Minerals

Nightmare

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture
National Research Council
The controversy primarily involves the second column - trace minerals.
Of the 14 trace minerals listed above, three or four may not have
universal agreement as essential, but a majority of creditable sources
admit that most of them are essential. Deficiency amounts have never
been determined for most trace minerals, although several diseases have
been linked with deficiencies of certain ones. Conclusive evidence has
not been found regarding the exact daily intake amounts necessary, since
some of the actual requirements may be too small to measure; hence the
name "trace." Other trace minerals which are still being studied as
possibly essential or possibly contaminant include arsenic (true!),
boron, cadmium, lithium, strontium, aluminum, barium, and beryllium.
After this, the marketplace takes over and science bows out. People are
out there talking about glacial milk, 88-mineral toddies, minerals from
ancient lakes, iceberg moss, longevity of 150 years, calcium from
pasteurized milk, "normal" doses of lead, eye of newt, etc., making
unproven claims about this or that combination, trumpeting anecdotal
cures for everything from cancer to hangnails. The purpose of this
chapter will be to try to sift through the debris and leave behind only
the fundamental information which can be verified.
In the past few years, even mainstream medicine is beginning to
acknowledge the incontrovertible importance of mineral supplementation.
In an article appearing in JAMA, the top American medical journal, 24
Dec 1996, a controlled study of selenium use for cancer patients was
written up. Selenium as you remember, effects powerful antioxidant
activity, neutralizing free radicals, which are rampant in the presence
of cancer. In this study, 1312 subjects were divided into groups. Some
were given selenium; others the placebo. Soon it was noticed that there
was a decrease of 63% with prostate cancer, and 46% with lung cancer in
the selenium group. The results were so blatant that the designers
actually terminated the study early so that everyone could begin to
benefit from selenium. This is just one example of the research that is
currently being done on mineral supplementation. The problem is, if the
results of studies economically threaten a current drug protocol, like
chemotherapy, it is unlikely that an inexpensive natural supplement like
selenium would be promoted by oncologists as a replacement any time
soon.

Nightmare

There are six nutrient groups:
Water
Vitamins
Minerals
Fats
Protein
Carbohydrate
All groups are necessary for complete body function.
The necessity for minerals is a recent historical discovery, only about
150 years old. In the 1850s, Pasteur's contemporary, Claude Bernard,
learned about iron. Copper came about 10 years later, and zinc about the
turn of the century. With the discovery of Vitamin A in 1912, minerals
were downplayed for about 50 years in favor of vitamin research. By
1950, after about 14 vitamins had been discovered, attention returned
once more to minerals when it was shown that they were necessary
co-factors in order for vitamins to operate. Minerals are catalysts for
most biological reactions. Soon the individualfunctions of minerals in
the body were demonstrated:
Structural: bones, teeth, ligaments
Solutes and electrolytes in the blood
Enzyme actions
Energy production from food breakdown
Nerve transmission
Muscle action
Table of minerals with the specific functions most commonly agreed upon
today
Calcium
Muscle contraction
Bone building
Sodium
Cell life
Waste removal
Potassium
Nerve transmission
Cell life
Normal blood pressure
Muscle contraction
Phosphorus
Bone formation
Cell energy
Magnesium
Muscle contraction
Nerve transmission
Calcium metabolism
Chlorine
Digestion
Normal blood pressure
Sulfur
Protein synthesis
Copper
Immune system
Artery strength
Forms hemoglobin from iron
Chromium
Insulin action
Immune function
Iron
Blood formation
Immune function
Selenium
Immune stimulant
Fight free radicals
Activates Vit E
Nickel
Immune regulation
Brain development
DNA synthesis
Iodine
Thyroid function
Vanadium
Circulation
Sugar metabolism
Molybdenum
Enzyme action
Silicon
Enzyme action
Tin
Enzyme action
Manganese
Enzyme action
Fluorine
Teeth enamel
Larry Berger, PhD
Mineral deficiency means that some of these jobs will not get done. The
body is capable of prodigious amounts of adapting, and can operate for
long periods of time with deficiencies of many of the above. But someday
those checks will have to be cashed. The result: premature aging. Cell
breakdown. Without minerals, vitamins may have little or no effect.
Minerals are catalysts - triggers for thousands of essential enzyme
reactions in the body. No trigger - no reaction. Without enzyme
reactions, caloric intake is meaningless, and the same for protein, fat,
and carbohydrate intake. Minerals trigger the vitamins and enzymes to
act; that means digestion. In general, most discussions about calories
are without content.

