Bio-Available Minerals
See
our full line of Mineral supplements
There are no live minerals. There are mineral complexes and salts that
work, but they aren't live. Kelp or dulse are OK, but better than Lugol's?
You'd have to eat pounds of it to get the equivalent of a few drops
of Lugol's (potassium iodide).
I think at least part of the confusion may be due to terminological
discrepancies, not necessarily "incompatible positions" of
live versus chemical. Let me give a try to some interpretations of what
people on both sides of the scientific fence might actually mean when
they use certain "questionable" terms...
I think what people are occasionally trying to say (perhaps not always with
enough scientific backing for the opinion, sometimes going on a piece of "bad
science" and sometimes, just on a "gut feeling") when they say
"live minerals" -- is that essential nutrients are something that
becomes bioavailable (i.e., can be transformed from a "chemical" into a
functioning constituent of the active live organism -- i.e. become a live
functioning part of a bone, a heart, a brain, a bloodstream) -- what they
are sometimes trying to say without saying it convincingly enough to convince
someone to whom wording like "live minerals" sounds as out of tune as a chain
saw -- is in fact backed up by some "good" science as well. Here's what I mean:
There's evidence that many (possibly all) essential nutrients become
bioavailable for this purpose (i.e., for the purpose of turning into a live
functioning part of "you" after you have eaten them) with much higher efficiency
when they are ingested as part of a natural substance in which they occur
alongside thousands of other natural substances, rather than alone in their pure
chemical form. This has been scientifically proven for many essential nutrients.
(I will look up and provide my references if necessary.) What makes them "live"
in this scenario is not some mysterious forces, spirits or "unproven" mystical
energies but, rather, their interactions with other metabolic players, their
ability to "behave a certain way" in the human body when they are ingested as
part of certain complex synergistic environments (and, for instance, a piece of
seaweed is just such an environment for iodine, unlike a bottle of Lugol's.)
Those natural and exceedingly complex synergistic environments is what the
human body has been evolutionally fine-tuned to recognize and process so as to
make the best of those minerals, vitamins, oils, amino acids, sugars, and so on.
That's bioavailability, a different story from what a mineral "is" or "has" in a
test tube -- a story of what it actually "does" in the live body.
And there's things these minerals simply aren't equipped to do when taken out
of their synergistic context, out of their natural
environments and administered in "pure" form. Without many of those co-factors,
team players in the game of bioavailability, synergists, enhancers or inhibitors
of the rate of absorbtion, emulsifiers, chelators, and so on, both the ones
known to science and the ones unknown to science (e.g., the vast majority of
alkaloids, both known and unknown to science, are unique to a plant they occur
in, and for those that have been "already discovered" by science, only a
fraction of a percentage of their action has been scientifically studied, and a
smaller still fraction understood) -- without those synergists a chemically pure
mineral (or any other
substance) will indeed, in many cases, behave in the human body as though it is
"dead," or at least seriously wounded. Here's a few (proven by "good" science
;-) ) examples of what I mean:
synthetic vitamin C, albeit chemically identical to natural vitamin C, does
not cure SCURVY in ANY amounts. Scurvy, the very disease after which "ascorbic"
acid has been named, only responds to vitamin C from fruits and vegetables, not
from the lab! The thinking of those scientists who want an explanation for this
proven fact must obviously turn to biophysics to understand even this one
substance's true "fate" in the human body, since biochemistry sheds no light
whatsoever on this phenomenon.
Calcium: won't absorb as a calcium supplement. That's because it needs both
fat and fat-soluble vitamins to become bioavailable.
So "no-fat" dairy, e.g., is the second surest way to clog one's kidneys with
insoluble calcium, "second" only to taking a supplement
with a glass of water, that is... None of the calcium ingested in this manner
will make it to the bones, or anywhere else it's needed. But a cup of cottage
cheese from whole (no fat removed!) and otherwise unmolested milk will deliver
the kind of "live," so to speak, calcium that will do its job. It's "live"
because fat and fat-soluble vitamins (and who knows what else!) in a substance
where
all of them occur together in proportions and amounts that are specific, as part
of "natural solvents" that are specific -- all of these factors "enliven" this
otherwise "severely wounded" (for purposes of bioavailability) calcium, and it
gets a chance to become part of the live human body upon ingestion, rather than
clog some organ or other with its dead weight.
Iodine: yes, painting it on the skin will work, taking it as a supplement
will work, but taking it as part of a piece of seaweed will work better. Iodine
is easy to overdose in pure form, and an overdose will cause cellular edema,
skin rashes (reportedly very stubborn), and increase one's susceptibility to
infections and inflammations. None of this will happen with seaweed, however,
which has, among other things, a natural form of MSG (sic!) -- a completely safe
form of MSG, unlike its neurotoxic "pure" chemical counterpart! -- that will
protect the tissues from the "side effects" of pure iodine.
The list goes on and on. The point I'm trying to make is that aiming to get
an essential nutrient from a natural source seems to be a worthwhile
strategy in many cases. Of course if it is a designer substance aimed
at attacking a specific disease, or if it is a "natural substance
in an unnatural amount" (the latter scenario is, e.g., part of
orthomolecular medicine's approach to using mega doses of vitamins,
free-form amino acids, and so on as medicinal substances rather than
as nutrients) -- if, in other words, what we're after is a "drug,"
and one that exhibits effects in the human body we want it to exhibit
and not too many unknown or unwanted or downright terrible "side
effects" in addition to those, and one unavailable from natural
sources, that's a different story. But for anything that is an essential
nutrient, something our bodies are competent in handling a certain specific
way in certain specific combinations better than any other way, going
to the natural source seems to be a better deal all around, whether
we call this strategy the suspiciously new-agey-sounding "live
minerals" (I'm not all that crazy about this way to put it either,
but I believe the actual in-vivo meaning behind this clumsy verbal label
is pretty sound), or a tad more respectable (to a scientist) "bioavailability,"
or the humbling (to most scientists) "biophysics" -- or simply
a lay person's (with powers of observation and common sense) "gut
feeling!"
;-) Best wishes, Elena
|