How Much Do Most of us Know About B-vitamins?

What's your point?

Your link to an holistic "heath" site is dubious, at best.

Main stream medicine tends to be employed in a very select method as if one body system doesn't effect the others. What's you're point?

Doesn't seem to be any real point to any of this.

Main stream medicine is what it is, and so are other approaches to health.

Pick one and believe in it, until you don't.

My main takeaway was that we are deluded into thinking that by merely controlling inputs we somehow have understanding.

Well, the human body's a system; an organic and open system. To understand the behavior of a system, don't we also need to monitor the processing, performance, function and outputs?

Lyn. Exactly. However, we don't have good indicators for those, hence my frustration. Lackingthose good indicators for actual performance etc. We just do our best, then wonder what the heck is going on, when the "output" is so far off from the target. Thanks for the appreciative inquiry. It advanced the discussion.

Milo

Been wallowing in health-porn, eh?

Doh............health porn!

I stay away from it. Whether I'm googling about the mole on my forehead, or why my knees ache, it doesn't take long to become convinced that I've only got a few months to live.

''You don't have hyperchonria....you just think you do!''

HeyMr Kramarat, if you're knees ache, go get checked out for Lyme disease.

I got it from a tick bite in Robbinsville, NC in early 2009 so it's all over NC now and the tick wasn't on me for more than two hours tops. You don't have to remember being bit.

Three weeks of minocycline will make you feel 30 years younger again if you can find a nurse practitioner to give it to you.

Just sayin'...

I appreciate the thought. That Lyme disease is nasty.

With me the knee problems, they run in the family. I also fell 40 ft back in my mid 20's and landed on my feet. That impact busted up all kinds of things, which are now coming back to bite me as I approach 50. The supplements I'm taking are keeping everything moving, and any pain at bay. Even the crackling in my knees seems to be less than it was a couple of years ago.

Glad to here you're alright.

O.K., everyone... forgive me for responding in one post. It does make it longer. But it helps continuity of thought. I hope nothing here is offensive. If it strikes someone in that manner, I'll plead no willful intent.

First off, I thank the few CR4 members who took the time to go to the link. But I'm dubious as to whether even you few, who posted, read through the article. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not necessarily faulting anyone for not reading all of it. It is long and tedious, as I said at the outset. This, in addition to me having seen your responses as typical, in my earlier casual experience, is why I have not directed attention to this article (or similar articles), in this manner, as I stated in my OP. But I decided to post it, since my co-worker's comments brought it up again in my mind, to see if my earlier decision not to, would be validated by exposing it to a larger audience.

lyn - my point was... it wasn't my point per se, it was the point made by the author of the article. If you had given it a few minutes you might have realized that almost all of the research citations link to mainstream published research. Not all "holistic" web sites are dogmatic. The wording in this article is somewhat tedious, but it appears the author has waded through the cited research. Your comment to "pick one and believe in it until you don't" is simplistic. Deciding to "pick one" [system] should be based on some knowledge. And "believing in it" sounds more like a religious type of faith. The article is referencing and summarizing research about specific B-vitamins and their role in health and disease. By implication all vitamins could be discussed similarly. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears to me that you went to the link, found the site had the "appearance" of so many other "holistic" web sites that you've decided were mumbo jumbo, and based on that feeling, you didn't read the article. I went back and picked a citation, as representative, to show the discussion was based on research... #15. Not all of the citations are linked, but the citations are there at the end of the article. The author's article is discussing, mostly, cited research. If I am wrong, I apologize. If you DID read the article, please criticize the research and/or the author's conclusions. Your response strikes me the same as if I had linked to an article about Gala apples and you responded, "Jeez, another one of those web sites about Gala apples... that's pretty dubious." What insight does a post like that provide?

bwire - I think I agree with you... IF you are being somewhat incredulous of lyn's comment.

Milo - Harder to know if you read the article or not. I appreciate your response and shared experience. Your response demonstrates the difference between someone who's been on the "front lines," so to speak, of confronting life-threatening illness as a caretaker, and bystanders who have never really had to do so. Not to fault bystanders for being bystanders, but as bystanders they should realize their viewpoint is more theoretical. Yes, we still do know very little about nutrition and it's role in health, but we can't afford to just throw up our hands saying we can't sort it all out or hide our heads in the sand like an ostrich. That is being foolish. (If we can decode the human genome we can tackle nutritional processes in the body. Of course, discoveries in this area won't benefit drug companies or their research sponsors, so it is harder to get it funded.) And one observation I take from your experience is that you were following mainstream medical advice and it didn't lead to any control of the situation. I don't think you would fault anyone for staying on the lookout for information that might change that scenario.

Tornado - Sorry if you think I'm being too sensitive... but labeling the seeking of health knowledge as "health porn," even as a joke, is being insensitive to the many people who have lost "faith" in "mainstream" medicine. Many are suffering serious, painful disease processes. They are looking for answers for themselves or some loved one because orthodox medical practice has failed to help them. Health problems are no laughing matter. The patient suffers and so does their family. Just think of all the people suffering from gastric ulcers who had their doctors treating them with anti-acid medications, because the accepted wisdom was they are caused by too much acid in the stomach. That is still part of the treatment, but it is now known that a bacteria is responsible, so antibiotics are also part of the treatment. And even more serious is cancer. There are books about how mainstream medicine has not lived up to its hype in treating cancer. And cancer is much less age related. I think your reference is directed more to the content of some of the health sites one may visit in their search (and, no doubt, some are of the snake oil variety). If you would take the time to read this article, though, and look at some of the citations, I don't think you'll feel this article qualifies for "health porn."

kramarat - Ditto my response to Tornado, with one additional comment. Your response is probably why most people are "leery" of health information or research. I think we are all aware that there is conflicting research. That is true of most other fields of research, but medical studies seem more prone to this skepticism. The more you study it, though, you can critique how it was done (most here could critique the experimental design; some research should be dismissed for that reason). Also, you can determine if most of it is coming to a similar conclusion (or pointing to a generic validity that needs fleshing out) and then you'll be better equipped to not succumb to the "hypochondriac" factor you are referring to. And finally, since B-vitamins are water soluble, there should be much less fear of abusing them. Although, one disturbing point mentioned in the article -- and which I've read in other, older research -- is that an induced deficiency can be stubborn to respond to just by reintroducing the vitamin itself. It does appear that semi-permanent, or even permanent damage can be induced. That would be a HUGE finding with depressing conclusions.

To all - I wasn't trying to make a point. Sharing is more accurate. I genuinely am interested in health research. I find this article intelligent and interesting. If you disagree, fine. But point out why based on information in the article. The author had his own interest piqued by his experience with B-vitamins. And with "scientific" curiosity, he began to look at what research he could find. I was hoping the article would spark a similar interest in readers to want to better understand nutrition and it's role in health and disease. Most of the article's discussion is about research published in professional journals. I would have hoped, if there was discussion/criticism, it would have been based on the cited research and the author's discussion of that research. Of course, that kind of discussion is impossible if no one reads the article. And again, I realize that reading this article is an investment in time. So I understand if that is why some didn't read it. But if it was lack of time, I would appreciate a post saying, "Sorry. I don't have time for this now." ... or "I'm just not interested in this." I guess that may be the unspoken statement of fact that only a few responded.

Unfortunately, there are certain areas of knowledge that, culturally, are easier to make fun of and deride. Although more people are becoming interested in how food affects well-being, the majority still don't care for the subject. To label those that are interested, "health nuts" demonstrates this bias. To denigrate a subject is to denigrate the seekers of its knowledge. I choose not to believe that is the intent of the posters who have referred to this as health porn.

I think modern "mainstream" medicine is having to come to the inescapable conclusion that what we stick in our bodies plays an important, if not key, role on our health. Just look around you. Most people in their 70's and 80's are on several medications (actually, much earlier ages), many have undergone heart surgery of some type, and many of them likely could have had different scenarios in old age, if they had had some interest in nutrition. Although, I'll have to say, good old common sense should tell us that our bodies evolved with unprocessed foods -- not Twinkies, corn chips, and the like. In addition to nutritional epiphanies, there is accumulating evidence that traditional health systems outside mainstream Western medicine are valid and produce positive results. As future patients, we should hope that we have the widest variety of pertinent, proven, treatments available to us. Currently, that isn't the case.

I want to see people to take more of an interest in their health. You will be the ultimate caretaker of your health. It is similar to comparing people who have learned quite a bit about computers and OS's vs. those who haven't. The ones who haven't look for those who have when their computer goes down or acts up.

Old age should not be like waking up after a big binge party the next morning and having to deal with the mess created amid the intoxication of it all. Sadly, that is how too many people, who reach old age, will end their lives.

I confess that I was mostly guessing at first, but after wallowing through all that, I will simply repeat my original characterization of "health porn."

Thanks. I don't believe the OP means any harm. I do take supplements and I don't take health advice from CR4 posts.

For anyone interested, there are some great sites out there to do some reading and research. Here are a couple:

http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/list-VitaminsMinerals/

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/drug-information/DrugHerbIndex

Thank for the links.

Is this post advising us to disregard the "medical establishment's" opinion with their dependance of double blind clinical trials and take your advice based on a holistic web-site and your own anecdotal evidence?

I hope your co-worker has enough sense to make the trip to another city for the sake of his two year old. Please keep us posted as to her fate.

I see why this is posted anonymously.

Apothicus -

No. Not at all. But I would say if you want to debate whether or not nutritional science has any bearing on disease, then you should be willing to take the time to start reading full papers on the subject -- as many as you can find. And, even that is a bit skewed, because of how research works, how it gets funded, etc. But at least you have something you can debate. For either of us to toss statements back and forth about health without tying it to something -- whether that is experiential or experimental evidence -- serves little purpose.

A wise person would try to take the best of both worlds. You might want to take a look at a book entitled, "Addictions can be cured : the treatment of drug addiction by neuro-electric stimulation : an interim report" by Margaret A. Patterson as an example of non-mainstream medicine being effective. This was published in 1975. A short portion of the book has been placed online by the author. I cite it not in reference to nutrition, but to show that interesting results that should have been investigated much more than they have can be left languishing... many times due to a short-sighted, closed-minded perspective.

As you may know, B-vitamins are water soluble. Experimenting on oneself is not so hazardous. I have a penchant for experimenting with nutritional and herbal supplements. This is how I have my anecdotal experience to recount. I don't see any problem with suggesting to a friend to look at the information that prompted me to "try" if I got positive results from the effort. No one in their right mind would suggest that any substance is going to cure whatever. Though medicine is based on our biology being the same for most humans, there are still way too many variables that are not understood well enough to make such a claim. This is why physicians may have to try several similar drugs on an individual to find the "right" one for him/her. You know, "Ask your doctor if _____ is right for you?"

If you look at the statistics of drugs used to treat depression, they have a pretty dismal record. Now there is "Ablifiy" to be added to the cocktail to, hopefully, improve the outcomes. And to have to watch for signs of "suicidal thoughts" when taking a drug that is supposed to have the opposite effect seems pretty incredulous to me. With them turning out so ineffective, how did they get approval in the first place? Whether you or anyone else chooses to accept the possibility, the drug companies keep doing "trials" until they get the results they need for approval. But, at least, be willing to take a look.

By the way, my co-worker came back rather disappointed. He had to drive more than an hour each way to see a specialist. There wasn't one available in this city.

You short-change most people. Very few people that I know seek any kind of treatment at the drop of a hat. It's one of the reasons men have the reputation of never going to the doctor.

i'm away but will read the b-vitamins (a complex bunch from the bit i know acting like catalysists i think in the chemical vista but at the biological level of complexity their roles will to this day still be mostly best guess scenarios as all of ourselves attempts to achieve homeostasis by the transmutation of inputs [nutrients/water/air...everything that comes with those inputs]).when i get home to redbay tommorrow night hopefully.Twood be ideal to have it all nailed down to a specific science but we are all more complex than the fanciest technology possible at this point and lines of connectivity from cell to cell togroups of cells to organ systems and feedbacks its...well mind boggleing...but as a species we are getting there..Simple fixes for a complex organism only saves lives for a time(interventional surgery,drug therapies etc...At the end of the day well we all end..Pushing the end off is a noble goal but i wouldn't put too much of my life effort in to it..there's far too much to do besides preserving oneself..

I certainly agree. Becoming fanatical about health is not what I would advise, either. But there are too many "mainstream" doctors who agree that prevention does include nutrition; which by definition includes vitamins. If there are many things one would like to do in life, wouldn't it be best to make some efforts to make that time as long and productive as possible? Suffering chronic degenerative disease at the end of one's life can make one's last years unpleasant even though it is still counted as "time."

Best to you.

Thank you for posting this. There is a lot about human healing western medicine do not understand or acknowledge because they have not enough "scientific evidence"

I know from firsthand experience western medicine does not cure everything, and there are lots of things holistic medicine can cure.

In September 2009 my son was dying and his doctors (one of them a world renewed pediatric surgeon) told us there was nothing to do to heal him, according to western medicine he was going to die. I turned to God (yes I believe in God even though there is no scientific evidence of his existence) for help and he put on our path an holistic healer. In December 2009 my son was completely recovered and the doctors could not explain in a "scientific way" how he recovered from his illness. I know this one case is anecdotic, but fortunately there are not enough cases like my son to make a scientific trail and let the half of them die treating them with western medicine and treat the other half with holistic medicine to gather enough "scientific evidence" that it works.

I know there are lots of "snake oil" vendors, they are somehow easy to identify; but there are more respectable holistic healers that offer their services to the ones willing to try them.

I know for sure that scientific study of western medicine effectiveness cost millions of dollars and no one want to invest in a scientific study of healing techniques that will not give billions of dollars in revenue. I think that is one of the reasons that holistic medicine does not have "scientific evidence" of its effectiveness.

I hope my post do not offend anyone.

Thank you so much for posting. Thank God for your son becoming an "anecdotal" case.

The real irony of all this poo-pooing of "holistic" medicine is that many people (even doctors) who have done the poo-pooing, when faced with life or death choices, quietly turn to alternative or integrative medicine as a last hope. And, so when it fails, it's the fault of the last methodology used -- not the fact that they had already been pronounced as hopeless by "double-blind trials" medicine. Failure tends to be the egg on the face of the last methodology used. And that is just flat out disingenuous.