All I can suggest is that you try Vitamin C and see if it works for you, for me it works, so I wonder what the agenda really is with all this writing against Vitamin C, what in it for those who say it does not work? Blessings Ted
Carol wrote: > In reality, it was Linus Paulings Institute that had to gain since one > of his major contributers was a company that produced and distributed > vitamin c. Dr. Art Robinson who trained under and headed Paulings institute > for quite a number of years had everything to lose. He in fact was fired for > his research which went against everything Pauling had been saying at that > time. There were also other institutions such as the Mayo Clinic which > showed what Pauling was saying was not true. Here is part of an article > about Pauling from AIM.org(accuracy in media) which explains a lot about him > that the mainstream media never reported. > > Severo's(The New York Times) lengthy obituary skirted around kookier details > of his career. In his own field of chemistry, Pauling was frequently > criticized as grabbing credit for research done by colleagues. When he > ventured into medicine, as a windy advocate of Vitamin C as a cure-all > panacea for everything from the common cold to AIDS and drug addiction, > Pauling defended such quacks as a California physician who treated cervical > cancer with coffee and buttermilk enemas. He was tantamount to a food > faddist poster boy during his last decades. > > In political affairs, Pauling was the epitome of the useful idiot so > skillfully exploited by the Soviet Union during the Cold War. He lent his > name---and prestige as a Nobel laureate---to a nuclear ban campaign > orchestrated by the Kremlin. That the campaign put his own nation at risk > did not concern Pauling, a chronic publicity hound. Wearing his trademark > black beret, Pauling pranced on picket lines from Washington to San > Francisco, a puppet of Soviet operatives working to weaken America's defense > and internal security agencies. > > Dr. Thomas Jukes, professor of medical physics at the University of > California at Berkeley, and a member of AIM's national advisory board, was a > Pauling watcher for years. He questioned whether Pauling's celebrity was due > to original work or a knack for self-promotion. Jukes wrote, "Was Pauling > mentally superior to practically all other human beings? Did his mind work > faster and better than any others? He alleged that his meditations produced > insight that revealed the answer to scientific problems. Did he have unique > mental powers in this regard? Was he a real scientific super-giant? Or was > he unusually skilled at using the ideas of other people and publicizing them > as his own?" > > As an example of Pauling's glory-grabbing, Jukes cited his claim to the > discovery of the alpha helix in protein structure, a landmark event. James > Watson, in his book The Double Helix, described how Pauling had presented > his claim during a lecture: "The words came out as if he had been in show > business all his life. A curtain kept his model hidden until near the end of > his lecture, when he proudly unveiled his latest creation. Then, with his > eyes twinkling, Linus explained the specific characteristics that made his > model--the alpha helix-uniquely beautiful." > > But as Jukes noted, "The alpha helix was not his discovery. It was that of a > black colleague, Dr. Herman Branson." Branson later became president of > Lincoln University in Pennsylvania. Branson gave his account of the > discovery in a 1984 letter to persons writing a Pauling biography. > > In 1948-49, while working under Pauling at the California Institute of > Techology, Branson was asked to do research on how amino acids might be > arranged in a protein molecule. To summarize a very technical scientific > matter, Branson proposed a single helix. Pauling disagreed with Branson, > telling him that it was "too tight" to fit a protein molecule. But Branson > went ahead and constructed a model showing the alpha helix. A Pauling > associate named Corey saw it and said, "Well, I'll be damned." Branson wrote > up his findings in the summer of 1949 and went on to other work. > > A year later Pauling wrote up the discovery listing Corey and Branson as > co-authors. In 1988 he published a book in which he took all the credit for > the discovery, saying that he found it by folding paper. Branson was not > mentioned. Branson wrote that he "resented" how Pauling had handled the > matter. > > Pauling's biographers, Ted G. Goertzel and his parents Victor and Mildred, > wrote, "In the case of DNA, Pauling rushed into print with a paper that > incorporated errors so basic that they should have been caught by any > student who has mastered Pauling's introductory chemistry text....Apparently > Pauling was willing to risk making errors in the hope that he would be given > credit for publishing the first, even if partly incorrect, model of DNA." > > Jukes showed that Pauling took credit (along with colleagues) for findings > concerning molecular disease that actually had been documented by a British > scientist, Dr. A.E. Garrod, in 1908---when Pauling was seven years old. > > IgNobel Conduct > > Pauling's most publicized legacy, his advocacy of mega-doses of Vitamin C to > counter cancer and' the common cold, well could be a legacy of harm to human > health. Pauling's zealotry persuaded millions of Americans to put their > faith in Vitamin C. Unfortunately, few of these persons realized the dangers > they incur by following Pauling's advice. > > Pauling commenced his Vitamin C crusade in 1966, when (at age 65) he > casually remarked at a banquet that he would like to live 15 or 20 years > longer. A man named Irwin Stone suggested taking massive doses of Vitamin C. > Rather than doing any scientific research on whether the substance actually > helped human health, Pauling eagerly signed on as a Vitamin C advocate. His > book, Vitamin C and the Common Cold, published in 1970, was a national > best-seller for weeks. He claimed that one gram daily would cut the > incidence of common colds by 45 percent for most persons, and that others > might need larger amounts. A second edition, issued in 1976 as Vitamin C, > The Common Cold and the Flu, recommended even higher dosages. > > No less than 16 clinical studies concluded that Pauling