|
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
IIHW agri-techonology researchers in association with Kent Brown &
Associates of Ste. George, Utah, and the Rio Verde University Laboratory in
Provo, Utah, began field experiments on the affects of VITฦ-MYTEฉ
and 11 other soil additive combinations to determine among others: sheen,
volume, body, disease, water requirements, and overall growth. The first
cuttings were done on July 23rd, 2005, and lab analysis is currently
underway. A cursory eyeball view of the grass samples showed marked
differences in the sample areas utilizing the VITฦ-MYTEฉ
all natural micro-nutrient additive. Research on this and other aspects of
vegetative incorporation of these depleted nutrients continue. |
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Much controversy and debate surrounds the subject of minerals. Sorting fact from fiction and debunking the myths about minerals! (says researcher/author Tim OShea) Inorganic, organic, chelated, elemental, ionic, colloidal, essential, trace - all these claims! What do we really need? Credentials in nutrition apparently mean very little when it comes to minerals. Much of what is written about minerals is speculative, market-oriented, or simply dead wrong. A net search on minerals gleans an overwhelming assault on one's patience, time and credulity. How could all this stuff be right? Minerals come from mines right? Except, when you're talking about nutrition. Then they come from food. At least they used to. When we still had some mineralized viable topsoil to grow market vegetables in that is! Four elements compose 96% of the body's makeup: carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen. The remaining 4% of the body's composition is mineral. There are several opinions about how many minerals are essential. The following table shows the ones that are not in dispute, in the first column. Macro means more than 100mg per day. Trace usually means we don't know how much we need and it is a very small quantity. Essential Minerals MACROMINERALS........ Calcium Chlorine Sodium Potassium Phosphorus Magnesium Sulfur TRACE ELEMENTS or MINERALS . . . . . . . Chromium Tin Zinc Vanadium Copper Silicon Manganese Nickel Iron Molybdenum Fluorine Iodine Cobalt Selenium - U.S. Dept. of Agriculture National Research Council The controversy primarily involves the second column - trace minerals. Of the 14 trace minerals listed above, three or four may not have universal agreement as essential, but the majority of creditable sources admit that most of them are essential. Deficiency amounts have never been determined for most trace minerals, although several diseases have been linked with deficiencies of certain ones. Conclusive evidence has not been found regarding the exact daily intake amounts necessary, since some of the actual requirements may be too small to measure; hence the name "trace." In the past few years, even mainstream medicine is beginning to acknowledge the incontrovertible importance of mineral supplementation. In an article appearing in JAMA, the top American medical journal, 24 Dec 1996, a controlled study of selenium use for cancer patients was written up. Selenium has been proven to be a powerful stimulator in antioxidant activity, by helping to neutralize free radicals, which are rampant in the presence of cancer. In this study, 1312 subjects were divided into groups. Some were given selenium; others the placebo. Soon it was noticed that there was a decrease of 63% with prostate cancer, and 46% with lung cancer in the selenium group. The results were so blatant that the designers actually terminated the study early so that everyone could begin to benefit from selenium. This is just one example of the research that is currently being done on mineral supplementation. The problem is, if the results of studies economically threaten a current drug protocol, like chemotherapy, it is unlikely that an inexpensive natural supplement like selenium would be promoted by oncologists as a replacement in the foreseeable future. There are six nutrient groups: Water Vitamins Minerals Fats Protein Carbohydrate All groups are necessary for complete body function. The necessity for minerals is a recent historical discovery, only about 150 years old. In the 1850s, Pasteur's contemporary, Claude Bernard, learned about iron. Copper came about 10 years later, and zinc about the turn of the century. With the discovery of Vitamin A in 1912, minerals were downplayed for about 50 years in favor of vitamin research. By 1950, after about 14 vitamins had been discovered, attention returned once more to minerals when it was shown that they were necessary co-factors in order for vitamins to operate. Minerals are catalysts for most biological reactions. Soon the individual functions of minerals in the body were demonstrated: Structural: bones, teeth, ligaments Solutes and electrolytes in the blood Enzyme actions Energy production from food breakdown Nerve transmission Muscle action The following is a table of minerals linked with the specific functions most commonly agreed upon today: Calcium: Muscle contraction Bone building Sodium: Cell life Waste removal Potassium: Nerve transmission Cell life Normal blood pressure Muscle contraction Phosphorus: Bone formation Cell energy Magnesium: Muscle contraction Nerve transmission Calcium metabolism Enzyme cofactor Chlorine: Digestion Normal blood pressure Sulphur: Protein synthesis Collagen cross-linking, bone and ligament structure Copper: Immune system Artery strength Forms hemoglobin from iron Chromium: Insulin action Immune function Glucose Iron: Blood formation Immune function Selenium: Immune stimulant Fight free radicals Activates Vitamin E Nickel: Immune regulation Brain development DNA synthesis Iodine: Thyroid function Vanadium: Circulation Sugar metabolism Molybdenum: Enzyme action Silicon: Enzyme action Connective tissue Tin: Enzyme action Manganese: Enzyme action Fluorine: Teeth enamel - Larry Berger, PhD and Parris Kidd, PhD Zinc is necessary for antioxidant production, which prevents aging and cancer. It is also a cofactor for some 80 metabolic enzymes. (Erasmus, p 172) Zinc is necessary for wound healing, fat metabolism, insulin function, semen production, tissue repair, especially skin, and HCl production. (Erasmus) Mineral deficiency means that some of these jobs will not get done. The body is capable of prodigious amounts of adapting, and can operate for long periods of time with deficiencies of many of the above. But one day those checks will have to be cashed. The result: premature aging and cell breakdown. Without minerals, vitamins may have little or no effect. Minerals are catalysts - triggers for thousands of essential enzyme reactions in the body. No trigger - no reaction. Without enzyme reactions, caloric intake is meaningless, and the same for protein, fat, and carbohydrate intake. Minerals trigger the vitamins and enzymes to act; that means digestion. DEFICIENCY With the exception of those egregiously uninformed doctors who quack "you should be able to get all the nutrition you need from your food," a virtually undisputed fact is deficiency. Mineral deficiency is the reason for the titanic output of websites, articles, and supplements visible today. The majority of mineral websites quote a 1936 source - Senate Document #264, as scientific proof that dietary minerals are generally inadequate for optimum health. "...most of us are suffering from certain diet deficiencies which cannot be remedied until depleted soils from which our food comes are brought into proper mineral balance." "The alarming fact is that food...now being raised on millions of acres of land that no longer contain enough minerals are starving us... no matter how much of the food we eat." "Lacking vitamins, the system can make use of minerals, but lacking minerals, vitamins are useless." Senate Document 264 74th Congress, 1936 The same document went on to quantify the extent of mineral deficiency: "99% of the American people are deficient in minerals, and a marked deficiency in any one of the more important minerals actually results in disease." Congressional documents are not generally highly regarded as scientific sources, and other reference texts cite other percentages. The figures quoted by Albion Laboratories, the world leader in patents on supplemental