Supplements, RDAs
In a 1979 talk at the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Orthomolecular Medical Society, Pauling criticized the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) standards set by government bodies. He stated:
"The RDAs are enough to keep people barely alive in ordinary poor health."
Bare Minimum vs. Optimum:
Pauling argued that the RDA only answers the question of how much a person needs to avoid dying from a deficiency disease. He believed scientists should instead be asking what intake level puts people in the "best of health".
The "Thousandfold" Range:
He noted that while small amounts of vitamins are enough to keep people alive, there is a range of "a thousandfold or ten-thousandfold" in intakes that can be taken safely without killing a person. He spent decades trying to find the specific "optimum" point within that range.
Criticism of the Food and Nutrition Board:
Pauling testified before a Senate subcommittee in 1975, stating that the Food and Nutrition Board established the RDA by considering only the amounts needed to prevent death or serious illness, giving "no serious consideration whatever" to optimum daily intake.
Animal Comparisons:
He pointed out that animal nutritionists recommend much higher amounts of Vitamin C for animals (whether they synthesize it themselves or not) to sustain health than the RDA requires for humans.
Vitamins vs. Drugs:
Pauling argued that because vitamins have remarkably low toxicity compared to drugs, they should be treated as a different class of substance. He expressed frustration that the FDA intended to classify vitamins as prescription drugs if they exceeded the RDA.
Pauling’s personal experience reinforced these views. After a biochemist, Irwin Stone, suggested he take 3,000 mg of Vitamin C daily—50 times the RDA—Pauling reported feeling "livelier and healthier" and no longer suffered from the severe colds that had plagued him his whole life. By the end of his life, he had increased his own intake to 18,000 mg per day.
Source: Linus Pauling in His Own Words: Selections From his Writings, Speeches and Interviews. Barbara Marinacci. 1995. 9780684813875.
"The RDAs are enough to keep people barely alive in ordinary poor health."
Bare Minimum vs. Optimum:
Pauling argued that the RDA only answers the question of how much a person needs to avoid dying from a deficiency disease. He believed scientists should instead be asking what intake level puts people in the "best of health".
The "Thousandfold" Range:
He noted that while small amounts of vitamins are enough to keep people alive, there is a range of "a thousandfold or ten-thousandfold" in intakes that can be taken safely without killing a person. He spent decades trying to find the specific "optimum" point within that range.
Criticism of the Food and Nutrition Board:
Pauling testified before a Senate subcommittee in 1975, stating that the Food and Nutrition Board established the RDA by considering only the amounts needed to prevent death or serious illness, giving "no serious consideration whatever" to optimum daily intake.
Animal Comparisons:
He pointed out that animal nutritionists recommend much higher amounts of Vitamin C for animals (whether they synthesize it themselves or not) to sustain health than the RDA requires for humans.
Vitamins vs. Drugs:
Pauling argued that because vitamins have remarkably low toxicity compared to drugs, they should be treated as a different class of substance. He expressed frustration that the FDA intended to classify vitamins as prescription drugs if they exceeded the RDA.
Pauling’s personal experience reinforced these views. After a biochemist, Irwin Stone, suggested he take 3,000 mg of Vitamin C daily—50 times the RDA—Pauling reported feeling "livelier and healthier" and no longer suffered from the severe colds that had plagued him his whole life. By the end of his life, he had increased his own intake to 18,000 mg per day.
Source: Linus Pauling in His Own Words: Selections From his Writings, Speeches and Interviews. Barbara Marinacci. 1995. 9780684813875.
Written by Gemini after giving it a copy of the above book.
Comments
Post a Comment