Re: BioImmune's "Absorbic C" anyone?

Thanks for reminding and confirming something I had allowed myself to flirt with forgetting, Chaz.

Read an article last night from an apparent pro-C doctor who was discussing the pros and cons of natural vs synthetic, and stated, to paraphrase "....for instance, one who contracts Scurvy cannot cure it by using synthetic C, they MUST use some natural form..... ". I read this and thought to myself.... "hmmmmm, that does not sound like it jive's with my memory of what Pauling advocated for many years..... has there been a new discovery that I missed?" Going out of my way to give benefit of the doubt here, the amount of C required to knock out Scurvy is so trivial that it certainly would not require big bucks natural C to remedey, just consume some oranges or limes for a while. Still, it leaves me to wonder about the motives or perspective of the doctor that made this statement.

Agreed on the cost issue for natural vs synthetic. The stuff I'm trying is_not_cheap, but for now it's at the advice of my holistic MD, so I'm willing to go with it for a while. For the masses, at least there is now a bit more of a range out there for people to choose from however they may decide to. At the same time it is a bit ironic; even 10 or 20 years ago, your average MD and medical scholar was scoffing at the (relatively) cheap synthetic brand's out there (the $15 - $20 per pound stuff) pontificating that the only thing it is good for is "expensive urine", but now these years later, there are manya MD wrapped around these much more expensive pharmacological brands. All the while these same types usually seem to be scarce when it comes to publicly commenting on the truth of mainstream drugs, the best often of which is that they produce far more expenive urine, the worst of which is that they do this at the additional expense and destruction of one's health and internal organs.