minerals, are somewhat lower, but the idea begins to come across: DEFICIENCIES - % of U.S. Population Magnesium - 75% Iron - 58% Copper - 81% Manganese - 50% Chromium - 90% Zinc - 67% Selenium - 60% Sources: Albion Labs, Fats That Heal FIVE REASONS FOR MINERAL DEFICIENCY: 1. SOIL DEPLETION Different studies will show different figures, of course, but there is certainly no lack of explanation for mass deficiencies of mineral intake. The most obvious of these is soil depletion and demineralization. In 1900, forests covered 40% of the earth. Today, the figure is about 27%. (Relating Land Use and Global Land Cover, Turner, 1992). Aside from hacking down temperate forests and rainforests in order to raise beef cattle or to build condos, one of the main reasons for the dying forests is mineral depletion. According to a paper read at the 1994 meeting of the International Society for Systems Sciences, this century is the first time ever that "mineral content available to forest and agricultural root systems is down 25%-40%." Less forests means less topsoil. In the past 200 years, the U.S. has lost as much as 75% of its topsoil, according to John Robbins in his Pulitzer-nominated work Diet for a New America. To replace one inch of topsoil may take anywhere from 200-1000 years, depending on climate. (Utah Teachers Resource Books) Demineralization of topsoil translates to loss of productive capacity. Contributing further to this trend is the growing of produce that is harvested and shipped far away. (This would also account for the depletion of minerals from forested areas where the logs are shipped away from the forest for processing. Eds note.) The standard NPK (nitrogen-phosphorus-potassium) fertilizer farmers commonly use is able to restore the soil enough to grow fruits and vegetables which are healthy looking, but may be entirely lacking in trace minerals. The inventor of the entire NPK philosophy, Baron von Leibig, recanted his theories before he died when he saw the deficiencies his methods were fostering as they became the agricultural standard in both Europe and America. Mineral depletion in topsoil is hardly a controversial issue. The question is not if, but how much. Plants are the primary agents of mineral incorporation into the biosphere. The implication for our position on the food chain is simply: lowered mineral content in produce grown in U.S. topsoil. Not much argument here. There is not any source that insists that the mineral content of American or any developed nations topsoil is as good today as it was 50 years ago. Generally, studies talk in terms of how much, if any, minerals are still present. 2. DIET The second contributor to mineral deficiency within the population is obviously, diet. Even if our produce did contain abundant minerals, less than 4% of the population eats sufficient fruits and vegetables to account for minimal RDAs. To compound matters further, mass amounts of processed food, excess protein, and refined sugars require most of our mineral stores in order to digest it and remove it. The removal process involves enzymes, which break things down. Enzyme activity, remember, is completely dependent on minerals like zinc, copper, chromium, selenium, cobalt and many others. No minerals - no enzyme action. In addition, pasteurized/homogenized milk and dairy products, alcohol, and drugs inhibit the absorption of these minerals, further depleting reserves. So it is cyclical: refined foods inhibit mineral absorption, which then are not themselves efficiently digested because of diminished enzyme activity. And then we go looking for bacteria and viruses as the cause of disease? 3. MUCOID PLAQUE The standard indigestible American diet packs layer upon layer of plaque onto the inner lining of the colon. One of the prime functions of the colon is to reabsorb water, in order to prevent dehydration. Plaque prevents such a reclamation, and the result is that we lose both water and minerals that normally should be reabsorbed. 4. COMPETITION The fourth reason for inadequate minerals in the body is a phenomenon known as secondary deficiency. It has been proven that an excess of one mineral may directly cause a deficiency of another, because minerals compete for absorption, compete for the same binding sites, like a molecular Musical Chairs. Secondary deficiency means that an excess of one mineral causes a deficiency of another. (Kidd) For example, iron, copper, and zinc are competitive in this way. Copper is necessary for the conversion of iron to hemoglobin, but if there is excess zinc, less iron will be available for conversion due simply to excess zinc! Researchers have found that these secondary deficiencies caused by excess of one mineral are almost always due to an imbalance of mineral supplements, since the quantities contained in food are so small. 5. DRUGS A final, and increasingly serious reason for mineral deficiency in humans is overuse of prescription drugs. It has been known since the 1950s that antibiotics interfere with uptake of minerals, specifically zinc, chromium, and calcium. (The Plague Makers) Tylenol, Advil, Motrin, and aspirin have the same inhibitive effect on mineral absorption. Moreover, when the body has to try and metabolize these drugs to clear the system, its own mineral stores are heavily drawn upon. Such a waste of energy is used to metabolize laxatives, diuretics, chemotherapy drugs, and NSAIDs, such as Tylenol, Advil, and aspirin out of the body. This is one of the most basic mechanisms in drug-induced immune-suppression: minerals are essential for normal immune function. Ultimately, the only issue that really counts with minerals is bio-availability. It really doesn't matter what we eat; it only matters what is available and is transported to the body's cells. Let's say someone is iron deficient, for example. Can't he just take a bar of iron and file off some iron filings into a teaspoon, and swallow them? Just took in more iron, didn't he? Will this remedy the iron deficiency? Of course not! Here is a major distinction: the difference between elemental minerals and nutrient minerals. Iron filings are in the elemental form; absorption will be 8% or less. Same with most iron pills and most calcium supplements. Food-bound iron, on the other hand, like that contained in raisins or molasses, will have a much higher rate of absorption, since it is complexed with other living organic forms, and as such is classed as a nutrient mineral. Minerals are not living, though they are necessary for life. Minerals are necessary for cell life and enzyme reactions and hundreds, perhaps thousands of other reasons. But they must be in a form that can make it as far as the cells. What is not bio-available passes right through the body, a waste of time and often money spent on poor mineral supplements. Bio-availability has a precursor, an opening act. It is called absorption. Take a mineral supplement pill. Put it in a glass of water and wait half an hour. If it is unchanged, chances are that the tablet itself would never even dissolve in the stomach or intestine, but pass right out of the body. You would be astounded how many mineral supplements there are in this category. OK, let's say the tablet or capsule actually does dissolve in the digestive tract. Then what? In order to do us any good, the mineral must be absorbed into the bloodstream, through the intestinal walls. Elemental minerals are absorbed about 1-8% in this manner. The rest is excreted. Elemental minerals are those found in the majority of supplements, because they're very cheap to produce. For the small percentage that actually makes it to the bloodstream, the mineral is available for use by the cells, or as catalysts in thousands of essential enzyme reactions that keep every cell alive every second. Use at the cellular level is what bio-availability is all about. With this background in mind, we can begin to understand that varying amounts of the seven macro-minerals and approximately 14 trace minerals are necessary in a bio-available form for optimum cell activity, optimum health and would seem to contribute to long lifespan. So besides mineral deficiency of epidemic proportions, what's the problem? In a word, supplementation! Mineral deficiency has become such an obvious health concern, Mineral deficiency has become such an obvious health concern, causing