was preaching > nonsense. One of the stronger dismissals came from the American Psychiatric > Association, in contesting Pauling's claim that vitamin therapy might > alleviate schizophrenia. The APA wrote, "The credibility of the megavitamin > proponents is low. Their credibility is further diminished by a consistent > refusal over the past decade to perform controlled experiments and to report > their results in a scientifically acceptable fashion. Under these > circumstances, [the APA] considers the massive publicity which they > promulgate via radio, the lay press and popular books...to be deplorable." > > Severo's obituary did mention that researchers at the Mayo Clinic and > elsewhere had challenged Pauling's claim about the efficacy of Vitamin C as > a cancer preventative. But he gave surprisingly short shrift to a tumultous > episode involving Dr. Arthur B. Robinson, a onetime Pauling student who > later worked at the Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine. In the 1970s > Robinson did clinical tests on mice to evaluate the physical effects of high > dosages of Vitamin C. To the dismay of his mentor, Robinson discovered that > the quantities of Vitamin C recommended by Pauling doubled the incidence of > skin cancer. > > Pauling responded by firing Robinson and destroying his laboratory data and > killing the experimental mice. He also accused Robinson of "amateurish" > science. Robinson sued Pauling and his institute for libel and slander and > collected an out-of-court settlement of $575,000--of which $425,000 was for > damages, the remainder for legal fees. (An exhaustive account of the > Robinson affair ran in Barron's on June 11, 1979.) > > The Robinson case was important because it showed that Pauling wittingly > suppressed the scientific record in order to protect his unproven Vitamin C > theories. Why was he so vigorous in defending a medical theory that in fact > could harm persons? > > Columnist Colman McCarthy, a Pauling chum, offered an interesting theory in > The Washington Post (Aug. 27) for the disdain with which the medical > community held his idol. "Such conventional treaters of colds as physicians > beholden to drug companies and their high-priced pills tried to dismiss > Pauling as a dabbler in quackery," McCarthy wrote. Perhaps. But as Dr. James > Lowell wrote in Nutrition Forum in May 1985, 'The largest corporate donor > (over $500,000) to Pauling's institute has been Hoffman- La Roche, the > pharmaceutical giant which is the dominant factor > in world-wide production of Vitamin C. Many of the institute's individual > donors have been solicited with the help of Rodale Press (publishers of > Prevention magazine) and related organizations which have publicized the > institute and allowed the use of their mailing lists." > > The New York Times's distortion of the validity of Pauling' s work continued > after the glowing Severo obituary. On August 28 the Times published a letter > from Stephen Lawson, chief executive officer of the Linus Pauling Institute, > continuing the argument that Vitamin C helped reduce the incidence of > cancer, and dismissing debunking by scientists at the Mayo Clinic and > elsewhere. > > Dr. Victor Herbert, of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine, rebutted Lawson > in a letter which the Times did not publish. He wrote, "Vitamin C is not > only worthless against heart disease and cancer, but harmful..." > > The Faddists' Friend > > Another facet of Pauling's career ignored by the Times was his record of > defending fellow faddists, including some accused of highly questionable > medical practices. In 1984 he appeared before the California Board of > Medical Quality Assurance on behalf of a Mill Valley physician who attended > a 56-year-old woman diagnosed as having treatable cervical cancer. The > physician chose to treat her with no less than 99 remedies, including coffee > and buttermilk enemas, herbs and enzymes. She died. > > Twin boys aged four years, who complained of earache, were treated with > coffee enemas twice daily and 70,000 units of Vitamin A. Pauling's testimony > was that coffee enemas might have had value because they clean out the lower > bowel. Despite Pauling's efforts, the physician lost his license. > > In another case, Pauling defended a vitamin promoter who sold by mail a > paper test to measure Vitamin C levels in the urine. He claimed that keeping > a constant flow "probably offers 100 percent protection against bladder > cancer." He also asserted that Vita- min C could cure drug addiction. The > postal inspectors put the man out of business. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bitbucket13" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 8:53 PM > Subject: Re: CS>Study Indicates that Vitamin C is Not Effective for Colds > > > On Mon, 1 Oct 2001 07:10:18 -0700, Carol wrote: > > >Forgive the length of this but this debunks Linus Paulings theory > > >on vitamin C as a fraud. Makes you think twice on taking the > > >stuff. Carol > > > > I belong to an alternative cancer group here in Australia. > > > > This document has been getting around for a while. This has got to be > > a fake! It seems to be the opposite of the truth. The medical > > profession has something to gain by discrediting Vitamin C because it > > is not good for business. Will doctors promote CS from their offices? > > Of course they wont. So it is with C. Vitamin C has been given to > > cancer patients with good results - there have been no cautions > > raised from the alternative industry. Others have tested vitamin C > > too with positive results. > > > > The establishment has a long and proven track record in persecuting > > cancer reseachers using litigation, lies, and deception. Why should > > this document be any different? > > > > > > > > -- > > The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. > > > > To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: > > [email protected] -or- [email protected] > > with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. > > > > To post, address your message to: [email protected] > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]> > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.281 / Virus Database: 149 - Release Date: 9/18/01 -- Ted Helping Hand Consulting http://www.helpinghandconsulting.com
