• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Flu Shots

I changed it skeptigirl, thanks. Next time I see him, I will ask about that. I don't think it is just the Vit C in OJ, there is something about oranges and lemons that seems to prevent infections. Just taking Vit C doesn't seem to work as well.
 
Robinson, you might be interested in what "the doctor within" says. Link

Basically, "Vitamin C" as it is found in oranges and most other plants, also animals, and as it is needed by the body, is a very fragile complex from different molecules. Ascorbic acid is merely one part of this complex. However it also happens to be the part that is produced industrially the easiest.

So basically, ascorbic acid alone doesn't help, it can even harm the body. Ascorbic acid doesn't help to cure or prevent scurvy. Only the entire vitamin C complex can do that. So the "vitamin C pills" and all that are worthless.

The thing with O-Juice is that often it's made from concentrat and sterilized/pasteurized. So what you have in the end is a product that contains no real vitamin C, but is enriched with ascorbic acid after the fact.
 
robinson said:
I was talking about Tetanus and Staph boosters. I got surgery coming up, and both of those can kill you, when it gets put deep inside your body. Lots of stuff that is harmless on the outside, can kill you when it is inserted into your flesh. I lost my best friend to Hospital Staph after he had simple surgery.

A neighbor still has MRSA ten years later, in his artificial hip. He has to take antibiotics or it breaks out. Thank medicine for at least having a vaccine now to prevent super bugs from killing us.
Click to expand...

Vitamin C protects you from getting scurvy. That's it. That's all. Unless you go to woo sites that say different.

Otherise, it is times like this that demonstrate you are capable of learning. Good job.
 
Physiotherapist said:
Eos,

This is not true. Vitamin C is needed in the body for other things other than the prevention of scurvy. I don't mean woo either, just scientific fact!!
Click to expand...
do please then specify which deficiencies it prevents, I mean like anemia... things like that. I know you need vit c to absorb iron. That's only one kind of anemia though. It won't help with sickle cell. I posted scurvy, and should have posted other deficiency diseases that you will get from not ingesting vitamin c.

What I'm saying, though, is that it won't prevent the common cold or other non-deficiendy diseases. Unless you know of supposed non-deficiency diseases that it could prevent... then please provide the evidence, blah de blah, as usual. Thank you for this chance to clarify.
 
Last edited:
robinson said:
I changed it skeptigirl, thanks. Next time I see him, I will ask about that. I don't think it is just the Vit C in OJ, there is something about oranges and lemons that seems to prevent infections. Just taking Vit C doesn't seem to work as well.
Click to expand...
I'd love to see the research supporting that if you know of any.
 
Re vitamin C's role in the body:

Vitamin CWP
The presence of ascorbate is required for a range of essential metabolic reactions in all animals and in plants and is made internally by almost all organisms, humans being one notable exception....The pharmacophore of vitamin C is the ascorbate ion. In living organisms, ascorbate is an antioxidant, as it protects the body against oxidative stress,[4] and is a cofactor in several vital enzymatic reactions.[5]
Click to expand...


And the effects on respiratory infections:

Review Vitamin C as an Antioxidant: Evaluation of Its Role in Disease Prevention
Sebastian J. Padayatty, MRCP, PhD, Arie Katz, MD, Yaohui Wang, MD, Peter Eck, PhD, Oran Kwon, PhD, Je-Hyuk Lee, PhD, Shenglin Chen, PhD, Christopher Corpe, PhD, Anand Dutta, BS, Sudhir K Dutta, MD, FACN, and Mark Levine, MD, FACN
Other than preventing scurvy, vitamin C has no proven benefits. In humans, vitamin C treatment has not resulted in changes in biomarkers of oxidation or in clinical outcome.
Click to expand...

This statement from Medline Plus on Vitamin C,
Common cold prevention (extreme environments)

Scientific studies generally suggest that vitamin C does not prevent the onset of cold symptoms. However, in a subset of studies in people living in extreme circumstances, including soldiers in sub-arctic exercises, skiers, and marathon runners, significant reductions in the risk of developing colds by approximately 50% have been reported. This area merits additional study, and may be of particular interest to elite athletes or military personnel.
Click to expand...
is consistent with this dissertation/meta-analysis (warning, very large PDF file) on the subject:

Do vitamins C and E affect respiratory infections; Harri Hemilä; Department of Public Health; University of Helsinki
Finland?
The new trials did not find reduction of common cold incidence in the ordinary Western population with vitamin C supplementation. Nevertheless, in this thesis it is shown that there may be sub-populations, such as people undergoing heavy acute physical stress and young males with low dietary vitamin C intakes, in which regular vitamin C supplementation may reduce the incidence of the common cold.
Click to expand...



