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]