Nightmare

A virtually undisputed fact is mineral deficiency. Observe the titanic
output of websites, articles, and supplements visible today. The
majority of mineral websites quote a 1936 source - Senate Document #264,
as scientific proof that dietary minerals were generally inadequate for
optimum health.
"...most of us are suffering from certain diet deficiencies which cannot
be remedied until deplete soils from which our food comes are brought
into proper mineral balance."
"The alarming fact is that food...now being raised on millions of acres
of land that no longer contain enough...minerals are starving us, no
matter how much of them we eat."
"Lacking vitamins, the system can make use of minerals, but lacking
minerals, vitamins are useless."
Senate Document 264
74th Congress, 1936
The same document went on to quantify the extent of mineral deficiency:
"99% of the American people are deficient in minerals, and a marked
deficiency in any one of the more important minerals actually results in
disease."
Congressional documents are not generally highly regarded as scientific
sources, and other reference texts cite other percentages. The figures
quoted by Albion Laboratories, the world leader in patents on
supplemental minerals, are somewhat lower, but the idea begins to come
across:
DEFICIENCY - U.S. Population
Magnesium 75%
Iron 58%
Copper 81%
Manganese 50%
Chromium 50%
Zinc 67%
Different studies will show different figures, of course, but there is
certainly no lack of explanation for mass deficiencies of mineral
intake. The most obvious of these is soil depletion and
demineralization. In 1900, forests covered 40% of the earth. Today, the
figure is about 27%. (Relating Land Use and Global Land Cover, Turner,
1992).
Aside from hacking down rainforests in order to raise beef cattle or to
build condos, one of the main reasons for the dying forests is mineral
depletion. According to a paper read at the 1994 meeting of the
International Society for Systems Sciences, this century is the first
time ever that "mineral content available to forest and agricultural
root systems is down 25%-40%." Less forests means less topsoil. In the
past 200 years, the U.S. has lost as much as 75% of its topsoil,
according to John Robbins in his Pulitzer-nominated work Diet for a New
America. To replace one inch of topsoil may take anywhere from 200-1000
years, depending on climate. (Utah Teachers Resource Books)
Demineralization of topsoil translates to loss of productive capacity.
Contributing further to this trend is the growing of produce that is
harvested and shipped far away.
The standard NPK (nitrogen-phosphorus-potassium) fertilizer farmers
commonly use is able to restore the soil enough to grow fruits and
vegetables which are healthy looking, but may be entirely lacking in
trace minerals. The inventor of the entire NPK philosophy, Baron von
Leibig, recanted his theories before he died when he saw the
deficiencies his methods were fostering as they became the agricultural
standard in both Europe and America.
Mineral depletion in topsoil is hardly a controversial issue. The
question is not if, but how much. Plants are the primary agents of
mineral incorporation into the biosphere. The implication for our
position on the food chain is simply: lowered mineral content in produce
grown in U.S. topsoil. Not much argument here.
I have not found any source that insists that the mineral content of
American topsoil is as good today as it was 50 years ago. Generally,
studies talk in terms of how much, if any, minerals are still present.
The second contributor to mineral deficiency within the population is
obviously, diet. Even if our produce did contain abundant minerals, less
than 4% of the population eats sufficient fruits and vegetables to
account for minimal RDAs. To compound matters further, mass amounts of
processed food, excess protein, and refined sugars require most of our
mineral stores in order to digest it and remove it. The removal process
involves enzymes, which break things down. Enzyme activity, remember, is
completely dependent on minerals like zinc and copper and chromium. No
minerals - no enzyme action. In addition, milk and dairy products,
alcohol, and drugs inhibit the absorption of these minerals, further
depleting reserves. So it is cyclical: refined foods inhibit mineral
absorption, which then are not themselves efficiently digested because
of diminished enzyme activity. And then we go looking for bugs as the
cause of disease?