specific diseases because of a lack of a single mineral, and general immune suppression with a lack of several... that the obvious need for supplementation has spawned an entire industry to the rescue. But in any market-driven industry involving pills, again we find that often the cures are worse than the original problems. Why?... Toxicity! Remember, even macro-minerals are only necessary in tiny amounts. Most trace minerals are necessary in amounts too small to be measured, and can only be estimated. Toxicity is a word that simply means extra stuff. When extra stuff gets put into the body, it's a big deal. All forces are mobilized for removal of the extra stuff, which are called antigens, toxins, poisons, reactants, etc, but you get the idea - it doesn't belong there. Toxicity means taking a non-essential non-nutrient into the body. Take lead poisoning, for example. If lead gets into the blood, the body will try to remove it. Since the metal atoms are so heavy compared with the body's immune forces, removal may be impossible. Lead can initiate a chronic inflammatory response and can remain in the body permanently, which is why we don't have lead in paint or gasoline any more. Most minerals can be toxic if taken to excess. And this excess would not happen from food; only from supplements. This is why if you are supplementing with trace minerals where the daily dose has not been established you should be taking only micro amounts of them. SO, WHAT SUPPLEMENTS WOULD BE BAD? Well, for starters, any supplement containing more than about 21 minerals, where the extra minerals are present in any other than extremely small micro doses, because little research, in fact no research in some cases, has been done on all the other trace elements. New toxicities are always being discovered. Aluminum linked to Alzheimer's is a recent discovery. Beyond these 21 or so it's simply anybody's guess, no matter what they tell you about the 5 civilizations where people live to be 140 years old. People who show dramatic improvements from taking these broad spectrum mineral drinks generally were so depleted that they rapidly absorbed the essential minerals in which they were deficient. But the toxicities from the non essential, unknown minerals may take a long time to show up. Why take in anything extra? (In the case of micro supplementation with the other little known minerals, problems would not arise as these minerals would have all been available from properly mineralized food anyway and the body would either utilize them as needed or excrete them. So the possibility of any toxic effects from using micro amounts of the lesser known trace elements, as would be found in food growing on properly mineralized soils, would be remote indeed. Editors note.) Amidst all the confusion about minerals, one thing should be made absolutely clear: we only need tiny amounts of virtually all the trace elements. So the mineral supplements we take should be as absorbable and as bio-available as possible - that way we won't have to take much and there is very little chance of toxicity. So the question then becomes: which mineral supplements are the most absorbable and the most usable, and therefore effective in the smallest amounts possible? Four candidates present themselves, all contending for the title: Elemental Ionic Colloidal Chelated Unraveling this puzzle is one area where a lot of confusion reigns. There's only one answer, but it's buried deep. To find it, we have to review a little BASIC PLUMBING: The digestive tract goes like this: mouth, esophagus, stomach, small intestine, large intestine, and out. Mineral absorption means transferring the mineral from the digestive tract through the wall of the intestine, into the bloodstream. You really have to picture this: the digestive tract is just a long tube, from one end to the other. As long as food and nutrients are inside this tube, they are actually considered to be still outside the body, because they haven't been absorbed into the bloodstream yet. This is an essential concept to understanding mineral absorption. Minerals can't do any good unless they make it into the bloodstream. This is exactly why most minerals bought at the supermarket and over the counter from health shops, are almost worthless: they pass right through the body - in one end and out the other. It's also why many nutritionists' and dieticians' advice is valueless; they commonly pretend and even believe their own hype that everything that is eaten is absorbed. Two main reasons for lack of absorption: The pill never dissolved in the first place and was excreted along with other undigested stuff. The mineral was in its elemental form and was bio-unavailable. (non-nutrient, e.g., iron filings) Let's say these problems are overcome...neither is true...or, let's say the mineral is contained within some food, such as iron in molasses, or potassium in bananas. Food-bound minerals are attached or complexed to organic molecules. Absorption into the blood is vastly increased, made easy. The mineral is not just a foreign metal that has been ingested; it is part of food. This is very important for the absorption of all minerals. Fruits and vegetables with high mineral content are the best way to provide the body with adequate nutrition. Food-bound minerals are the original mode. As already cited above however, sufficient mineral content is an increasingly rare occurrence. Foods simply don't have sufficient quantities of most trace elements and minerals to properly sustain life. How little or what portion of normal depends on what studies one finds. Suffice to say virtually all scientists agree that we do need a broad spectrum of a large number of minerals and trace elements. So, the necessity for supplementation becomes patently obvious, if the food no longer has it, and we need minerals... then pass the mineral supplements, please. But what supplements? 1. ELEMENTAL Let's look at the four types one by one. Least beneficial are the supplements containing minerals in the elemental form. That means the mineral is just mentioned on the label. It's not ionized, it's not chelated, it's not complexed with an oxide or a carbonate or a sulfate, or with a food, and it's not colloidal. Like under "ingredients" it just says "iron" or "copper," or "calcium," etc. Elemental minerals are obviously the cheapest to make. A liquid would only have to be poured over some nails to be said to contain iron. Elemental minerals are the most common in supermarket and over the counter health store supplements. They may not be toxic, as long as only the minerals mentioned on the label are included in the supplement. The problem is absorption: it's between 1 and 8 percent. The rest passes right through. Not only a waste of money; also a waste of energy: it has to be processed out of the body. This can actually use up available mineral stores. 2. IONIC Next comes ionic minerals. Usually a step up. Ionic means in the form of ions. Ions are unstable molecules that want to bind with other molecules. An ion is an incomplete molecule. There is a definite pathway for the absorption of ionic minerals through the gut (intestine) into the blood. In fact, any percent of the elemental minerals that actually got absorbed became ions first, by being dissolved in stomach acids. Ionic minerals are not absorbed through the intestine intact. The model for mineral ion absorption through the intestine is as follows. Ions are absorbed through the gut by a complicated process involving becoming attached or chelated to some special carrier proteins in the intestinal wall. Active transport is involved; meaning, energy is required to bring the ionic mineral from inside the intestine through the lining, to be deposited in the bloodstream on the other side. Ionic minerals may be a good source of nutrients for the body, depending upon the type of ions, and on how difficult it is for the ion to get free at the appropriate moment and location. Minerals require an acidic environment for absorption. Low pH (less than 7) is acidic; high pH (above 7) is alkaline. As the stomach contents at pH 2 empty into the small intestine, the first few centimeters of the small intestine is the optimum location for mineral absorption. The acidic state is necessary for ionization of the dissolved minerals. If the pH is too alkaline, the ions won't disassociate