A O U

The Vitamin C Story

The following paper was downloaded from a board on CompuServe and is passed on here for whatever value it may have. Since reading it several years ago, I have been taking 5 grams (5,000 mg) of Vitamin C pretty near every day. Has it helped? I don't know but I'm generally pretty healthy and *seem* to suffer less than average from colds, flues, etc. Like chicken soup, "What could it hurt?"

THE CONTROVERSY Probably the greatest nutritional controversy of our time involves vitamin C, which is also called ascorbic acid or ascorbate. On the one hand the government's recommended daily allowance (RDA) for adults is only about 60 mg (milligrams) which is 0.06 g (gram). Most physicians and nutritionists accept and even endorse this value.

On the other hand a contingent of scientists and maverick physicians and nutritionists forcefully asserts that the RDA is too low by a factor of 35 or more and that, in fact, the typical adult needs several grams of vitamin C per day. Which position is correct?

This essay will attempt to answer that question.

WHAT ARE VITAMINS?

Perhaps we should begin by considering just what a vitamin is. Vitamins are natural, organic chemicals which our bodies require in order to maintain good health but which, in most cases, they cannot manufacture and, therefore, must acquire from the foods that we eat or by supplementation. If we don't acquire these chemicals, serious illnesses will inevitably result. For example, a severe deficiency of vitamin A can cause blindness while deficiencies of vitamins B1, B3, and B12 can cause beriberi, pellagra, and pernicious anemia, respectively. Severe deficiency of vitamin C causes scurvy. Other vitamins are associated with other serious diseases when severe deficiency of these vitamins occurs. There is no medicine which can treat these serious, even fatal, vitamin deficiency diseases other than their associated vitamins. We must acquire at least some of each essential vitamin or we will inevitably succumb to one of these terrible diseases.

Fortunately, only traces of the essential vitamins in some cases a few milligrams (thousandths of a gram) and in other cases only a few micrograms (millionths of a gram) are required to prevent the extreme-deficiency diseases and therefore, in this century, they are rather rare in developed countries, even among the poor.

OPTIMUM VERSUS MINIMUM

Because only trace quantities of vitamins are required to prevent the extreme-deficiency diseases it has become accepted that such trace quantities are all that are required for good health. For example, since about 60 mg per day of vitamin C will prevent scurvy this has become the recommended intake. But is this assumption correct? Is the minimum amount of a vitamin that will prevent its associated extreme-defficiency disease also the optimum amount required to maintain good health?

Consider the following analogy. If an automobile engine is totally deprived of lubricating oil it will seize up and cease to function. This is an example of extreme deficiency of a vital ingredient (in this case, lubricating oil) and the seizing up of the engine is the automotive equivalent of human death from an extreme vitamin deficiency disease such as scurvy. Only a quart or less of oil is required to keep an automobile engine from seizing up, and yet in a typical car four or five quarts of oil are required for optimum performance. Other automotive fluids such as radiator coolant, brake fluid, transmission fluid, etc. could, undoubtedly, also be reduced to some minimum amount that would allow a car to function for a while, but a car operated with such minimum levels of essential fluids would not perform optimally and would almost certainly wear out prematurely.

It is ironic that, while very few people would be foolish enough to operate their cars with minimum rather than optimum fluid levels, most people routinely operate their bodies with minimum rather than optimum nutrient intakes.

The few milligrams of vitamin C which will prevent scurvy, like the half quart or so of oil that will prevent engine seize up in an automobile, is the minimum amount required to prevent catastrophic breakdown. As with lubricating oil, a much larger quantity of vitamin C is required is required for optimum health. Vitamin C has many functions in addition to the prevention of scurvy and these functions require it in gram, not milligram, quantities per day. In fact, vitamin C is required in larger quantities than any other vitamin. It is a macro nutrient like calcium and the essential amino acids, not a trace nutrient like most other vitamins.

HOW DO WE KNOW THAT VITAMIN C IS A MACRO NUTRIENT?

