Sodium Ascorbate is usually taken when mega dosing so that shouldnt be a problemOriginally Posted by Doc M
That don't kill me, can only make me stronger
Sodium Ascorbate is usually taken when mega dosing so that shouldnt be a problem
AR-Hall of Famer
I don't see any reference in any of the above posts to suggest he was referring to "sodium ascorbate" as opposed to ascorbic acid tablets. Anything in high doses, especially anyting that has excipients or binders in it can cause stomach distress.
That don't kill me, can only make me stronger
Sodium Ascorbate is Vitamin C
AR-Hall of Famer
And your point is what exactly? Sodium Ascorbate is a form of Vitamin C.
What point are you trying to make exactly besides trying to pick an argument?? Or are you the world renowned vitamin expert and an internet MD..if so, I do apologize and don't dare challenge your vast knowledge...
Oh, and thanks for pointing out that sodium ascorbate is vitamin c. I never would have figured that one out.
Doc M
National Level Bodybuilder/Hall of Famer/RETIRED
I miss you.
Muscle Asylum Project Athlete
AR-Hall of Famer
Hahaha..What can I say, as you know I am a sensitive person!!I miss you.
Maybe he's just misunderstood...or maybe he was trying to spawn an argument..Either way, it's all good. Great pic by the way..You just seem to get bigger and more cut every time you post a pic. It pisses me off!! lol
Doc M
That don't kill me, can only make me stronger
"Sodium Ascorbate is buffered (non-acidic) and will not contribute to gastric irritation in acid-sensitive persons. Sodium Ascorbate is synthesized from a combination of Sodium Bicarbonate and Ascorbic Acid to form Sodium Ascorbate."
yawn
AR-Hall of Famer
Well, you have certainly shown you can copy and paste from an online medical resource. At least you gave the courtesy of putting it in quotes.
And I'm still looking where he mentioned or indicated he was dosing with Sodium Ascorbate, but hey, who am I to argue with you. You are obviously light years ahead of the rest.
Doc M
Yawn...that's funny...
That don't kill me, can only make me stronger
whats funny is all i did quote your section on stomach distress and i said Sodium ascorbate for that and you proceeded to "pick a fight" as you would say
king of mass
This is your first post after he says simpley that "Sodium Ascorbate is a form of Vitamin C."
It looks like you felt like your intellegents was being challenged, so you responded an a total asinine way. You appear to be the one thats initiating confrontation.
Dulce bellum inexpertis
I dont feel like wasting space and putting full-text articles up, I'm going to quote them and give credit&references, if anyone wants the full texts to examine the methodology or anything else just PM me...
I have a problem with how this study was conducted, I dont think it gives any concrete proof that any of the above listed substances are therapeautic. The study was based off of people who answered "Yes" to whether or not they had a cold. No cultures were ever taken, half of the people could have had a bacterial infection. Then they were later asked to "recall" symptoms...Im just posting this article as an example of something someone on this board might post as "concrete evidence" that Vitamin C is the wonder drug of the 21st century, when in fact upon closer examination of the actual study and how it was conducted, its far from it. You cant rely on an abstract to tell you if the research was credible, you have to look at the entire thing yourself.PURPOSE We undertook a study to estimate the sufficiently important difference (SID) for the common cold. The SID is the smallest benefit that an intervention would require to justify costs and risks.
METHODS Benefit-harm tradeoff interviews (in-person and telephone) assessed SID in terms of overall severity reduction using evidence-based simple-language scenarios for 4 common cold treatments: vitamin C, the herbal medicine echinacea, zinc lozenges, and the unlicensed antiviral pleconaril.
RESULTS Response patterns to the 4 scenarios in the telephone and in-person samples were not statistically distinguishable and were merged for most analyses. The scenario based on vitamin C led to a mean SID of 25% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23–0.27). For the echinacea-based scenario, mean SID was 32% (95% CI, 0.30–0.34). For the zinc-based scenario, mean SID was 47% (95% CI, 0.43–0.51). The scenario based on preliminary antiviral trials provided a mean SID of 57% (95% CI, 0.53–0.61). Multivariate analyses suggested that (1) between-scenario differences were substantive and reproducible in the 2 samples, (2) presence or severity of illness did not predict SID, and (3) SID was not influenced by age, sex, tobacco use, ethnicity, income, or education. Despite consistencies supporting the model and methods, response patterns were diverse, with wide spreads of individual SID values within and among treatment scenarios.