from whatever they're complexed with, and will simply pass on through to the colon without being absorbed. As the mineral ions are presented to the lining of the intestine, if all conditions are right, and there are not too much of competing minerals present, the ions will begin to be taken across the intestinal barrier, making their way into the bloodstream. This is a complicated, multi-step process, beyond the scope of this article. Simply, it involves the attachment of the free mineral ion to some carrier proteins within the intestinal membrane, which drag the ion across and free it into the bloodstream. A lot happens during the transfer, and much energy is required for all the steps. Just the right conditions and timing are necessary - proper pH, presence of vitamins for some, and the right section of the small intestine. Iron, manganese, zinc, copper - these ions are bound to the carrier proteins which are embedded in the intestinal lining. The binding is accomplished by a sort of chelation process, which simply describes the type of binding which holds the ion. The carrier protein or ligand hands off the mineral to another larger carrier protein located deeper within the intestinal wall. After several other steps, if all conditions are favourable, the ion is finally deposited on the other side of the intestinal wall: the bloodstream, now usable by the cells. Ionic mineral supplements do not guarantee absorption by their very nature, although they are certainly much more likely to be absorbed than are minerals in the raw, elemental state. However, ionic minerals are in the form required for uptake by the carrier proteins that reside in the intestinal wall. The uncertainties with ionic minerals include how many, how much, and what else are the unstable ions likely to become bound to before the carrier proteins pick them up. All ionic supplements are not created equal. Just because it's an ion doesn't mean a supplemental mineral will be absorbed. Too many and too big a quantity of specific minerals in a poorly designed supplement will compete for absorption. Too much of one or more minerals will crowd out the others. The idea is to offer the body an opportunity for balance; rather than to overload it with the hope that some will make it through somehow. Minerals are biologically active in tiny amounts and the best supplements are the ones that provide micro doses at non toxic levels. Recent scientific developments indicate far greater absorption of ionised minerals once they are complexed with organic fulvic acid. The same organic acid found in healthy soil full of micro-organisms, which allows elemental minerals to be absorbed and utilized by growing plants. The bio availability of minerals once complexed with organic fulvic acid is many times greater than minerals simply in an ionized form. 3. COLLOIDAL Speaking of overloading, the third type of supplemental minerals is the one we hear the most about: colloidal. What does colloidal really mean? Colloidal refers to a solution, a dispersion medium in which mineral particles are so well suspended that they never settle out: you never have to shake the bottle. The other part of the dictionary definition has to do with diffusion through a membrane: "will not diffuse easily through vegetable or animal membrane." Yet this is supposed to be the whole rationale for taking colloidal minerals - their absorbability. Colloidal guru Joel Wallach himself continuously claims that it is precisely the colloidal form of the minerals that allows for easy diffusion and absorption across the intestinal membrane, because the particles are so small. Wallach claims 98% absorption, but cites no studies, experiments, journal articles or research of any kind to back up this figure. Why not? Because there aren't any. The research on colloidal minerals has never been done. It's not out there. Senate Document 264 doesn't really cover it. In reality, colloidal minerals are actually larger than ionic minerals, as discussed by researcher Max Motyka, MS. Because of the molecular size and suspension in the colloid medium, which Dorland's Medical dictionary describes as "like glue," absorption is inhibited, not enhanced. No less an authority than Dr. Royal Lee the man responsible for pointing out the distinction between whole food vitamins and synthetic vitamins, stated: "A colloidal mineral is one that has been so altered that it will no longer pass through cell walls or other organic membranes." Does that sound like easy absorption? Stedman's Medical Dictionary talks about colloids ..."resisting sedimentation, diffusion, and filtration..." Again, resisting diffusion seems to indicate inhibition of absorption, not increased absorption, wouldn't you think? As Alexander Schauss and Parris Kidd both explain... "colloids are suspensions of minerals in clay and water. Clay often has levels of aluminum as high as 3000 parts per million, with safety levels set at 10 ppm or lower (Kidd). Aluminum has been proven to kill nerve cells, which we now see in the patho-physiology of Alzheimer's." Dr. Schauss characterizes the aluminum content as the big problem with colloidal minerals. He cites a standard geology reference text - Dana's Manual of Mineralogy - describing clay as primarily aluminum: "Clay minerals are essentially hydrous aluminum silicates." - Dana's Manual, p436 And another geology text: "[clays] are essentially hydrous aluminum silicates and are usually formed from the alteration of aluminum silicates." - Mineral Recognition p 273 Schauss finds references as high as 4400 PPM of aluminum in colloidal clay. Schauss states that he has done an exhaustive search for any human studies using colloidal minerals and after searching 2000 journals, like everyone else, has come up with zero. For a mineral to be absorbed, it must be either in the ionic state and preferably complexed with organic fulvic acid, or else chelated, as explained above. The percentage of colloidal minerals which actually does get absorbed has to have been ionized somehow, due to the acidic conditions in the small intestine. Only then is the mineral capable of being taken up by the carrier proteins in the intestinal membrane, as mentioned above. But why create the extra step? Ionic minerals would be superior to colloidal, because they don't have to be dissociated from a suspension medium, which is by definition non-diffusible. All this extra work costs the body in energy and reserves. In an editorial in Am J of Nat Med, Jan 97, Alexander Schauss further points out the error of Wallach's claims. Wallach states that colloidal minerals are negatively charged, and this enhances intestinal absorption. The problem is his science is 180ยฐ backward: Wallach claims the charge of the intestinal mucosa is positive, but all other sources have known for decades that the mucosal charge is negative. (Guyton, p13) This is why ionic minerals are presented to the intestinal surface as cations (positively charged ions). Opposites attract, like repels - remember? Another big minus for colloidals. QUALITY CONTROL What consistency of percentages of each mineral from batch to batch is there? Very simply, there isn't any with most of the mega mineral supplements, as many of the manufacturers will themselves admit. The ancient lakes and glaciers apparently have not been very accommodating when it comes to percent composition. Such a range of variation might be acceptable in, say, grenade tossing or blood dilution in seawater necessary to attract a shark, or IQ threshold of terrorists, or other areas where high standards of precision are not crucial. But a nutritional supplement that is supposed to enhance health by swallowing it - this is an area in which the details of composition should be fairly visible, verifiable, the same every time. To ensure you are getting the minerals and trace elements at the correct rate a reputable company will use standardization techniques for all the minerals which have are known to be essential and only include the lesser known elements in micro amounts. In addition a properly formulated mineral supplement will have been rigorously tested for the poisonous and toxic minerals such as aluminum, lead and cadmium and all traces removed. In many of these 80-trace-mineral toddies, there is no way of testing the presence or absence of many of the individual minerals. Many