Date:   1/26/2014 4:39:40 PM ( 10 y ago)
Hits:   5,778
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=2144826

Hi Lorica,

You bring up some very good questions.

Just like you mentioned with the acid/alkaline controversy, there is much controversy surrounding liposomal ascorbate vs. ascorbic acid. This controversy is at the "cutting edge," i.e. I am unable to give you an absolutely definitive answer!

As "grist for your mill" I will offer the following: As far as testing, ascorbic acid has THOUSANDS [if not tens of thousands] of times more data [history] than liposomal ascorbate. I am certainly aware of Dr. Levy's claims, but have also seen contradictory claims from other doctors. Also, with liposomal ascorbate, you get no GI tract cleansing [effect], and I personally think that is not a good thing [to not get]. Additionally I have read that HOMEMADE liposomal ascorbate does not produce TRUE liposomes, i.e. that are very tiny, i.e. the homemade ones are [supposedly] larger [and this is (supposedly) not as effective]. Since money and businesses are involved with the [commercial] liposomal products, I can only say "caveat emptor!" I think liposomal ascorbate probably has a [potentially valuable] place in ascorbate therapy, but with the exception of a health emergency, I believe it should be used AFTER Bowel Tolerance dosing, and not before or instead of.

As an aside, my own speculation is that the cleaner your GI tract is, the more ascorbate/electrons you will be able to ingest into your body. So for most people, liposomal ascorbate may be a very good alternative [if they can AFFORD it], i.e. because the average person's GI tract appears to be quite clogged/polluted. I, of course, think people would do well [health-wise] to take care of that problematic situation, but to each there own!

I have read the "expensive urine" statement/assertion before, but I definitely question it. For instance, the dehydroascorbate molecule is also vitamin "C" but it no longer carries the two "free"/extra/alkalinizing/toxin neutralizing/antioxidant electrons in it, i.e. it has been oxidized. So is that what is being passed [off] in the urine, e.g. as DR. Cathcart writes, "thrown away?" My view would be: Why would the body not utilize the two extra electrons? Also, why would the animals use their [assumably limited] glucose to produce ascorbic acid, and then pass some of it off in their urine [as they do]? I have to assume that it must ALSO produce some benefit there, e.g. for the kidneys and/or bladder and/or urethra, etc. Dr. Cathcart writes in several of his articles that we must "force" the antioxidizing electrons into the "affected" tissues by ingesting Bowel Tolerance doses of ascorbic acid daily. The implication is that some portion of the "additional" ascorbate [ingested] will, in fact, end up in the urine [or simply excreted via a "loose stool"].

I hope this helps in your decision making process, Lorica.

All my best,

David
 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.02 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=2144826