Yes, Chris I agree that the two ascorbates are the same.  My point is that I prefer a full profile natural vitamin over an isolate.  By the same token, I prefer D3 from sunlight.  However, I do supplement with both items (the ascorbate is usually part of the wonderful intraMAX product).  I also drink lots and lots of juices and usually eat considerable fruits for my whole C.

I agree completely with you about the inaccuracy of the broad condemnation of carbohydrates.  There are certainly bad carbs, but there are also good essential carbs too.

As regards the Inuit, I suppose that they are a good illustration of how life is able to adapt - though I note that they generally get adequate amounts of most vitamins and minerals, with A, D, and C being notable exceptions.  They certainly do get some of those vitamins as would be expected since whales and other fish eat lots of vitamin and mineral rich plankton.  Perhaps as Grz suggests they are able, through adaption, good gut flora and consumption of a protein rich nutrient dense diet, to take much better advantage of the lower amounts of those vitamins.

The high Omega 3s/essential fatty acids in the Inuit diet likely offsets deficiencies to a great extent and contributes greatly to apparent abundant health, at least in the short run, for those Inuit who remain on their traditonal diet.  I would also observe that the Inuit live an active and simple life in an environment that is largely free of toxins and pollution.

I think that there is also another vital consideration:  In general, man has the ability to survive and even apparently thrive, at least over the short run, on a diet that is deficient in one or more vital nutrients.  Like an advanced version of the space shuttle, our bodies have backups and backups to backups so that it can make adjustments when it is not being nourished properly.  Also, like the space shuttle, there is a price to pay in terms of lifespan when backup systems are used for prolonged periods.

One stark example is the famous (I would say infamous) Adkins no-carb diet.  People can appear to thrive on the diet for years, but too often the long term result is serious health issues and shorter lifespans.  Unlike the original hardcore Adkins no-carb diet, traditonally the Inuit did consume some carbs when available in the form of small amounts of fruits and berries.  Apparently that may have been enough to keep them from being in a constant state of ketosis.

When the Inuit were first studied in the 1920's and 30's by Dr. Vilhjalmur Stefansson their average lifespan was only 30-35 years. Not exactly a wonderful figurel, though perhaps not that far out of line with lifespans around the globe at the time.  Now, thanks to the introduction of SADs type items to their foods, they have what may be the worst of both worlds, and they continue to lag behind in lifespan.  The average lifespan of the Inuit in the Quebec region is the lowest for all of Canada.

So, I would have to say that I am far from sold on how healthy the Inuit diet is and, like you, no matter how healthy the Innuit may or may not be, a diet of whale blubber and little or no vegetables will not ever be my cup of tea!