established essential trace minerals do not even have an agreed-upon recommended daily allowance, for two reasons: 1. The research has never been done 2. The amounts are too small to be measured. TOXICITY AND COMPETITION Some essential minerals are toxic in excess, but essential in small amounts. Iron, chlorine, sodium, zinc, selenium and copper are in this category. Toxic levels have been established, and resulting pathologies have been identified: we know what diseases are caused by their excesses. How risky is it to take in 40 or 50 minerals for which no toxicity levels have ever been set? Again it must be stressed that micro amounts of trace elements, similar to levels found in plants growing on properly mineralised land is the only safe way to be taking a broad spectrum mineral supplement. The problem is selective utilization, as explained by Dr. Parris Kidd. Toxic trace minerals may closely resemble the essential minerals in atomic configuration. The result is competition for enzyme sites by two similar minerals only one of which is beneficial: "aluminum competes with silicon cadmium competes with zinc tellurium competes with selenium lanthanum competes with calcium..." - Kidd, p42 We also know that zinc competes with iron. (Erasmus) A separate hoax is being played out with COLLOIDAL SILVER: Used by many as a "natural antibiotic." Extremely uninformed physicians recommend daily doses of colloidal silver, in order to "prevent" colds, in the absence of any studies or trials whatsoever. As Dr. Kidd points out: "...the body is not well-equipped to handle silver. This element can poison the kidneys, become deposited in the brain, and even give to the skin a gunmetal type of gloss." Doug Grant, a nutritionist, cites several minerals which frequently appear on the ingredient labels of certain mega-mineral products - they actually admit their supplements contain or "may contain" some of the following: (the phrase "may contain" has always been scary for me. If they're not sure, then what else is there that this product "may contain" that they don't know about?) Aluminium: Documented since the article in Lancet 14 Jan 1989 to be associated with Alzheimer's Disease, as well as blocking absorption of essential minerals like calcium, iron, and fluoride. If you want to ingest large amounts of aluminium simply start taking antacid tablets or absorb it through your skin by applying anti-deodorant under the arms! Silver: questionable as a single-dose antibiotic, consistent intake of silver accumulates in the blood-forming organs - spleen, liver, and bone marrow-, as well as the skin, lungs, and muscles. Serious pathologies have resulted: blood disorders, cirrhosis, pulmonary edema, chronic bronchitis, and a permanent skin condition known as argyria, to name just a few. Silver is better left in the ancient lakes, and in tableware. It should not be taken regularly as a supplement on its own. Gold: Manufacturers of mega-minerals hawk that "there's more gold in a ton of seawater than there is in a ton of ore." So what? Our blood is not seawater; it evolved from seawater. Gold used to be used to treat rheumatoid arthritis, but has largely been abandoned when they proved that it caused kidney cell destruction, bone marrow suppression, and immune abnormalities. Lithium: Rarely used as an antipsychotic medication, lithium definitely can cause blackouts, coma, psychosis, kidney damage, and seizures. Outside of that, it should be fine. The list goes on and on. These are just a few examples of mineral toxicities about which we have some idea. But for at least half the minerals in the mega toddies, we know nothing at all. 4. CHELATED The fourth form of supplemental minerals is the chelated variety. Some clarification of this term is immediately necessary. Chelated is a general term that describes a certain chemical configuration, or shape of a compound in which some molecule gets hooked up with some other chemical structures. When a mineral is bound or stuck to certain carrier molecules, which are known as chelating agents, or ligands, and a ring-like molecule is the result, we say that a chelate is formed. Chelate is from the Greek word for claw, suggested by the open v-shape of the two ligands on each side, with the mineral ion in the center. Chelation occurs in many situations. Many things can be chelated, including minerals, vitamins, and enzymes. Minerals in food may be bound with organic molecules in a chelated state. Many molecules in the body are chelated in normal metabolic processes. The carrier proteins in the intestinal wall discussed above, whose job it is to transport ionic minerals - these chelate the ions. Another sense of the word chelation as exemplified in a mainstream therapy for removing heavy metals from the blood is called chelation therapy. The toxic metals are bound to a therapeutic amino acid ligand called EDTA. With a Pac-Man action, the metals are thus removed from the blood. Molecular weight is measured in units called daltons. The ligands or binding agents may very small (800 daltons) or very large (500,000 daltons) resulting in a many sizes of chelates. Mineral + ligand = chelate. Generally the largest chelates are the most stable, and also the most difficult to absorb. Ionic minerals absorbed through the intestine are chelated to the carrier proteins, at least two separate times. Using the word chelated with respect to mineral supplements refers a very specific type of chelation. The idea is to bind the mineral ion to ligands that will facilitate absorption of the mineral through the intestine into the bloodstream, bypassing the pathway used for ionic mineral absorption. Sometimes minerals prepared in this way are described as "pre-chelated" since any ionic mineral will be chelated anyway once it is taken up by the intestinal membrane. After decades of research at Albion Laboratories in Utah, it was learned that small quantities of amino acids, especially glycine, are the best ligands for chelating minerals, for three reasons: (You will find the best mineral formulas are always combined with amino acids especially glycine. Eds note) 1. Bypasses the entire process of chelation by the intestine's own carrier proteins 2. Facilitates absorption by an entirely different pathway of intestinal absorption, skipping the intermediate steps which ionic minerals go through 3. The chelate will be the at the most absorbable molecular weight for intestinal transfer: less than 1500 daltons It has also been established beyond controversy that certain pairs of amino acids (dipeptides) are the easiest of all chelates to be absorbed, often easier than individual amino acids. Proteins are made of amino acids. Normal digestion presumably breaks down the proteins to its amino acid building blocks so they can be absorbed. But total breakdown is not always necessary. It has long been known that many nutrient chains of two or three or even more amino acids may be absorbed just as easily as single amino acids. Food-bound copper, vitamin C with hemoglobin molecule, animal protein zinc, are some examples of amino acids chelates that are easily absorbed intact. (Intestinal Absorption of Metal Ions, Chapter 7). To take another example, in abnormal digestion it is well known that chains of amino acids - dipeptides, tripeptides, even polypeptide proteins - sometimes become absorbed intact in a pathology known to gastroenterologists as Leaky Gut Syndrome. Obviously it is not healthy and has many adverse consequences, but the point is that amino acids chains are frequently absorbed, for many different reasons. It's not always like it says in the boldface section headings in Guyton's Physiology. The reason these dipeptide chelates are absorbed faster than ionic minerals is that the chelated mineral was bonded tightly enough so that it did not dissociate in the acidic small intestine and offer itself for capture by the intestinal membrane's carrier proteins. That whole process was thus avoided. The chelate is absorbed intact. An easier form. This is a vast oversimplification, and the most concise summary, of why chelated minerals may be superior to the standard ionic forms of mineral supplements, provided it's the right chelate. Only a specific chelate can resist digestion and maintain its integrity as it is absorbed through the gut. Again, all chelates are not created equal. Inferior chelates, used because they are cheaper to produce, include the following: - carbonates - citrates - oxides - sulphates - chlorides - phosphates Take the smallest amounts possible of any others. |
