On Sat, 18 Jul 1998, Richard Geller wrote:

> Ray in his book dismisses supplements. But I don't agree.
>
> So what do y'all do? What do y'all think?

My personal opinion is that supplements are a reasonable
precaution, especially in a diet high in meats.  Meats are high
in methionine, which is metabolized to homocysteine, a substance
that is now believed to cause cardiovascular disease (see Kilmer
McCully, _The Homocysteine Revolution_).  Homocysteine is reduced
by the B vitamins, especially folic acid, B-6 and B-12.  These
are plentiful in fresh meats and vegetables, but they are also
very vulnerable to degradation.  The heat of cooking denatures
them, as does the simple fact of foods being stored/shipped for
days instead of being eaten immediately when picked.  For these
reasons, I think it makes sense to supplement with B vitamins, at
the very least.  It pays not to forget that supermarket
Neanderthin is only an approximation of paleolithic dietary
experiences.

A similar case can be made for vitamin C supplementation.  A diet
of fresh raw meats and fresh berries would have plenty of C, but
cooked meats and less than fresh berries would be compromised in
this area.  As Linus Pauling argued, the fact that one is not
having symptoms of scurvy does not mean that one is getting an
optimal amount of C.  Furthermore, it is believed that our
ability to synthesize C in our own bodies was lost only
relatively recently -- maybe 50,000 years ago -- so the
evolutionary consequences of this loss may not be fully resolved
yet.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]