On Wed, 6 Dec 2000 07:42:51 -0700, "Dennis Brownridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I guess my discomfort with IU is that it seems to be a completely arbitrary >unit that tells me absolutely nothing about how much of the stuff I am >actually getting, or even what that stuff is. 1 IU of one nutrient doesn't >seem to have any relation at all to 1 IU of another nutrient. One might >measure in milligrams while the other measures in nanograms, a million times >less. Would it be possible to give doses in masses "equivalent to" some >standard preparation, with the understanding that the actual mass might be >different? For example, could they give Vit. A doses in �g of Retinol >equivalents or something? Perhaps abbreviated as Vit. A (RE) 1 �g. We do >this with radiation (the sievert, an SI unit, which measures the dose >"equivalent to" 1 J/kg of some standard) and it seems to make more sense to >me. But note that I am not suggesting we invent new SI units for vitamins! I've just checked the multivitamins we have at home: all ingredients are given in mg or �g. No mention of IU. -- Chris KEENAN UK Metrication: http://www.metric.org.uk/ UK Correspondent, US Metric Association