Nightmare

The third reason for inadequate minerals in the body is a phenomenon
known as secondary deficiency. It has been proven that an excess of one
mineral may directly cause a deficiency of another, because minerals
compete for absorption, compete for the same binding sites, like a
molecular Musical Chairs. Secondary deficiency means an excess of one
mineral may cause a deficiency of another.
For example, iron, copper, and zinc are competitive in this way. Copper
is necessary for the conversion of iron to hemoglobin, but if there is
excess zinc, less iron will be available for conversion. This may cause
a secondary deficiency of iron, which can manifest itself as iron
deficiency anemia. All due simply to excess zinc. Researchers have found
that these secondary deficiencies caused by excess of one mineral are
almost always due to mineral supplements, since the quantities contained
in food are so small. Thus the hazards of mega-mineral toddies.
A fourth reason for mineral deficiency in humans is overuse of
prescription drugs. It has been known since the 1950s that antibiotics
interfere with uptake of minerals, specifically zinc, chromium, and
calcium. (The Plague Makers) Also Tylenol, Advil, Motrin, and aspirin
have the same inhibitive effect on mineral absorption. When the body has
to try and metabolize these drugs to clear the system, its own mineral
stores are heavily drawn upon. Such a waste of energy is used to
metabolize laxatives, diuretics, chemotherapy drugs, and NSAIDs, such as
Tylenol, Advil, and aspirin out of the body. This is one of the most
basic mechanisms in drug-induced immunosuppression: minerals are
essential for normal immune function.
Ultimately, the only issue that really counts with minerals is
bioavailability. Really doesn't matter what we eat; it only matters what
makes it to the body's cells. Let's say someone is iron deficient, for
example. Can't he just take a bar of iron and file off some iron filings
into a teaspoon, and swallow them? Just took in more iron, didn't he?
Will this remedy the iron deficiency? Of course not. Here is a major
distinction: the difference between elemental minerals and nutrient
minerals. Iron filings are in the elemental form; absorption will be 8%
or less. Same with most iron pills and most calcium supplements.
Food-bound iron, on the other hand, like that contained in raisins or
molasses, will have a much higher rate of absorption, since it is
complexed with other living, organic forms, and as such is classed as a
nutrient mineral. Minerals are not living, though they are necessary for
life. Minerals are necessary for cell life and enzyme reactions and
hundreds of other reasons. But they must be in a form that can make it
as far as the cells. What is not bioavailable passes right through the
body, a waste of time and sometimes money.

Nightmare

Bioavailability has a precursor, an opening act. It is called
absorption. Take a mineral supplement pill. Put it in a glass of water
and wait half an hour. If it is unchanged, chances are that the tablet
itself would never even dissolve in the stomach or intestine, but pass
right out of the body. You would be astounded how many mineral
supplements there are in this category.
OK, let's say the tablet or capsule actually does dissolve in the
digestive tract. Then what? In order to do us any good, the mineral must
be absorbed into the bloodstream, through the intestinal walls.
Elemental minerals are absorbed about 1-8% in this manner. The rest is
excreted. Elemental means rocks. Elemental minerals are those found in
the majority of supplements, because they're very cheap to produce. For
the small percentage that actually makes it to the bloodstream, the
mineral is available for use by the cells, or as catalysts in thousands
of essential enzyme reactions that keep every cell alive every second.
Use at the cellular level is what bioavailability is all about.
With this background in mind we can begin to understand that varying
amounts of the seven macrominerals and approximately 14 trace minerals,
in a bioavailable form are necessary for optimum cell activity, optimum
health and would seem to contribute to long lifespan. So besides
epidemic mineral deficiency, what's the problem?
In a word, supplementation. Mineral deficiency has become such an
obvious health concern, causing specific diseases because of a lack of a
single mineral, and general immune suppression with a lack of several,
that the obvious need for supplementation has spawned an entire industry
to the rescue. But in any market-driven industry involving pills, again
we find that often the cures are worse than the original problems. Why?
First off, toxicity. Remember, even macrominerals are only necessary in
tiny amounts. Most trace minerals are necessary in amounts too small to
be measured, and can only be estimated. Toxicity is a word that simply
means extra stuff. When extra stuff gets put into the body, it's a big
deal. All forces are mobilized for removal of the extra stuff, which are
called antigens, toxins, poisons, reactants, etc, but you get the idea -
it doesn't belong there. Toxicity means taking a nonessential
non-nutrient mineral into the body.
Take lead poisoning, for example. If lead gets into the blood, the body
will try to remove it. Since the metal atoms are so heavy compared with
the body's immune forces, removal may be impossible. Lead can initiate a
chronic inflammatory response and can remain in the body permanently,
which is why we don't have lead in paint or gasoline any more.
Most minerals can be toxic if taken to excess. And this excess would not
happen from food; only from supplements. What supplements would be bad?
Well, for starters, any supplement containing more than about 21
minerals, because that's all that have been proven to be necessary for
humans. New toxicities are always being discovered. Aluminum linked to
Alzheimer's is a recent discovery. Beyond these 21 or so it's simply
anybody's guess, no matter what they tell you about the 5 civilizations
where people live to be 140 years old. People who show dramatic
improvements from taking these 60 and 80 mineral drinks generally were
so depleted that they rapidly absorbed the essential minerals in which
they were deficient. But the toxicities from the nonessential, unknown
minerals may take a long time to show up. Why take in anything extra?
Here's an example of an ingredient list from one of these mega-mineral
drinks. I pulled it off the Net: Calcium, Magnesium, Zinc, Vanadium,
Manganese, Potassium, Selenium, Chromium, Phosphate, Iron, Sulfur,
Carbon, Sodium, Barium, Strontium, Cesium, Thorium, Molybdenum, Nickel,
Cerium, Germanium, Copper, Rubidium, Antimony, Gallium, Neodymium,
Lanthanum, Bismuth, Zirconium, Thallium, Tungsten, Ruthenium, Boron,
Iodine, Chloride, Bromine, Titanium, Cobalt, Dysprosium, Scandium,
Samarium, Fluoride, Niobium, Praseodymium, Erbium, Hafnium, Lithium,
Ytterbium, Yttrium, Cadmium, Holmium, Rhenium, Palladium, Gold, Thulium,
Terbium, Iridium, Tantalum, Europium, Lutetium, Rhodium, Tin, Indium,
Silver, Beryllium, Tellurium, and Platinum.
Any questions?