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
The breakdown of foodstuffs is accomplished through a
combination of mechanical and enzymatic processes. To accomplish
this breakdown, the digestive tube requires considerable assistance
from accessory digestive organs such as the salivary glands, liver
and pancreas, which dump their secretions into the tube. The name
"accessory" should not be taken to mean dispensable; indeed, without
pancreatic enzymes you would starve to death in short order. In many ways, the digestive system can be thought of as a well-run factory in which a large number of complex tasks are performed. The three fundamental processes that take place are: |
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
Each part of the digestive tube performs at least some of these tasks, and different regions of the tube have unique and important specializations. Like any well-run factory, proper function of the digestive system requires robust control systems. Control systems must facilitate communication among different sections of the digestive tract (i.e. control on the factory floor), and between the digestive tract and the brain (i.e. between workers and management). Control of digestive function is achieved through a combination of electrical and hormonal messages which originate either within the digestive system's own nervous and endocrine systems, as well as from the central nervous system and from endocrine organs such as the adrenal gland. Different parts of these systems are constantly talking to one another. The basic messages are along the lines of "I just received an extraordinary load of food, so I suggest you get prepared" (stomach to large intestine) or "For goodness sake, please slow down until I can catch up with what you've already given me" (small intestine to stomach). The digestive system is composed of the digestive or alimentary tube and accessory digestive organs. The basic terminology used to describe parts of the digestive system is shown below and more detailed description of each is presented in later sections. The digestive system is composed of the digestive or alimentary tube and accessory digestive organs. The basic terminology used to describe parts of the digestive system is shown below and more detailed description of each is presented in later sections. |
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
The digestive system depicted above - a carnivore
- is the simplist among mammals. Other species, even humans, have a
more or very much more extensive large intestine, and ruminants like
cattle and sheep have a large set of forestomachs through which food
passes before it reaches the stomach. Each of the organs shown above contributes to the digestive process in several unique ways. If you were to describe their most important or predominant function, and summarize shamelessly, the list would look something like this: |
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
The digestive system depicted above - a carnivore - is the simplest among mammals. Other species, even humans, have a more or very much more extensive large intestine, and ruminants like cattle and sheep have a large set of fore stomachs through which food passes before it reaches the stomach. Each of the organs shown above contributes to the digestive process in several unique ways. If you were to describe their most important or predominant function, and summarize shamelessly, the list would look something like this: Mouth: Foodstuffs are broken down mechanically by chewing and saliva is added as a lubricant. In some species, saliva contains amylase, an enzyme that digests starch. Esophagus: A simple conduit between the mouth and stomach - clearly important but only marginally interesting compared to other regions of the tube. Stomach: Where the real action begins - enzymatic digestion of proteins initiated and foodstuffs reduced to liquid form. Liver: The center of metabolic activity in the body - its major role in the digestive process is to provide bile salts to the small intestine, which are critical for digestion and absorption of fats. Pancreas: Important roles as both an endocrine and exocrine organ - provides a potent mixture of digestive enzymes to the small intestine which are critical for digestion of fats, carbohydrates and protein. Small Intestine: The most exciting place to be in the entire digestive system - this is where the final stages of chemical enzymatic digestion occur and where almost almost all nutrients are absorbed. Large Intestine: Major differences among species in extent and importance - in all animals water is absorbed, bacterial fermentation takes place and feces are formed. In carnivores, that's about the extent of it, but in herbivores like the horse, the large intestine is huge and of critical importance for utilization of cellulose. Mineral absorption means transferring the mineral from the digestive tract through the wall of the intestine, into the bloodstream. You really have to picture this: the digestive tract is just a long tube, from one end to the other. As long as food and nutrients are inside this tube, they are actually considered to be still outside the body, because they haven't been absorbed into the bloodstream yet. This is an essential concept to understanding mineral absorption. Minerals can't do any good unless they make it into the bloodstream. This is exactly why most minerals bought at the supermarket and over the counter from health shops, are almost worthless: they pass right through the body - in one end and out the other. It's also why many nutritionists' and dieticians' advice is valueless; they commonly pretend and even believe their own hype that everything that is eaten is absorbed. Two main reasons for lack of absorption: The pill never dissolved in the first place and was excreted along with other undigested stuff. The mineral was in its elemental form and was bio-unavailable. (non-nutrient, e.g., iron filings) Let's say these problems are overcome. . .neither is true. . .or, let's say the mineral is contained within some food, such as iron in molasses, or potassium in bananas. Food-bound minerals are attached or complexed to organic molecules. Absorption into the blood is vastly increased, made easy. The mineral is not just a foreign metal that has been ingested; it is part of food. This is very important for the absorption of all minerals. Fruits and vegetables with high mineral content are the best way to provide the body with adequate nutrition. Food-bound minerals are the original mode. As already cited above however, sufficient mineral content is an increasingly rare occurrence. Foods simply don't have sufficient quantities of most trace elements and minerals to properly sustain life. How little or what portion of normal depends on what studies one finds. Suffice to say virtually all scientists agree that we do need a broad spectrum of a large number of minerals and trace elements. So, the necessity for supplementation becomes patently obvious, if the food no longer has it, and we need minerals... then pass the mineral supplements, please. But what supplements? 1. ELEMENTAL Let's look at the four types one by one. Least beneficial are the supplements containing minerals in the elemental form. That means the mineral is just mentioned on the label. It's not ionized, it's not chelated, it's not complexed with an oxide or a carbonate or a sulfate, or with a food, and it's not colloidal. Like under "ingredients" it just says "iron" or "copper," or "calcium," etc. Elemental minerals are obviously the cheapest to make. A liquid would only have to be poured over some nails to be said to contain iron. Elemental minerals are the most common in supermarket and over the counter health store supplements. They may not be toxic, as long as only the minerals mentioned on the label are included in the supplement. The problem is absorption: it's between 1 and 8 percent. The rest passes right through. Not only a waste of money; also a waste of energy: it has to be processed out of the body. This can actually use up available mineral stores. 