CONCLUSIONS Depending on treatment specifics, people want an on-average 25% to 57% reduction in overall illness severity to justify costs and risks of popular cold treatments. Randomized trial evidence does not support benefits this large. This model and these methods should be further developed for use in other disease entities.
To be eligible for either arm of this study, prospective adult participants had to answer "yes" to the question, "Do you think that you have a cold or are coming down with a cold?" They also had to report at least 1 of 4 cold symptoms (sneezing, runny nose, nasal obstruction, or sore throat), and to have a total Jackson score of at least 2 points. Jackson scores13–15 are simple sums of severity ratings (1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe) for 8 symptoms: those noted above plus cough, headache, chilliness, and malaise.
Im going to add this last part in, and it should totally discredit this article from even being included in an argument such as this-From May 6, 2003, when the study began until August 22, 2005, when data collection ended, 983 people contacted our research team, and 253 enrolled in 1 of the 2 groups reported here. Of the 730 not enrolled in this study, 217 joined another study, 201 did not meet inclusion criteria, 128 declined to participate, and 43 were simply calling for information. Some 141 could not be categorized meaningfully. Of those excluded, 55 were thought to have allergy or an illness other than a cold, 35 had symptoms for more than 7 days, 25 were younger than 18 years, 19 were considered unreliable after the screening interview, and 67 were excluded for a variety of other reasons. (Our screening protocol allowed people to be excluded for more than one reason.)
Next, the participant was presented with 1 of the following scenarios:
A 10-cent vitamin pill must be taken 3 times daily for the first 3 days of your cold. There are no significant risks or side effects to this treatment. It is unlikely that the length of your cold would be reduced significantly. Severity of symptoms might be reduced by as much as 30%.
A 20-cent lozenge must be dissolved in the mouth every 2 to 3 hours while awake for the first 3 days of your cold. Side effects may include bad taste, and, very occasionally, nausea. It is possible that the length of the cold could be reduced slightly. Severity of symptoms might be reduced by as much as 30%.
A 50-cent dropperful of an herbal extract must be taken 3 times each day for the first 3 days of your cold. Side effects are limited to bad taste. It is possible that the length of the cold could be reduced slightly. Severity of symptoms might be reduced by as much as 30%.
A $2 prescription-only pill must be taken 3 times daily for the first 3 days of the cold. Side effects are unknown. Preliminary data suggests an average 24-hour reduction in the length of your cold. Severity of symptoms might be reduced by as much as 30%.
The scenarios were presented in varied order, so that each scenario had an approximately equal chance of being considered first, second, third, or last. After each scenario was presented, participants were asked, "Would you take this treatment?" and then, "Why?" or "Why not?" Brief notes were taken regarding the answers to these qualitative questions. Next, participants who had answered "yes" to the original question were asked: "Would you take this [treatment] if it were able to reduce severity by 20%?" If the answer was still "yes," the hypothetical severity reduction was lowered to "10%," then if still "yes," it was lowered to "5%," and, finally, "any?" If the original answer was "no," severity reduction benefit was increased to "40%," then if still "no," it was increased to "50%," then "75%." Severity reduction SID was defined as the smallest severity reduction that justified the treatment scenario for that participant.
Woops...meant to add this in-
Sufficiently Important Difference for Common Cold: Severity Reduction
Bruce Barrett, MD, PhD1, Brian Harahan, BA1,2, David Brown, PhD3, Zhengjun Zhang, PhD1 and Roger Brown, PhD1
1 Department of Family Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisc
2 School of Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison Wisc
3 Provincial Health Services Authority, and Department of Family Practice, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Bruce Barrett, MD, PhD, Department of Family Medicine, University of Wisconsin, 777 South Mills, WI 53715, [email protected]
Last edited by thegodfather; 11-13-2007 at 04:35 PM.
AR-Hall of Famer
I didn't feel like he was challenging my intelligence, seriously. I apologized for coming across as an ass. I interpreted his response as somewhat argumentative, right or wrong. I apologized like a big boy, he said no big deal, life will certainly go on.
Hey I'm not perfect and maybe can be an ass- just ask my wife, she will definitely confirm it.
Doc M
king of mass
Well I still like you and think you have great advice.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote