Vitamin E

I’m sure some of you will remember the Vitamin E scare of November 2004:

http://www2.whdh.com/features/articles/healthcast/DBM916

And today, September 2005, Vitamin E is just wonderful:

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7942

I do like clear, unambiguous advice, don’t you?

Personal “key points”

  • Take Vitamin E. It’s not called a VITAl MINeral for nothing!
  • Preferably in a natural form - and here’s a list of foods with very high levels (and a darn good web site in its own right):

Anyone have anything prfound they can share on this subject?

Regards,

WiZlon

Vitamin E is not bad for you.

Taking large amounts of it is.

In fact, toxicity can result from taking large amounts of any vitamin or mineral, even vitamins that are water soluble. Although nutrient requirements vary from person to person, Tolerable Upper Intake Levels (ULs) are established so that people do not overconsume nutrients with the foolish belief that, because some is good, more is better.

Furthermore, like anything, our bodies require a balanced system of essential resources on which to function. For a healthy person, high-dose supplements will disrupt that balance. High-doses are reserved for theraputic purposes.

So it’s not a question of whether or not Vitamin E is intrinsically bad or good; it’s a matter of how much Vitamin E is bad and/or good.

If someone is concerned over whether or not they should supplement with Vitamin E, my opinion is to take a daily multivitamin that includes it and, of course, eat a diet that incorporates Vitamin E-rich foods.
You’ll have your bases covered.

Well said, Angelbutt. The UL is an important guide for those who supplement vitamins and minerals.

Vitamin E posed a srange scenario, though, when even 400IU (i.e. 180mg, well below the UL of 1000 mg) appeared risky in some research populations (e.g. cardiac patients).

The statements on moderation remain, though: a 200IU dose of E is plenty - and yes, helpful to some people.

Like Angelbutt said, dose is key.

[quote]Lonnie Lowery wrote:
Well said, Angelbutt. The UL is an important guide for those who supplement vitamins and minerals.

Vitamin E posed a srange scenario, though, when even 400IU (i.e. 180mg, well below the UL of 1000 mg) appeared risky in some research populations (e.g. cardiac patients).

The statements on moderation remain, though: a 200IU dose of E is plenty - and yes, helpful to some people.

Like Angelbutt said, dose is key.
[/quote]

The results have come out increasingly better for Vit E as time has gone on…If anyone is interested in the gory details, I’ll be glad to look it up…