Multi Vitamins

Does anyone know how they make these things? I've always been curious.

I'm looking at a bottle label right now and just one tablet contains 100% recommened daily intake for many different vitamins and minerals. It would take a truck load of food to get all these vitamins. How do they get all that into a little pill?

The ingredients are listed but I don't know many of those big words. Is it man made chemical stuff, things that have been extracted from food or what?

I found out the other day that orange juice concentrate is made by boiling down oranges and one of the by-products of the process is the vitamin C used in tablets.

What brand are you taking?

Unless the label says otherwise, no, they didn't boil down vats of carrots or grapefruits to get the vitamins. They are synthesized in laboratories.

Vitamin C was the first to be artificially produced. The 1937 Nobel prize or chemistry was given or the synthesis. Nowadays, it's produced by fermentation of glucose. Most comes from China these days.

I take a mutli every day except when travelling.

What brand?

Manch, The brand I have is Centrum. But the question would apply to any brand.

No idea how they're made. But I recall that 'The Guardian's' (UK centre-left newspaper) 'weekend' doctor advised a few months back that it's better not to take supplements.

It's not so much that supplements are inherently evil. It's more that (as should be obvious) it is always better to get your vitamins, minerals or whatever from foods, not pills. There's just so many more goodies in an orange than in a vitamin C tablet.

Another issue is that some people figure they can substitute a vitamin supplement for a decent diet. It's OK to live on fast food or to eat only meat & no vegetables or some other notion--you can make up or it by taking a vitamin. Wrong.

Oh, yeah. I forgot to add. When you are talking about just the vitamin itself, there is no evidence that a vitamin derived from a natural source (e.g. rose hip vitamin C ) is any better or more bioavailable than one synthesized in a lab. Quality control is a different issue, but again that is a function of how good the manufacturer is. There is no inherent reason why those rose hips would be "less contaminated" or "purer" than that synthesized pill. In fact, so called "natural" supplements often vary radically in the amount of the nutrient actually in the package, no matter what the label says.

Thanks for the information, nutraxfornerves.

'trax: it is obvious.

But methought the Dr.'s point was beyond this: sth. like taking supplements was itself bad (not cos they were used as subs. but that they, like hydro fats, were not a good idea at all).

But I can't recall the details.

Could this be it?

On June 16, 2007, the good doctor was asked about antioxidant supplements. He replied<blockquote>Quote
<hr>Antioxidants are supposed to 'mop up and destroy' free radicals - chemicals thought to be part of the cause of cancers and ageing. So the simplistic argument is that they should be beneficial, and the more the better. Not so, according to recent opinion in the journal of the National Cancer Institute. Two renowned cancer experts wrote that if antioxidant supplements decrease free radicals, they may interfere with essential defensive mechanisms for ridding us of damaged cells, including those that are pre-cancerous and cancerous. So they may well cause harm. I don't want to take sides, but I wouldn't dream of taking them myself.<hr></blockquote>

'trax: that is it exactly. Many thanks. Tony

"(Trax'?..Before you even think about having a go at me...The OP really can search for what you post on here....)"

S/O: not entirely fair, tho' the OP can speak for her-/himself.

For my part: I am grateful for 'trax's help, however boring others may find it.

Also, I find 'trax one of the most helpful, least critical and genuinely pleasant on here. And: I once posted on here as an atheist and, if I recall right, 'trax posted as a Christian: but without vehemence, without taking offence or being self-righteousness - for which I much admired her.

P.S. Knowing my luck, 'trax'll post that she's an atheist and it's someone else! In either case, I much admire 'trax.

..Furry muff....

P.P.S. In fairness, 'trax didn't post so much as a Christian as 'each to their own' - but ye get the gist.

1. OK - so, be nice. If I can do it, anyone can :)

"She's 'killed' many a thread on GS...."

That is unfair.

There was a time when 'trax posted fast and we asked her to slow down; and she did. That was years ago. Even then what she posted was well worth reading and, fortunately for us, she still posts it, albeit a wee bit later than she might.

What ye posted is utterly unfair. Aside from anything else, I asked for it - quite literally.

IMO: 'trax is one of the best on here: heart of gold, utterly sincere, totally humane; and I won't mention her sheer genius.