Nightmare

Again, we only need a little. So the mineral supplements we take should
be as absorbable and as bioavailable as possible - that way we won't
have to take much. Less chance of toxicity.
So the question then becomes: which mineral supplements are the most
absorbable and the most usable, and therefore effective in the smallest
amounts possible? Four candidates present themselves, all contending for
the title:
Elemental
Ionic
Colloidal
Chelated
Unraveling this puzzle is one area where the internet actually impedes
progress. Try it and you'll see why. There's only one answer, but it's
buried deep. To find it, we have to review a little basic plumbing.
The digestive tract goes like this: mouth, esophagus, stomach, small
intestine, large intestine, and out. Mineral absorption means
transferring the mineral from the digestive tract through the wall of
the intestine, into the bloodstream. You really have to picture this:
the digestive tract is just a long tube, from one end to the other. As
long as food and nutrients are inside this tube, they are actually
considered to be still outside the body, because they haven't been
absorbed into the bloodstream yet. This is an essential concept to
understanding mineral absorption. Minerals can't do any good unless they
make it into the bloodstream. This is exactly why most minerals bought
at the grocery store are almost worthless: they pass right through the
body - in one end and out the other. It's also why many nutritionists'
and dieticians' advice is valueless; they commonly pretend everything
that is eaten is absorbed. When they start talking about calories, look
for another speaker.
Two main reasons for lack of mineral supplement absorption:
The pill never dissolved
The mineral was in its elemental form (non-nutrient, e.g., iron filings)
Let's say these problems are overcome; neither is true. Or let's say the
mineral is contained within some food, such as iron in molasses, or
potassium in bananas. Food-bound minerals are attached or complexed to
organic molecules. Absorption into the blood is vastly increased, made
easy. The mineral is not just a foreign metal that has been ingested; it
is part of food.
Fruits and vegetables with high mineral content are the best way to
provide the body with adequate nutrition. Food-bound minerals are the
original mode. As already cited above, however, sufficient mineral
content is an increasingly rare occurrence. Foods simply don't have it.
How little, what portion of normal depends on what studies one finds.
Soon the necessity for supplementation becomes obvious: if the food no
longer has it, and we need it, pass the supplements, please. At that
point, the marketplace assaults one's awareness and we're almost back to
the days of the tonics, brews, toddies, and snake potions of yesteryear.
Let's look at the four types one by one. Least beneficial are the
supplements containing minerals in the elemental form. That means the
mineral is just mentioned on the label. It's not ionized, it's not
chelated, it's not complexed with an oxide or a carbonate or a sulfate,
or with a food, and it's not colloidal. Under "ingredients" it just says
"iron" or "copper," or "calcium," etc.
1. Elemental
Elemental minerals are obviously the cheapest to make. A liquid would
only have to be poured over some nails to be said to contain iron.
Elemental minerals are the most common in grocery store supplements.
They may not be toxic, as long as only the minerals mentioned on the
label are included in the supplement. The problem is absorption: it's
between 1 and 8 percent. The rest passes right through. Not only a waste
of money; also a waste of energy: it has to be processed out of the
body. This can actually use up available mineral stores.
2. Ionic
Next comes ionic minerals. Usually a step up. Ionic means in the form of
ions. Ions are unstable molecules that want to bind with other
molecules. An ion is an incomplete molecule. There is a definite pathway
for the absorption of ionic minerals through the gut (intestine) into
the blood. In fact, any percent of the elemental minerals that actually
got absorbed became ions first, by being dissolved in stomach acids.
Ionic minerals are not absorbed through the intestine intact.
The model for mineral ion absorption through the intestine is as
follows. Ions are absorbed through the gut by a complicated process
involving becoming attached or chelated to some special carrier proteins
in the intestinal wall. Active transport is involved; meaning, energy is
required to bring the ionic mineral from inside the intestine through
the lining, to be deposited in the bloodstream on the other side.
Ionic minerals may be a good source of nutrients for the body, depending
upon the type of ions, and on how difficult it is for the ion to get
free at the appropriate moment and location. Minerals require an acidic
environment for absorption. Remember low pH (less than 7) is acidic;
high pH (above 7) is alkaline. As the stomach contents at pH 2 empty
into the small intestine, the first few centimeters of the small
intestine is the optimum location for mineral absorption. The acidic
state is necessary for ionization of the dissolved minerals. If the pH
is too alkaline, the ions won't disassociate from whatever they're
complexed with, and will simply pass on through to the colon without
being absorbed.
As the mineral ions are presented to the lining of the intestine, if all
conditions are right, and there are not too much of competing minerals
present, the ions will begin to be taken across the intestinal barrier,
making their way into the bloodstream. This is a complicated, multi-step
process, beyond the scope of this chapter. Simply, it involves the
attachment of the free mineral ion to some carrier proteins within the
intestinal membrane, which drag the ion across and free it into the
bloodstream. A lot happens during the transfer, and much energy is
required for all the steps. Just the right conditions and timing are
necessary - proper pH, presence of vitamins for some, and the right
section of the small intestine.
Iron, manganese, zinc, copper - these ions are bound to the carrier
proteins which are embedded in the intestinal lining. The binding is
accomplished by a sort of chelation process, which simply describes the
type of binding which holds the ion. The carrier protein or ligand hands
off the mineral to another larger carrier protein located deeper within
the intestinal wall. After several other steps, if all conditions are
favorable, the ion is finally deposited on the other side of the
intestinal wall: the bloodstream, now usable by the cells.
Ionic mineral supplements do not guarantee absorption by their very
nature, although they are certainly more likely to be absorbed than are
minerals in the raw, elemental state. However, ionic minerals are in the
form required for uptake by the carrier proteins that reside in the
intestinal wall.
The uncertainties with ionic minerals include how many, how much, and
what else are the unstable ions likely to become bound to before the
carrier proteins pick them up. All ionic supplements are not created
equal. Just because it's an ion doesn't mean a supplemental mineral will
be absorbed. Too many minerals in a supplement will compete for
absorption, crowding out the others. The idea is to offer the body an
opportunity for balance; rather than to overload it with the hope that
some will make it through somehow.