2. IONIC Next look at ionic minerals. Usually they are a step up. Ionic means in the form of ions. Ions are unstable molecules that want to bind with other molecules. An ion is an incomplete molecule. There is a definite pathway for the absorption of ionic minerals through the gut (intestine) into the blood. In fact, any percent of the elemental minerals that actually got absorbed became ions first, by being dissolved in stomach acids. Ionic minerals are not absorbed through the intestine intact. The model for mineral ion absorption through the intestine is as follows. Ions are absorbed through the gut by a complicated process involving becoming attached or chelated to some special carrier proteins in the intestinal wall. Active transport is involved; meaning, energy is required to bring the ionic mineral from inside the intestine through the lining, to be deposited in the bloodstream on the other side. Ionic minerals may be a good source of nutrients for the body, depending upon the type of ions, and on how difficult it is for the ion to get free at the appropriate moment and location. Minerals require an acidic environment for absorption. Low pH (less than 7) is acidic; high pH (above 7) is alkaline. As the stomach contents at pH 2 empty into the small intestine, the first few centimeters of the small intestine is the optimum location for mineral absorption. The acidic state is necessary for ionization of the dissolved minerals. If the pH is too alkaline, the ions won't disassociate from whatever they're complexed with, and will simply pass on through to the colon without being absorbed. As the mineral ions are presented to the lining of the intestine, if all conditions are right, and there are not too much of competing minerals present, the ions will begin to be taken across the intestinal barrier, making their way into the bloodstream. This is a complicated, multi-step process, beyond the scope of this article. Simply, it involves the attachment of the free mineral ion to some carrier proteins within the intestinal membrane, which drag the ion across and free it into the bloodstream. A lot happens during the transfer, and much energy is required for all the steps. Just the right conditions and timing are necessary - proper pH, presence of vitamins for some, and the right section of the small intestine. Iron, manganese, zinc, copper - these ions are bound to the carrier proteins which are embedded in the intestinal lining. The binding is accomplished by a sort of chelation process, which simply describes the type of binding which holds the ion. The carrier protein or ligand hands off the mineral to another larger carrier protein located deeper within the intestinal wall. After several other steps, if all conditions are favourable, the ion is finally deposited on the other side of the intestinal wall: the bloodstream, now usable by the cells. Ionic mineral supplements do not guarantee absorption by their very nature, although they are certainly much more likely to be absorbed than are minerals in the raw, elemental state. However, ionic minerals are in the form required for uptake by the carrier proteins that reside in the intestinal wall. The uncertainties with ionic minerals include how many, how much, and what else are the unstable ions likely to become bound to before the carrier proteins pick them up. All ionic supplements are not created equal. Just because it's an ion doesn't mean a supplemental mineral will be absorbed. Too many and too big a quantity of specific minerals in a poorly designed supplement will compete for absorption. Too much of one or more minerals will crowd out the others. The idea is to offer the body an opportunity for balance; rather than to overload it with the hope that some will make it through somehow. Minerals are biologically active in tiny amounts and the best supplements are the ones that provide micro doses at non toxic levels. Recent scientific developments indicate far greater absorption of ionized minerals once they are complexed with organic fulvic acid. The same organic acid found in healthy soil full of micro-organisms, which allows elemental minerals to be absorbed and utilized by growing plants. The bio availability of minerals once complexed with organic fulvic acid is many times greater than minerals simply in an ionized form. 3. COLLOIDAL Speaking of overloading, the third type of supplemental minerals is the one we hear the most about: colloidal. What does colloidal really mean? Colloidal refers to a solution, a dispersion medium in which mineral particles are so well suspended that they never settle out: you never have to shake the bottle. The other part of the dictionary definition has to do with diffusion through a membrane: "will not diffuse easily through vegetable or animal membrane." Yet this is supposed to be the whole rationale for taking colloidal minerals - their absorbability. Colloidal guru Joel Wallach himself continuously claims that it is precisely the colloidal form of the minerals that allows for easy diffusion and absorption across the intestinal membrane, because the particles are so small. Wallach claims 98% absorption, but cites NO studies, experiments, journal articles or research of any kind to back up this figure. Why not? Because there aren't any. The research on colloidal minerals has never been done. It's not out there. Senate Document 264 doesn't really cover it. In reality, colloidal minerals are actually larger than ionic minerals, as discussed by researcher Max Motyka, MS. Because of the molecular size and suspension in the colloid medium, which Dorland's Medical dictionary describes as "like glue," absorption is inhibited, not enhanced. No less an authority than Dr. Royal Lee the man responsible for pointing out the distinction between whole food vitamins and synthetic vitamins, stated: "A colloidal mineral is one that has been so altered that it will no longer pass through cell walls or other organic membranes." Does that sound like easy absorption? Stedman's Medical Dictionary talks about colloids . . ."resisting sedimentation, diffusion, and filtration..." Again, resisting diffusion seems to indicate inhibition of absorption, not increased absorption, wouldn't you think? As Alexander Schauss and Parris Kidd both explain... "colloids are suspensions of minerals in clay and water. Clay often has levels of aluminum as high as 3000 parts per million, with safety levels set at 10 ppm or lower (Kidd). Aluminum has been proven to kill nerve cells, which we now see in the pathophysiology of Alzheimer's." Dr. Schauss characterizes the aluminium content as the big problem with colloidal minerals. He cites a standard geology reference text - Dana's Manual of Mineralogy - describing clay as primarily aluminum: "Clay minerals are essentially hydrous aluminum silicates." - Dana's Manual, p436 And another geology text: "[clays] are essentially hydrous aluminum silicates and are usually formed from the alteration of aluminum silicates." - Mineral Recognition p 273 Schauss finds references as high as 4400 PPM of aluminum in colloidal clay. Schauss states that he has done an exhaustive search for any human studies using colloidal minerals and after searching 2000 journals, like everyone else, has come up with zero. For a mineral to be absorbed, it must be either in the ionic state and preferably complexed with organic fulvic acid, or else chelated, as explained above. The percentage of colloidal minerals which actually does get absorbed has to have been ionized somehow, due to the acidic conditions in the small intestine. Only then is the mineral capable of being taken up by the carrier proteins in the intestinal membrane, as mentioned above. But why create the extra step? Ionic minerals would be superior to colloidal, because they don't have to be dissociated from a suspension medium, which is by definition non-diffusible. All this extra work costs the body in energy and reserves. In an editorial in Am J of Nat Med, Jan 97, Alexander Schauss further points out the error of Wallach's claims. Wallach states that colloidal minerals are negatively charged, and this enhances intestinal absorption. The problem is his science is 180ฐ backward: Wallach claims the charge of the intestinal mucosa is positive, but all other sources have known for decades that the mucosal charge is negative. (Guyton, p13) This is why ionic minerals