The most compelling evidence we have that vitamin C is a macro nutrient which is required daily in large quantities is that the vast majority of animals synthesize large quantities of vitamin C in their bodies every day, proportional to their body weight. This includes cats, dogs, horses, cows and virtually all other mammals except the primates and guinea pigs as well as virtually all birds, amphibians, and reptiles. All animals tested to date synthesize vitamin C daily at a rate equal to between 2 g and 10 g per 150 pounds of body weight despite the fact that their diets include at least traces of this vitamin. Why would animals which acquire milligram quantities of vitamin C per day in their food (just as humans do) synthesize more of this vitamin in gram quantities unless they needed such large quantities for good health?

Most animals get most of their other vitamins from their food just as humans do. Like humans, they aren't set up by nature to synthesize most vitamins because the quantities in their food are sufficient. But nature has singled out vitamin C as a macro nutrient which is required by animals in greater-than-dietary quantities. If nature tells virtually all other animals (by the body chemistry it gives them) that vitamin C is a macro nutrient and not a trace nutrient, shouldn't we also heed this message?

There are, admittedly, a few animal species that do not synthesize vitamin C within their bodies. These are a fruit-eating bat from India and a few Indian birds as well as guinea pigs and primates. (Incidentally, because guinea pigs, like humans, do not synthesize vitamin C they can get many of the same diseases that afflict humans; whereas animals which synthesize this vitamin cannot get these diseases or can be forced to get them only with great difficulty. It is for this reason that guinea pigs are so frequently used in medical research that the very name "guinea pig" has become synonymous with "test subject".)

But the major exceptions of interest to us are the primates: monkeys, apes, and humans. Why don't primates synthesize vitamin C? Do primates, unlike virtually all other animal species, just not need ascorbate in macro quantities which seems rather unlikely or is there some other explanation?

WHY DON'T HUMANS AND OTHER PRIMATES SYNTHESIZE VITAMIN C?

To answer this question Dr. Linus Pauling (an outstanding chemist and the only person ever to win two unshared Nobel prizes) has put forth an interesting hypothesis that I believe is correct. Pauling notes that all of the few animal species that do not synthesize vitamin C either live now or originated in or near the tropics, and most of these animals eat (or used to eat) a diet rich in fruit. A tropical diet, especially one rich in fruit, yields exceptionally high quantities of vitamin C macro quantities, not just trace quantities.

If an animal outside the tropics is born with a genetic mutation which prevents it from synthesizing vitamin C it will be come sickly because it cannot get the large quantities that it needs of this nutrient from its food.

In fact, the ill effects of its ascorbate deficiency will be so severe that the animal almost certainly will not survive long enough to reproduce and, thus, the mutation will not be passed on to progeny. Such genetic mutations undoubtedly occur periodically in all animal species but, if they are not passed on, the species as a whole is not affected.

But, if a fruit-eating tropical animal were born with a genetic mutation which deprived it of the ability to synthesize vitamin C, its diet would provide sufficient quantities of the vitamin to allow it to survive and reproduce. In fact, it might even have a slight advantage over the other members of its species, since laboratory studies have shown that mutations which rid an organism of an unnecessary function confer a slight advantage in survival and reproduction.

Pauling hypothesizes that, in the distant past, an ancestor of the modern primates underwent a genetic mutation that caused it to lose the ability to synthesize vitamin C. Because of its fruit-rich tropical diet, this ancestor survived and reproduced and eventually the slight advantage which the loss of an unnecessary (in the tropics) function gave them allowed its progeny to completely dominate their species after many generations.

THE BEGINNING OF HUMAN VITAMIN C DEFICIENCY

The problem is that many humans eventually migrated away from the tropics to climates in which their diet yielded less-than-optimum quantities of vitamin C. Such a move would have weakened and eventually killed any other primate species, which is why one generally does not find monkeys and apes far from the tropics.