Nightmare

3. Colloidal
Speaking of overloading, the third type of supplemental minerals is the
one we hear the most about: colloidal. What does colloidal really mean?
Colloidal refers to a solution, a dispersion medium in which mineral
particles are so well suspended that they never settle out: you never
have to shake the bottle. The other part of the dictionary definition
has to do with diffusion through a membrane: "will not diffuse easily
through vegetable or animal membrane." Yet this is supposed to be the
whole rationale for taking colloidal minerals - their absorbability.
Colloidal guru Joel Wallach himself continuously claims that it is
precisely the colloidal form of the minerals that allows for easy
diffusion and absorption across the intestinal membrane, because the
particles are so small. Wallach claims 98% absorption, but cites no
studies, experiments, journal articles or research of any kind to back
up this figure. Why not? Because there aren't any. The research on
colloidal minerals has never been done. It's not out there. Senate
Document 264 doesn't really cover it.
In reality, colloidal minerals are actually larger than ionic minerals,
as discussed by researcher Max Motyka PhD. Because of the molecular size
and suspension in the colloid medium, which Dorland's Medical dictionary
describes as "like glue," absorption is inhibited, not enhanced. No less
an authority than Dr. Royal Lee, the man responsible for pointing out
the distinction between whole food vitamins and synthetic vitamins,
stated
"A colloidal mineral is one that has been so altered that it will no
longer pass through cell walls or other organic membranes."
Does that sound like easy absorption?
For a mineral to be absorbed, it must be either in the ionic state, or
else chelated, as explained above. The percentage of colloidal minerals
which actually does get absorbed has to be ionized somehow, due to the
acidic conditions in the small intestine. Only then is the mineral
capable of being taken up by the carrier proteins in the intestinal
membrane, as mentioned above. By why create the extra step? Ionic
minerals would be superior to colloidal, because they don't have to be
dissociated from a suspension medium, which is by definition
non-diffusable. All this extra work costs the body in energy and
reserves.
Max Motyka further points out the error of Wallach's claims. Wallach
states that colloidals are negatively charged, and this enhances
intestinal absorption. The problem is his science is 180 backward:
Wallach claims the charge of the intestinal mucosa is positive, but all
other sources have known for decades that the mucosal charge is
negative. (Guyton, p13) This is why ionic minerals are presented to the
intestinal surface as cations (positively charged ions). Opposites
attract, like repels - remember? Another big minus for colloidals.
Quality control. Consistency of percentages of each mineral from batch
to batch. Very simply, there isn't any with the mega mineral
supplements, as the manufacturers will themselves admit. The ancient
lakes and glaciers apparently have not been very accommodating when it
comes to percent composition. Such a range of variation might be
acceptable in, say, grenade tossing or blood dilution in seawater
necessary to attract a shark, or IQ threshold of terrorists, or other
areas where high standards of precision are not crucial. But a
nutritional supplement that is supposed to enhance health by drinking it
- this is an area in which the details of composition should be fairly
visible, verifiable, the same every time. In these 80-trace-mineral
toddies, there is no way of testing the presence or absence of many of
the individual minerals. Many established essential trace minerals do
not even have an agreed-upon recommended daily allowance, for two
reasons:
the research has never been done
the amounts are too small to measure