are presented to the intestinal surface as cations (positively charged ions). Opposites attract, like repels - remember? Another big minus for colloidals. QUALITY CONTROL What consistency of percentages of each mineral from batch to batch is there? Very simply, there isn't any with most of the mega mineral supplements, as many of the manufacturers will themselves admit. The ancient lakes and glaciers apparently have not been very accommodating when it comes to percent composition. Such a range of variation might be acceptable in, say, grenade tossing or blood dilution in seawater necessary to attract a shark, or IQ threshold of terrorists, or other areas where high standards of precision are not crucial. But a nutritional supplement that is supposed to enhance health by swallowing it - this is an area in which the details of composition should be fairly visible, verifiable, the same every time. To ensure you are getting the minerals and trace elements at the correct rate a reputable company will use standardization techniques for all the minerals which have are known to be essential and only include the lesser known elements in micro amounts. In addition, a properly formulated mineral supplement will have been rigorously tested for the poisonous and toxic minerals such as aluminum, lead and cadmium and all traces removed. In many of these 80-trace-mineral toddies, there is no way of testing the presence or absence of many of the individual minerals. Many established essential trace minerals do not even have an agreed-upon recommended daily allowance, for two reasons: 1. The research has never been done 2. The amounts are too small to be measured. TOXICITY AND COMPETITION Some essential minerals are toxic in excess, but essential in small amounts. Iron, chlorine, sodium, zinc, selenium and copper are in this category. Toxic levels have been established, and resulting pathologies have been identified: we know what diseases are caused by their excesses. How risky is it to take in 40 or 50 minerals for which no toxicity levels have ever been set? Again it must be stressed that micro amounts of trace elements, similar to levels found in plants growing on properly mineralized land is the only safe way to be taking a broad spectrum mineral supplement. The problem is selective utilization, as explained by Dr. Parris Kidd. Toxic trace minerals may closely resemble the essential minerals in atomic configuration. The result is competition for enzyme sites by two similar minerals only one of which is beneficial: "aluminum competes with silicon cadmium competes with zinc tellurium competes with selenium lanthanum competes with calcium..." - Kidd, p42 We also know that zinc competes with iron. (Erasmus) A separate hoax is being played out with COLLOIDAL SILVER: Used by many as a "natural antibiotic." Extremely uninformed physicians recommend daily doses of colloidal silver, in order to "prevent" colds, in the absence of any studies or trials whatsoever. As Dr. Kidd points out: ". . .the body is not well-equipped to handle silver. This element can poison the kidneys, become deposited in the brain, and even give to the skin a gunmetal type of gloss." Doug Grant, a nutritionist, cites several minerals which frequently appear on the ingredient labels of certain mega-mineral products - they actually admit their supplements contain or "may contain" some of the following: (the phrase "may contain" has always been scary for me. If they're not sure, then what else is there that this product "may contain" that they don't know about?) Aluminum: Documented since the article in Lancet 14 Jan 1989 to be associated with Alzheimer's Disease, as well as blocking absorption of essential minerals like calcium, iron, and fluoride. If you want to ingest large amounts of aluminum simply start taking antacid tablets or absorb it through your skin by applying anti-deodorant under the arms! Silver: questionable as a single-dose antibiotic, consistent intake of silver accumulates in the blood-forming organs - spleen, liver, and bone marrow-, as well as the skin, lungs, and muscles. Serious pathologies have resulted: blood disorders, cirrhosis, pulmonary edema, chronic bronchitis, and a permanent skin condition known as argyria, to name just a few. Silver is better left in the ancient lakes, and in tableware. It should not be taken regularly as a supplement on its own. Gold: Manufacturers of mega-minerals hawk that "there's more gold in a ton of seawater than there is in a ton of ore." So what? Our blood is not seawater; it evolved from seawater. Gold used to be used to treat rheumatoid arthritis, but has largely been abandoned when they proved that it caused kidney cell destruction, bone marrow suppression, and immune abnormalities. Lithium: Rarely used as an antipsychotic medication, lithium definitely can cause blackouts, coma, psychosis, kidney damage, and seizures. Outside of that, it should be fine. The list goes on and on. These are just a few examples of mineral toxicities about which we have some idea. But for at least half the minerals in the mega toddies, we know nothing at all. 4. CHELATED The fourth form of supplemental minerals is the chelated variety. Some clarification of this term is immediately necessary. Chelated is a general term that describes a certain chemical configuration, or shape of a compound in which some molecule gets hooked up with some other chemical structures. When a mineral is bound or stuck to certain carrier molecules, which are known as chelating agents, or ligands, and a ring-like molecule is the result, we say that a chelate is formed. Chelate is from the Greek word for claw, suggested by the open v-shape of the two ligands on each side, with the mineral ion in the center. Chelation occurs in many situations. Many things can be chelated, including minerals, vitamins, and enzymes. Minerals in food may be bound with organic molecules in a chelated state. Many molecules in the body are chelated in normal metabolic processes. The carrier proteins in the intestinal wall discussed above, whose job it is to transport ionic minerals - these chelate the ions. Another sense of the word chelation as exemplified in a mainstream therapy for removing heavy metals from the blood is called chelation therapy. The toxic metals are bound to a therapeutic amino acid ligand called EDTA. With a Pac-Man action, the metals are thus removed from the blood. Molecular weight is measured in units called daltons. The ligands or binding agents may very small (800 daltons) or very large (500,000 daltons) resulting in a many sizes of chelates. Mineral + ligand = chelate. Generally the largest chelates are the most stable, and also the most difficult to absorb. Ionic minerals absorbed through the intestine are chelated to the carrier proteins, at least two separate times. Using the word chelated with respect to mineral supplements refers a very specific type of chelation. The idea is to bind the mineral ion to ligands that will facilitate absorption of the mineral through the intestine into the bloodstream, bypassing the pathway used for ionic mineral absorption. Sometimes minerals prepared in this way are described as "pre-chelated" since any ionic mineral will be chelated anyway once it is taken up by the intestinal membrane. After decades of research at Albion Laboratories in Utah, it was learned that small quantities of amino acids, especially glycine, are the best ligands for chelating minerals, for three reasons: (You will find the best mineral formulas are always combined with amino acids especially glycine. Editors note) 1. Bypasses the entire process of chelation by the intestine's own carrier proteins 2. Facilitates absorption by an entirely different pathway of intestinal absorption, skipping the intermediate steps which ionic minerals go through 3. The chelate will be the at the most absorbable molecular weight for intestinal transfer: less than 1500 daltons It has also been established beyond controversy that certain pairs of amino acids (dipeptides) are the easiest of all chelates to be absorbed, often easier than individual amino acids. Proteins are made of amino acids. Normal digestion presumably breaks down the proteins to its amino acid building blocks so they can be absorbed. But total breakdown is not always necessary. It has long been known that many nutri | |||||||