The situation was different in the case of humans, however. Although the move from vItamin-C-rich food sources did weaken them, it did not kill them because humans had certain advantages that no other animal species had: they could use tools and weapons as well as make clothing and control fire. These skills enabled humans to clothe, shelter, and heat themselves enough to survive the elements and to defend themselves against predators, even though they were weakened by a lack of vitamin C. Thus, although most animals in less-than-optimum health quickly perish, humans survived.

Nevertheless, our ancestors, once they left the vitamin-C-rich foods of the tropics, were and we still are today in considerably less-than-optimum health because of chronic vitamin C deficiency. Away from our natural habitat humans fall prey to colds and viruses and a multitude of other illnesses including cancer and artery disease to a far greater extent than is the case with animals which synthesize vitamin C or with populations of humans and other primates that still dwell in the tropics.

WE FEED MONKEYS AND APES BETTER THAN OURSELVES

As noted above, the other primates did not migrate far from their original home, as humans did, because they could not survive without rich sources of vitamin C. But many monkeys and apes have been captured by humans and removed from their natural habitat by force. Because of their value as pets, zoological specimens, and laboratory animals, scientific studies of the diet required to maintain primates in good health have been performed. These studies indicate that monkeys and apes in captivity require daily intakes of 2 g to 3.5 g per day of vitamin C per 150 pounds quantities which are in the range of vitamin C synthesized by the many animals which are capable of such synthesis.

Obviously, then, primates need vitamin C as much as other animals do; they just can't make their own and, therefore, have to ingest it orally. As we have already noted, the foods in the natural habitats of primates are rich in vitamin C; but, even when non-human primates are involuntarily removed from their natural foods, their human captors generally see to it that the diet of monkeys and apes is adequately enriched with this essential nutrient. One may properly be amazed, however, that while we humans solicitously feed our captive primate cousins large daily doses of vitamin C to optimize their health, we steadfastly continue to deny our own need for similar doses of this nutrient even though we share with them the inability to synthesize it.

VITAMIN C IS SAFE, NATURAL, AND NON-TOXIC

Some people who see the merits of the foregoing arguments are still reluctant to take adequate doses of vitamin C because of the seemingly-large quantities involved or because of a fear of taking drugs. It is important to realize that vitamin C is not a drug, it is a natural nutrient, and It is not toxic in any known quantity.

HOW MUCH VITAMIN C DO WE NEED?

If humans are given an excess of vitamin C they simply excrete the excess in their urine and feces. Conversely, if no significant excretion occurs then there is no excess, and quite possibly, there is a deficiency. In one test, people were given 0.5 g of vitamin C per day for a week, then 1.0 g per day for a week, and so on in 0.5 g increments, until a maximum of 5.0 g per day was given. Tests for excess vitamin C in the urine indicated that half the subjects did not excrete an excess until the dose was 2.5 g per day or higher. 5% of the subjects did not excrete an excess even on daily doses of 5.0 g. Therefore, a daily intake of 2.5 g of vitamin C would seem prudent even if one wanted only a 50% chance of getting enough and 5 g would be required to raise the odds in one's favor to 95%.

VITAMIN C PROTECTS AGAINST CANCER AND ARTERY DISEASE

Since one function of vitamin C is to protect body tissue from attack by various toxins and oxidizing agents, such as so-called "free radicals", its presence in one's urine and feces is desirable and, thus, some excess intake is desirable. Both colon and bladder cancer may well be caused by failure to excrete "excess" vitamin C. Vitamin C has been shown to help prevent and even treat other cancers as well. For many cancers it is more effective than chemotherapy and it certainly is less discomforting.

A similar situation exists with respect to artery disease. Most animals do not get atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries) because their arteries are protected by vitamin C, which they manufacture in their bodies.

However, a recent study on guinea pigs (as noted previously, the only mammals other than man and the primates which do not manufacture their own vitamin C) found that guinea pigs whose intake of vitamin C was restricted to the human RDA proportion- ally adjusted for their smaller body weight acquired atherosclerosis just like humans. But guinea pigs which were given diets rich in vitamin C did not get atherosclerosis. All other factors were the same for the two test groups.