Nightmare

How much less is known about the amounts and toxicities of those unknown
minerals which have never been studied, but are claimed to be present in
these "miraculous" toddies?
Many essential minerals are toxic in excess, but essential in small
amounts. Iron, chlorine, sodium, zinc, and copper are in this category.
Toxic levels have been established, and resulting pathologies have been
identified: we know what diseases are caused by their excesses. How
risky is it to take in 40 or 50 minerals for which no toxicity levels
have ever been set?
Doug Grant, a nutritionist, cites several minerals which frequently
appear on the ingredient labels of certain mega-mineral products they
actually admit their supplements contain or "may contain" some of the
following: (the phrase "may contain" has always been scary for me. If
they're not sure, then what else is there that this product "may
contain" that they don t know about?)
Aluminum: Documented since the article in Lancet 14 Jan 1989 to be
associated with Alzheimer's Disease, as well as blocking absorption of
essential minerals like calcium, iron, and fluoride.
Silver: questionable as a single-dose antibiotic, consistent intake of
silver accumulates in the blood-forming organs - spleen, liver, and bone
marrow-, as well as the skin, lungs, and muscles. Serious pathologies
have resulted: blood disorders, cirrhosis, pulmonary edema, chronic
bronchitis, and a permanent skin condition known as argyria, to name
just a few. Silver is better left in the ancient lakes, and in
tableware.
Gold: Manufacturers of mega-minerals hawk that "there's more gold in a
ton of seawater than there is in a ton of ore." So what? Our blood is
not seawater; it evolved from seawater. Gold used to be used to treat
rheumatoid arthritis, but has largely been abandoned when they proved
that it caused kidney cell destruction, bone marrow suppression, and
immune abnormalities.
Lithium: Rarely used as an antipsychotic medication, lithium definitely
can cause blackouts, coma, psychosis, kidney damage, and seizures.
Outside of that, it should be fine.
The list goes on. The above are just a few examples of mineral
toxicities about which we have some idea. But for at least half the
minerals in the mega toddies, we know nothing at all.
4. Chelated
The fourth form of supplemental minerals is the chelated variety. Some
clarification of this term is immediately necessary. Chelated is a
general term that describes a certain chemical configuration, or shape
of a compound in which some molecule gets hooked up with some other
chemical structures. When a mineral is bound or stuck to certain carrier
molecules, which are known as chelating agents, or ligands, and a
ring-like molecule is the result, we say that a chelate is formed.
Chelate is from the Greek word for claw, suggested by the open v-shape
of the two ligands on each side, with the mineral ion in the center.
Chelation occurs in many situations. Many things can be chelated,
including minerals, vitamins, and enzymes. Minerals in food may be bound
with organic molecules in a chelated state. Many molecules in the body
are chelated in normal metabolic processes. The carrier proteins in the
intestinal wall discussed above, whose job it is to transport ionic
minerals - these chelate the ions. Another sense of the word chelation
as exemplified in a mainstream therapy for removing heavy metals from
the blood is called chelation therapy. The toxic metals are bound to a
therapeutic amino acid ligand called EDTA. With a Pac-Man action, the
metals are thus removed from the blood.
Molecular weight is measured in units called daltons. The ligands or
binding agents may very small (800 daltons) or very large (500,000
daltons) resulting in a many sizes of chelates. Mineral + ligand =
chelate. Generally the largest chelates are the most stable, and also
the most difficult to absorb. Ionic minerals absorbed through the
intestine are chelated to the carrier proteins, at least two separate
times.
Using the word chelated with respect to mineral supplements refers a
very specific type of chelation. The idea is to bind the mineral ion to
ligands that will facilitate absorption of the mineral through the
intestine into the bloodstream, bypassing the pathway used for ionic
mineral absorption. Sometimes minerals prepared in this way are
described as "pre-chelated" since any ionic mineral will be chelated
anyway once it is taken up by the intestinal membrane.
After decades of research at Albion Laboratories in Utah, it was learned
that small amino acids, especially glycine, are the best ligands for
chelating minerals, for three reasons:
bypasses the entire process of chelation by the intestine's own carrier
proteins
facilitates absorption by an entirely different pathway of intestinal
absorption, skipping the intermediate steps which ionic minerals go
through
the chelate will be the at the most absorbable molecular weight for
intestinal transfer: less than 1500 daltons
It has also been established beyond controversy that certain pairs of
amino acids (dipeptides) are the easiest of all chelates to be absorbed,
often easier than individual amino acids. Proteins are made of amino
acids. Normal digestion presumably breaks down the proteins to its amino
acid building blocks so they can be absorbed. But total breakdown is not
always necessary. It has long been known that many nutrient chains of
two or three or even more amino acids may be absorbed just as easily as
single amino acids. Food-bound copper, vitamin C with hemoglobin
molecule, animal protein zinc, are some examples of amino acids chelates
that are easily absorbed intact. (Intestinal Absorption of Metal Ions,
Chapter 7).
To take another example, in abnormal digestion it is well known that
chains of amino acids - dipeptides, tripeptides, even polypeptide
proteins - sometimes become absorbed intact in a pathology known to
gastroenterologists as Leaky Gut Syndrome. Obviously it is not healthy
and has many adverse consequences, but the point is that amino acids
chains are frequently absorbed, for many different reasons. It's not
always like it says in the boldface section headings in Guyton's
Physiology.
The reason these dipeptide chelates are absorbed faster than ionic
minerals is that the chelated mineral was bonded tightly enough so that
it did not dissociate in the acidic small intestine and offer itself for
capture by the intestinal membrane_s carrier proteins. That whole
process was thus avoided. The chelate is absorbed intact. An easier
form. This is a vast oversimplification, and the most concise summary,
of why chelated minerals may be superior to ionic, provided it's the
right chelate. Only a specific chelate can resist digestion and maintain
its integrity as it is absorbed through the gut. Again, all chelates are
not created equal. Inferior chelates, used because they are cheaper to
produce, include the following:
carbonates
citrates
oxides
sulfates
chlorides
phosphates