But while that author is extremely critical of the negative findings, at least some of the studies cited were fairly small. For example in Vitamin C Supplementation and Respiratory Infections: a Systematic Review you find:
In this review, the vitamin C trials with military personnel and with other subjects living under conditions comparable to those of military recruits are analyzed to find out whether vitamin C supplementation affects respiratory infections. For this systematic review, we identified seven trials with military personnel, three trials with students in crowded lodgings, and two trials with marathon runners. Eight of these trials were double blind and placebo controlled and seven were randomized. Five small trials found a statistically significant 45 to 91% reduction in common cold incidence in the vitamin C group. These trials were short and the participants were under heavy exertion during the trial. Furthermore, three other trials found a statistically significant 80 to 100% reduction in the incidence of pneumonia in the vitamin C group. The large number of positive findings seems to warrant further consideration of the role of vitamin C in respiratory infections, particularly in military recruits.
Click to expand...

The same author of the dissertation also co-wrote the following review:

Vitamin C and acute respiratory infections
So far over 60 studies have examined the effects of vitamin C on the common cold. No effect on common cold incidence was observed in the six largest studies, indicating that vitamin C has no preventive effects in normally nourished subjects in the Western countries. There are, however, smaller studies reporting benefit. In three trials of subjects under heavy acute physical stress, common cold incidence decreased by on average 50%, and in four trials of British males common cold incidence decreased by on average 30% in the vitamin C groups. The dietary vitamin C intake in the UK is low, and consequently the benefit may be due to the correction of marginal deficiency, rather than high vitamin doses. Regular vitamin C supplementation (ge1 g/day) has quite consistently reduced the duration of colds, but the size of the benefit has varied greatly. In the four largest studies the duration of colds was reduced only by 5%. In two of these studies, however, absence from school and work was reduced by 14–21% per episode, which may have practical importance. Three controlled studies recorded a reduction of at least 80% in the incidence of pneumonia in the vitamin C group, and one randomised trial reported substantial treatment benefit from vitamin C in elderly UK patients hospitalized with pneumonia or bronchitis. It seems that the preventive effects of supplementation are mainly limited to subjects with low dietary vitamin C intake, but therapeutic effects may occur in wider population groups. Further carefully designed trials are needed to explore the effects of vitamin C.
Click to expand...

In my reading it seems a bit tricky to filter out the bias going into the reviews. If you 'believe' then smaller studies become more significant. If you doubt then inconsistent findings become less significant. Until some mechanism is suggested why the results should be so different in a group such as marathon runners or the military under stress in the Arctic, I tend to discard such findings as inconclusive. For the general population, large studies have shown vitamin C has essentially no effect on numbers of colds or duration of colds. Unless you have young children, adults don't necessarily catch that many colds over a short duration of time. So the fact a small study over a short time span found effects really seems more prone to error than a large study over a longer time span.

A reduction of 5% duration seems pretty minimal. 20% less time loss from school or work might be more significant. You have to know how good the blinding of the study was. If your cold lasted as long with and without but you went back to work anyway, either it was milder or you just believed you were better sooner. That one is hard to know without looking at how well the study was blinded.

As for the elderly benefiting, there are other studies with similar populations showing no benefit. And look at the actual cited study of the benefit in the elderly:

Vitamin C in respiratory infections - adapted from the International Journal of Vitamin and Nutrition Research, 64,3:212-219, 1994
Extensive controlled trials have demonstrated that vitamin C supplementation can decrease the severity and duration of the common cold, although it does not appear to prevent colds from occurring...

...Fifty-seven elderly patients who were hospitalized for acute bronchitis or pneumonia were randomly assigned to receive either 200 mg/day of vitamin C or an inactive placebo. The patients' progress was assessed using a clinical scoring system based on the major symptoms of respiratory infection.

The clinical scoring system showed that patients who received vitamin C fared significantly better than those who received placebo. This was particularly true for those patients who were most severely ill at the start of the study. Among the severely ill patients, many had blood vitamin C levels low enough to suggest that they were at least marginally deficient in this vitamin when they were admitted to the hospital. Six patients died during the study: five in the placebo group and one in the group that received vitamin C. The difference in death rates between the vitamin C and placebo groups was not statistically significant.
Click to expand...
So they got better according to some scores, but again, we don't know how well the study was blinded. The patients may have been deficient so their supplements were indicated anyway. It doesn't mean extra C helped. And if the difference in death rate was not statistically significant, you have to wonder what the objective measures were which were "significantly better".

It also seems that in comparing these trials, little is paid to the fact some show decreased rates of infection while others show decreased duration. Such findings are not consistent yet in the meta-analysis they are scored equally as if the results correlate.

But I have not looked at all of the studies involved in these reviews, so I maintain an open but skeptical mind on the benefits of vitamin C for infection.



I do however, take a smaller vitamin C supplement along with vitamin E (studies indicate together matters) for the potential cardiac benefits. It's one of those decisions based on the fact that it is inexpensive, I am not substituting these for a better alternative, the risk of harm is low (though at least one study showed a worse outcome with only one of these two than no supplement), and the potential benefit worthwhile. The results of the combination also suggest the results of either vitamin alone might not show a benefit because the combination is required for some as yet unknown reason.
 
Last edited:
Eos of the Eons said:
Exposure to tetanus rarely makes anyone sick? Evidence? The exposure we want to protect people from is the direct contact with the bloodstream.
Click to expand...

No, it is deep puncture wounds, or other injuries where you have damaged flesh with little oxygen that allows the Tetanus to poison us. Necrosis of umbilical cords cut with unsanitary instruments is the main reason for infant Tetanus and the resulting deaths.

Tetanus is pretty much everywhere. But it can't grow in the presence of oxygen. Hence it is not a problem in the bloodstream, but in tissue that is injured and not oxygenated.
 
robinson said:
No, it is deep puncture wounds, or other injuries where you have damaged flesh with little oxygen that allows the Tetanus to poison us. Necrosis of umbilical cords cut with unsanitary instruments is the main reason for infant Tetanus and the resulting deaths.

Tetanus is pretty much everywhere. But it can't grow in the presence of oxygen. Hence it is not a problem in the bloodstream, but in tissue that is injured and not oxygenated.
Click to expand...
Robinson, by leaving part of the quote out you are essentially misquoting Eos.

And if you want to get technical, it is the toxin in the bloodstream that is the actual problem and what the vaccine addresses.

The tetanus bacillus grows in the anaerobic environment. It produces a neurotoxin. If it only stayed in the local area you would not get systemic tetany you'd only get local tetany.

The vaccine is actually against the toxin, not the bacteria. Your body's immune system takes care of the infection.

The tetanus vaccine is an inactivated toxin (poison) called a toxoid. It is made by growing the bacteria in a liquid medium and purifying and inactivating the toxin.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The vaccine is actually against the toxin, not the bacteria. Your body's immune system takes care of the infection.

Quote:
The tetanus vaccine is an inactivated toxin (poison) called a toxoid. It is made by growing the bacteria in a liquid medium and purifying and inactivating the toxin
Click to expand...
TBH that sounds like a load of crap. Vaccinations against poisoning? Are people who get Botox treatments somehow immune to Botox in time? No.

Skeptigirl, did you find a study that compared freshly pressed OJ to Ascorbic Acid to a Placebo?
 
Dabljuh said:
TBH that sounds like a load of crap. Vaccinations against poisoning? Are people who get Botox treatments somehow immune to Botox in time? No.
Click to expand...
With regard to tetanus, it is not crap, it is how the vaccine works.
I don't expect you to have known this, because you have consistently displayed woeful ignorance about each and every vaccine discussed on these boards and have persistently ignored offers to try and give you a simple undersatnding of the principles involved. However I still live in the forlorn hope that one day, before reflexly spouting complete nonsense, you might take the trouble to check up something before you shoot your mouth off on whichever topic it is that you have chosen as your method of revealing the yawning depths of your ignorance.

Dabljuh said:
Skeptigirl, did you find a study that compared freshly pressed OJ to Ascorbic Acid to a Placebo?
Click to expand...
It was Robinson who said he thought fresh OJ was better than Vitamin C. What do you think Skeptigirl is - your personal, one-woman Googlebot?
You have a computer - use it.
 