Current evidence indicates that atherosclerosis is initiated by oxidation of artery walls by metabolic byproducts (including free radicals) which occur naturally in one's body and which nature intends vitamin C and the other anti-oxidants (vitamin E, selenium, and beta carotene) to protect us against.

If our anti-oxidant protection is missing or inadequate then our artery walls are attacked and wounded. Deposition of cholesterol and the other ingredients of arterial plaque then occurs in an attempt by the body to heal the wounded arteries. After many years of repetitive cycles of oxidative attack followed by deposition of "healing" plaque the arteries can become so clogged that blood flow is severely restricted. When the coronary arteries become blocked a "heart attack" is the almost inevitable result.

On the other hand, if adequate concentrations of anti-oxidants, principally vitamin C, are present in the blood and arteries, they will protect against the oxidation of the artery linings and, thus, prevent the deposition of arterial plaque from ever starting.

Adequate intake of vitamin C is also essential for building and maintaining a strong immune system.

OTHER ANTI-OXIDANTS

As noted above, vitamin E, selenium, and beta-carotene are also important anti-oxidants. They and vitamin C have been shown in numerous studies to be helpful in preventing and treating cancer and heart disease as well as in preventing many of the effects of aging. In fact, I believe that it is possible, with proper nutrition, to extend the average human life expectancy by ten to twenty years and to delay the effects of aging proportionally.

However, if you're going to take only one supplement, take vitamin C. It's the single most important nutritional supplement for most people.

THE NEED FOR SUPPLEMENTATION

The foregoing evidence would seem to indicate clearly that all animals, including humans, require vitamin C in macroscopic quantities. Since humans and other primates have lost the ability to synthesize this vitamin they must acquire it by ingestion. Ideally this would be accomplished through one's diet, but this is nearly impossible to achieve outside a tropical (or near-tropical) environment. Every other vitamin and mineral can, at least in theory, be acquired from a so-called "good balanced diet" but not vitamin C.

The daily quantities of vitamin C which all animals require is so large that those few animals including humans which do not synthesize it and thus must acquire it by ingestion, cannot do so from a non- tropical diet no matter how well-balanced. Thus, for humans living away from the tropics some supplementation of vitamin C is necessary if optimum health is to be achieved.

The minimum value for an average adult should be about 2 g per day. Those wishing to achieve approximately a 95% chance of an adequate intake should take 5 g per day. Persons above or below 150 pounds of body weight should adjust their dosage proportionately. A good rule of thumb is about 30 to 35 mg of vitamin C each day per pound of body weight.

Although the RDA dosage of about 60 mg per day is readily achievable through almost any remotely adequate diet and will prevent scurvy, it is grossly inadequate for achievement of optimum health.

It should be noted, for the benefit of those who eat a lot of fresh fruits and vegetables, that laboratory tests have shown that supermarket produce frequently contains far less vitamin C and other nutrients than is indicated in standard nutritional tables because such produce often is picked unripe and artificially "ripened" in transit. Therefore, some supplementation of vitamin C is advisable for everyone who lives outside the tropics.

TAKE YOUR VITAMIN C REGULARLY

If for any reason vitamin C supplementation is to be reduced or discontinued it should be done gradually over a period of a couple of weeks. Abrupt discontinuation of supplementation can result in vitamin C "starvation" and may well result in some illness, even if only a sudden cold.

The best course is to decide on a regimen of supplementation and continue it for life. The supplement should be taken every day, preferably in two or three doses because vitamin C is water soluble, not fat soluble, and thus its retention time in the body is fairly short.

Note: Much of the information in this essay as well as much additional nutritional information is contained in the books:
Vitamin C, the Common Cold, and the Flu
How to Live Longer and Feel Better by Linus Pauling
Your Personal Vitamin Profile by Michael Colgan.