Corona virus, Health, News

Eight in ten (82%) critically ill COVID-19 patients have low to undetectable vitamin C levels

17 Comments

From the Health Forum NZ @ facebook

WHO DIES AND WHO LIVES IS NOT A MYSTERY…
NUTRITION COUNTS. IT REALLY COUNTS. WE KNOW ABOUT VITAMIN D AND ZINC STATUS AND ITS CORRELATION WITH COVID MORTALITY….
NOW ITS VITAMIN C’S TURN TO SHINE…
(Reproduced post by Patrick Holford)
https://www.facebook.com/patrickholford
Eight in ten (82%) critically ill COVID-19 patients have low to undetectable vitamin C levels, reports a study in Spain measuring vitamin C levels in intensive care patients in their hospital in Barcelona; published today in the Nutrition Journal.
18% had undetectable levels – as seen in scurvy.
82% had either low or undetectable levels.
Only 18%, less than two in ten, had normal levels.
The researchers conclude “in our cohort of patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome), vitamin C status is very low. Given the potential role of vitamin C in sepsis and ARDS, there is gathering interest of whether supplementation could be beneficial in COVID-19.”
Here in the UK virtually no patients are tested for vitamin C deficiency, which can be done so easily with a urine vitamin C strip. Right now, I’m reviewing nine clinical trials – eight show benefit, one shows no effect, and the higher the dose the better the effect. This is relating to less deaths, better oxygenation, less inflammation and faster recovery.
If this study is representative of what’s happening in the UK, where we eat less vitamin c rich foods, it suggests that 8 in 10 critically ill people need vitamin C.
Why do we have this blind-spot for vitamin C?
You can read the study for yourself here – https://doi.org/10.1186/s12937-021-00727-z as well as sign up to our petition here – https://www.vitaminc4covid.com/


YOU ARE WELCOME TO SHARE WHAT YOU PERSONALLY ARE TAKING IN TERMS OF SUPPLEMENTS…BUT PLEASE DO NOT GIVE RECOMMENDATIONS TO OTHERS IN THIS THREAD.
FOR PERSONAL MEDICAL RECOMMENDATIONS PLEASE SEE A QUALIFIED PRACTITIONER

Image by Hans Braxmeier from Pixabay

17 thoughts on “Eight in ten (82%) critically ill COVID-19 patients have low to undetectable vitamin C levels”

  2. Just watch out for syntetic crap, as the quality is bad. Ex., the effect of syntetic Vitamin E is only ~50% compared to natural. The reason is that there is no available technique to fold the artificial tokopherol molecyles (α-, β-, γ- & δ-) correctly. Due to that, our bodies have difficulties to use it efficiently. At 50% efficiency, the synthetic E supplemens should be 50% cheeper, but it isn’t …

    Vitamin C is a different story. I have several relatives, who reacts on the synthetic version. For them, it’s a laxative. (In the same way I react on a number of root vegetables, stone fruits, peas, but that’s allergy. In recent years, I have discovered that I also can’t eat kiwi, water melons and figs. In Greece, my friends there have a tendency to often share the two latter … Nuts, the same, but different reaction [real, not peanuts – which is a leguminous plant, despite I can’t manage peas …])

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Sorry, that seems to be a glitch sometimes Sasjal. I’ve noticed it too. I try to remember to begin my comment with the person’s name I’m responding to.

        Like

        1. It doesn’t relate to you. It’s a WordPress Biden feature, that occure by random … Despite clicking on ‘REPLY’, the system sometimes forget where to put it …

          Liked by 1 person

    2. Good point Sasjal re the synthetic ones. I guess ideally too we once got our nutrients from good uncontaminated (by pesticides etc etc) food… so it’s buy organic etc etc … I do take some supplements & make my own liposomal C. It has definitely helped with the reasons I took it. Here in the 50s onwards for several decades most folk had a lemon tree in their yard (not so now) … my aunt used to eat one lemon daily.

      Like

    1. Interesting … I got no sign of being cut off on my mobile. Was even able to read the hole text after I posted it. Anyway, let see if I can remember all of it …

      I hate the [English] word “organic”, because I stil remember stuff from primary school in chemistry class back in the 1970’s, when it still was fun (in secondary, not so much), including a lot about the water molecule’s unique properties (which seems mostly forgotten today …) Organic stuff are in general carbon based. (Climate hoaxer’s hate ‘carbon’ …) The opposite is “inorganic”, which are mostly body foreign stuff, that are not unusually toxic to us if ingested.

      In Swedish, we use the word “ecological“, which represent the situation far better, but this word has been widely abused and not nessarily true.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Thanks Sasjal. Interesting thoughts there. To me organic simply means, no chemicals or pesticides, healthy soil, nutritious. Education’s certainly been reorganized to our detriment.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. It’s seldom I need to check out a English word, but I just had to this time. As I dragged in chemestry in the subject, I read your last word as re-tri[chloroethylene]-ment … 😁 Well, it’s past bed time here (9h behind Kiwi Time Zone) … 😴

          Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.