Nightmare

If the label gives one of these chelates, it means the mineral is bound
either too strongly or not tightly enough, and will be released at the
wrong time and the wrong place. Chelation of minerals in nutrient
supplements is a very precise science, yielding chelates superior to
those occurring naturally in foods.
Intact absorption is faster, easier, and requires less metabolic energy,
provided the chelate is about 1500 daltons.
To compare chelated and ionic minerals, once the research is presented,
there is really not much of a dispute about which is absorbed faster,
ionic minerals or dipeptide-like amino acid chelates. Meticulous isotope
testing has shown the following increases in percent absorption of
chelates, as compared with ionic:
Iron 490% greater
Copper 580% greater
Magnesium 410% greater
Calcium 421% greater
Manganese 340% greater
Journal of Applied Nutrition 1970; 22: 42
Again, this is just the briefest glance at the prodigious amount of
research comparing ionic with chelated minerals, but the results are
uniform. The winner of the bioavailability contest is: chelated
minerals, provided the chelate was maintained as small as possible,
generally using glycine as the amino acid ligands, at a total weight of
about 1500 daltons.
Food-bound chelated minerals. Often you will hear this or that company
claiming that "organic" minerals contained in food are the best, cannot
be improved upon, and are superior to all possible types of mineral
supplements. This is almost true. The only exception is glycine-chelated
minerals, for two reasons:
- the exact amount of minerals in any food is extremely variable and
difficult to measure, even if there is high mineral content of the soil.
Pesticides destroy root organisms in the soil. These bugs play a major
role in selective mineral absorption into the plant. (Jensen p 55)
- the ligands that bind the mineral in the food chelate may be too
strong or too weak to dissociate at exactly the right time for maximum
absorption in the human digestive tract. Glycine chelates are uniform
and easily measurable. No question about dosage.
Marketing is a wonderful thing - two different companies are now
attributing the longevity of the Hunza tribe in Pakistan to two entirely
different properties of their water: one, the minerals; the other,
molecular configuration. A classic error in logic is described as "post
hoc, ergo propter hoc" - after this, therefore because of this. Maybe it
was the weather that made the Hunzas live longer, or their diet, or
their grains, or the absence of toothpaste or webservers or... Marketing
is the art of persuasion by suspending logic.
The average lifespan of an American is about 75 years. No one has ever
proven that taking mineral supplements will extend life. Many old people
never took a mineral or a vitamin in their life. It really comes down to
quality of life. Incidence of disease during the lifespan. For how many
days or months of the total lifespan was the person ill? We are the
walking petri dishes of Alexis Carrel, remember? Carrel was the French
biochemist, a Nobel prize winner, who did the famous experiment in which
he kept chicken heart cells alive in a petri dish for 28 years just by
changing the solutes every day. Could've gone longer, but figured he'd
proven his point. Mineral content factors largely in the quality of our
solutes: the blood - the milieu interior, the biological terrain.
The U.S. has the highest incidence of degenerative diseases of any
developed country on earth. In addition, the infectious diseases are
coming back; antibiotics are getting less effective every year.
Americans' confidence in prescription drugs is weakening. Allow me to
disabuse you of unfounded hopes: cancer and AIDS will never be cured by
the discovery of some new drug. It's not going to happen. There probably
will never be another Alexander Fleming - turns out penicillin was just
a brief detour anyway. Bacteria have had 50 billion years to figure out
ways to adapt. The only way that anyone recovers from any illness is
when the immune system overcomes the problem. Allergy shots never cured
an allergy - people who take allergy shots always have allergies.
Our only hope of better health is to do everything possible to build up
our natural immune system. One of these preventative measures is
nutritional supplementation. It may not be dramatic, but daily deposits
to the immune system bank account will pay off down the road. Healthy
people don't get sick.
With respect to minerals, then, what are our goals? My opinion is that
having once realized the necessity for mineral supplementation, our
objectives should be simple:
Take only the minerals we absolutely need
Take the smallest amounts possible
Nothing left over ( no metabolic residue)
Some of the above ideas may seem strange and difficult to understand, on
first reading. But it is truly a very simplified version of what
actually takes place. Most of the technical details were omitted for the
sake of clarity and brevity. However, the correctness of the above basic
framework is verifiable. The reader is encouraged to flesh things out a
little by consulting the attached reference list.
We are living in the age of the Junk Science Hustle. Everybody's an
expert, often quoting shaky sources, shaky facts, and shaky claims which
may have no foundation in physical reality. Seems there's a formula:
Get a product
Get a marketing company (preferably in Utah or Texas)
Get some university MD endorsements
Get some miraculous testimonials
Get a downline