Dabljuh said:
TBH that sounds like a load of crap. Vaccinations against poisoning? Are people who get Botox treatments somehow immune to Botox in time? No.

<snip>
Click to expand...

Actually, yes.

http://dystonia.mighty-site.com/pages/immunity/128.php

Immunity

Because botulinum toxin is a biological product, it is possible for the body to create antibodies and develop immunity to the effects of the toxin. Measures are in place to guard against immunity:

The “recipes” for botulinum toxins have been refined to reduce the chances of the body forming antibodies

Physicians use the smallest dose needed to get a positive result

Injections are typically not repeated more often than every 3-4 months

Physicians generally use one serotype at a time rather than alternate or mix type A and type B

An important distinction must be made between individuals who have become immune to the toxin and individuals who have not had an optimal treatment: Someone who has become immune to botulinum toxin does not react at all to the product. This is very different from someone who gets some results from the injections but not the results they were hoping for or expecting. If a person is getting any results at all then there is hope that the way the botulinum toxin is administered can be manipulated to get a good result.

If you are receiving botulinum toxin injections and getting some result but not the result you expected or unacceptable side effects, ask your physician about the specific symptoms that concern you. Treatment with botulinum toxin may require a trial period to establish the appropriate dose, injection sites, and targeted symptoms but it is a very adaptable treatment that can create a dramatic benefit. A physician may test a patient for immunity by injecting a tiny amount of botulinum toxin into the brow muscle and observing the effect.

In some cases, a patient who has previously been successfully treated with botulinum toxin begins to experience a loss in benefit. Several factors could be responsible for this change. The nature and pattern of muscle contractions may change over time, thus necessitating an adjustment in the site of injection and dosage. If deep muscles become involved, it may be difficult to access those muscles. If you notice a change in how your symptoms respond to botulinum toxin, discuss these changes with your doctor.
Click to expand...

http://www.tjclarkinc.com/bacterial_diseases/tetanus_and_botulism.htm

Immunity

On the average there are about 25 cases of botulism annually in the U.S. Prior to the advent of critical care, the case fatality rate exceeded 60%, but currently it is about 20%. The first (or only) patient in an outbreak has a 25% chance of death, whereas subsequent cases which are diagnosed and treated more quickly, carry only a 4% risk.

The toxins that cause botulism are each specifically neutralized by its antitoxin. Botulinum toxins can be toxoided and make good antigens for inducing protective antibody. As with tetanus, immunity to botulism does not develop, even with severe disease, because the amount of toxin necessary to induce an immune response is toxic. Repeated occurrence of botulism has been reported.

Once the botulinum toxin has bound to nerve endings, its activity is unaffected by antitoxin. Any circulating ("unfixed") toxin can be neutralized by intravenous injection of antitoxin. Individuals known to have ingested food with botulism should be treated immediately with antiserum.

A multivalent toxoid evokes good protective antibiody response but its use is unjustified due to the infrequency of the disease. An experimental vaccine exists for laboratory workers.
Click to expand...
 
Dabljuh said:
TBH that sounds like a load of crap. Vaccinations against poisoning? Are people who get Botox treatments somehow immune to Botox in time? No.
Click to expand...

Like the diphtheria vaccine, the tetanus vaccine is a toxoid. Toxoid vaccines are made by treating the toxins (or poisons) produced by the germ that causes the disease (in this case /Clostridium tetani) with heat or chemicals, such as formalin. While this process destroys the toxin's ability to cause illness, the toxin is still able to stimulate the immune system to produce protective antibodies. Exposing someone to this inactive form of tetanus toxin allows her body's defense system to be prepared if she ever encounters the actual disease.
Click to expand...
http://www.drspock.com/article/0,1510,10398,00.html

Someone else may be able to provide a better source for this. It was just the first one I found.
 
Congratulations: You convinced me. This is actually pretty interesting to me. It seems like these toxins are actually tested and all (on actual guinea pigs, not just the figure of speech) by injecting the immunized guinea pigs with the toxin, and they do become immune.

This means you have here at least one vaccination that works. Hence, I no longer believe that all vaccinations are BS. I'll have to learn to differentiate between vaccinations that are BS and those that aren't.
 
And how will you differentiate between them? The ones that you have been given the actual information on work, and the ones you remain in ignorance about don't work?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom