The Vast Need of The Human Carriage and Why Synthetic Vitamins, Especially Synthetic Vitamin C Is Necessary.

Everybody needs to run away from romantic delusions of two sorts.

One the pathetic crypto-Nazi sentiment that they or a population of humanity does not need as much Vitamin C.  Given that the predicted human lifespan should easily be 150 years with vigor and youth retained at age 100, this is a laughable retrospective delusion.  There is not a person on Earth who doesn't need to rescue their genetic defect in their L-Gulono-y-lactone oxidase gene.  Nordic, Germanic, whatever.  It doesn't include you either.  You still need multi-gram quantities of ascorbate through your entire life without cessation.

The other, a naturalist idea, that we must succumb to our biological frailties because we are supposed to have them.  Then there is no point to medical science and progress.  It is akin to a sort of suicide, philosophical at its core, but in action a suicide.  Science is intrinsically artificial and synthetic.  Not everything of nature is good for humans.  The loss of Vitamin C synthesis, for example, was intended to cripple humanity.  Natural and Synthetic are not synonymous with "Good" and "Bad."  We must wipe this illogical association from our minds.  A Toshiba computer is what?  Natural??

We are obliged to respect and preserve The Earth and its pristine ecologies, unpoisoned by Man, but this may also take technology to do so.

The premise is and always will be that several grams of ascorbate a day are necessary to prevent and treat human cardiovascular diseases.  It is not the only element necessary.  The human physiology is vastly needy with many biochemical auxotrophies crippling it, not just the Gulo gene absence.  If we were replete with these substances, we would be like plants, just needing mineral water, sunshine, and carbon dioxide.  We're not plants.  Humans take tremendous and vast resources to support on a physiological level, but we wouldn't be the most resource intensive mammal.  Certain whales take enormous food resources.

Why pretend we don't need exactly what we need?  Knowing that say 4 grams of ascorbate is what all humans need minimally per day to stall or prevent heart attacks and strokes, that would mean the equivalent of Vitamin C contained in 40 oranges...a day.  Is it practical to rely on orange tree or lemon tree orchards to prevent heart disease and cancer?  To cut to the chase, NO.  Not for us, a mammal that has been GENETICALLY HANDICAPPED.  All humans possess this defect, so no proud want-to-be Nazi can gloat that they need less Vitamin C than their "lesser" peer.

Let's break it down in real-life terms and show why it is exactly about "vitamin pills."  You cannot rely on vitamin pill sales and then claim that it "isn't about vitamin pills."  Without the commerce element, it is ever about vitamin pills to save the human race from suffering.

Orange Orchard Logistics 101 - You need to learn this before making some stupid, embarrassing global claim about planting oranges everywhere.

In a "high density" orchard, consisting of one acre, nevermind water requirement, there are 1500 orange trees.  Each will produce 300 oranges per tree at year 5, for a total of 450,000 oranges per year on one acre.  Remember, this is land that is dedicated to orange and nothing and nobody else.  Minus the juice, that is 45,000 grams of ascorbate per year.  It seems like a great deal, but let's break it down further given real world parameters.  Given ALL adults require MINIMALLY 4 grams a day, everyday for prevention of major disease, this breaks down to 45,000/4grams a day/365 days a year = Less than 31 people.

This is less than needed to keep 31 people healthy. 

The population of Europe was 742,500,000 people in 2013.  In order to indirectly and inefficiently make 4 grams of Vitamin C for all these individuals per year, you would need a citrus orchard of 23,951,612 acres size.  This translates to 37,500 square miles of orchard or greater than the size of Wisconsin.

Given that this is feasible, and certainly there are that many orange orchards, why hasn't orange juice saved humanity from atherosclerosis?  

There are about 8 oranges in a big 16 oz cup of juice, or two glasses of juice.  This would be 800 mg of Vitamin C, a good beneficial dose, but hardly enough to get to the therapeutic amount of 40 oranges a day, or 5 big glasses of orange juice (plus the sugars) EVERYDAY.  Not only does nobody do this, it is not tolerable.  As delicious as it is, nobody can stomach such enormous quantities of orange juice.  Attempting to EAT 40 oranges EVERYDAY is even worse.  If you are talking apples, we're talking ten times more apples - FOUR HUNDRED APPLES A DAY = 3.4 grams Vitamin C.

Only a concentrated extract taken undiluted would be and could be effective, and this would take...SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY to squeeze the nutrition of 400 apples into a tolerable volume!  It is deceptive and irresponsible to suggest that eating an orange or an apple a day will stave off the genetic defect all humans possess in some kind of romantic naturalism statement on behalf of somebody who does not take their vitamins, like a child who won't eat their vegetables.  There is an easier solution in place, synthetic but good and pure Vitamin C, also a product of science.  Naturalism, the human notion, is not always constructive or forward looking.  It can plunge you backwards to square one. 






 

Atherosclerosis Is Not A Modern Disease. Lifespan Was Shorter Not Longer In Ancient Humans.

Looking at atherosclerotic plaque in people 4000 years ago.

Today we are awash with paleo diet recommendations or vegetarian/granarian/fruitarian diets, all consumed by ancient human beings.  They DIDN'T live longer, they lived much shorter lives.  People never reached 50 years of age, and this age was correlated with rampant atherosclerosis (plaque).  They certainly had orange and apple trees back then.  There is no shortage of apples in Europe, so that is clearly not the cause of atherosclerosis in Europe.  It is not because of an "apple tree deficiency."  Our clean eating ancestors had severe atherosclerosis before the age of 40.  Why could this be?  They ate plenty of apples...

The German and Norse Pagan festivals featured many many apples (to eat). "Brita as Iduna" (1901) by Carl Larsson:

We have a heritable in-born genetic defect of ascorbate synthesis that goes beyond just a sprinkle or dash.  It was the great pioneers such as Pauling, Stone, Cameron, Willis, who initiated the idea of megadose ascorbate consumption (which is not mega but actually normal).  The schizophrenic contradiction of wanting this threshold rescue dose of this genetic defect to be lower by the day is pure insanity.  It is like saying one day humans will not need to drink several glasses of water a day to be alive.  It "ain't gonna happen."  The orange tree idea takes us to square one, as the therapeutic dose for atherosclerosis is minimally 4,000 mg ascorbate.  That is 40 oranges, more than a tree may make all year.   Until the day we as a species actually genetically engineer back a working copy (is this natural?) to replace our corrupted yet present Gulo gene, we will need to take in effective amounts of the rescue substance, ascorbate.

That is the whole idea behind science, the mastery of our biological weaknesses, and so called "vitamins."  If we are naturalists to the extreme, throw away your computer, wear burlap sacks, live like a Quaker and we can forget about vitamin pills altogether, plunging ourselves all the way back to 4000 years ago where people were rife with atherosclerosis and lived to a little over 40 years of age despite "perfect" natural diets with no fried or packaged foods.

It's the missing substances, stupid.