Nightmare

In a certain way, all this is actually a good sign - a natural
consequence of the explosion in holistic nutrition and supplementation.
Because in the midst of the quagmire of hype and junk science, some
truly superlative items have emerged onto the marketplace which have
benefitted indirectly from biomedical advances evolved in the
challenged, time-bomb world of mainstream pharmacology. Most of the new
holistic supplements are less toxic than standard pharmaceutical drugs,
because they're in a category the FDA calls GRAS (Generally Regarded As
Safe. That's probably more than we can say for Prozac, fen-phen, and
Viagra.) Many of the extraordinary holistic supplements won't be sold in
stores, and no one is going to give them away. So welcome to the
American marketplace. Very time-consuming and confusing is the screening
process one must go through to unearth the treasures that can reward the
patient and resolute search. Caveat emptor.
Are minerals important? Two-time Nobel prize winner Linus Pauling
thought so: "You can trace every sickness, every disease, every ailment
to mineral deficiency."
Using the image of Carrel's solutes in the petri dish as the analogue of
blood in our bodies, adequate mineral content is undoubtedly an
advantage and a vital component of the body's own solutes in its
constant effort to cleanse and operate all its cells at an optimum
metabolic vibrancy and resilience. After childhood, healthy people don't
get sick. Ever.

Nightmare

Tourmaline (part 1)
by Stephanie Pflumm ©Copyright 2007

Gemologists proclaim the Tourmaline to be the most colorful gemstone family in
the mineral kingdom. Siblings in this group of Aluminum/Boran/Silica (aka
complex Aluminous Borosilicate) crystals range from clear to a rainbow of
colors appearing in the same specimen.

Even the manner in which these colorful crystals grow is complex with a
variety of metals influencing the final outcome. Tourmaline crystals grow in
long, finger to needle like formations with fine striations running the length
of the crystals. Most have basal (flat) terminations, but some rarer pieces
will have pyramidal terminations on one or both ends.

As Tourmaline grows it forms rings with six connecting sites (aka T sites).
These sites are occupied at alternating intervals by Aluminum, Boron and
Silica ions. This arrangement becomes even more complicated as the crystals
grow.

Every time one of these six points connects within this growing crystal ring,
there is a new opportunity for a different metal (sometimes Iron, Manganese,
Vanadium or even Copper) to be introduced into the equation. This
opportunistic growth pattern allows for the distinctive zones of colors
treasured Tourmalines like Rainbows and Watermelons exhibit.

The largest quantities of Tourmaline are mined from pegmatites. Essentially
gigantic geodes, they were once flowing magma containing gases which allows
cavities to form as the magma cools and hardens. Normally rich with minerals
and metals, pegmatites provide the perfect incubator for growing crystals and
gemstones.

A smaller number of crystals are found in streams and riverbeds, especially in
the gem rich rivers of Burma. These usually end up in the rivers as a result
of winds and rains wearing away the softer rocks the gems grew in.

Very rare Tourmaline crystals will form fine pockets inside the striations
that mark the crystal's surface. If the pockets align in a precise manner, or
become filled with water, the gem may show chatoyancy (a shimmer like Tiger's
Eye).

Like their Quartz relations, Tourmaline crystals also produce electrical
energy. In fact crystals exhibit both piezoelectricity (static electric
charge) and pyroelectricity (a polarized charge that is positive at one end of
the crystal and negative at the other).

It is the crystal's static charge that actu