Hi I'm new to this site. I came across it doing a mushy search. I just read

http://www.healthcastle.com/vitamine_headneckcancer.shtml

and am amazed at the article being on this health site as it seems to be against Vit E altogether and it is quite obvious from the article that it is only alpha that is used - I am under the impression that we should be using mixed tocopherols d-alpha, d-beta, d-gamma and d-delta and also the other thing that worries me is the lack of mention as to whether it is dl or d.

Hi Ani, I dont know much of the details of the different types of vit E, I do however know that the information about vit E came from very large doses which is totally unrealistic. Anyway, I would suggest keep taking your Vit E , in moderation, of course.

Cheers JonB it's good to see some one else agrees.
We all need to be open enough to realise that the media very often only prints scare stories and the information that suits them.

Something I omitted

dl is synthetic and
d is natural

For me it stands to reason which one I would want to be using.

As I understand it Ani, I would not use any vitamin or mineral that was not natural anyway. Simple!!!

I was confused about vitamin E too. I ran across an article that helped me put the controversy into perspective. Go to: http://www.mercola.com/2005/mar/2/vitamin_e.htm. It seems full spectrum (mixed tocopehrols and tocotreinols) vitamin e is best. And, research is now showing higher anti-cancer activity from tocotrienols. Its the synthetic varieties that may cause harm. Anyway, just thought I would pass the info along.

I am aware that tocotreinols are important but I have managed to find mixed tocopehrols but so far have not found tocotreinols. To buy from the US cost us a fortune in the UK obviously in life or death I would pay but at the moment I am just being vain (wrinkles & scars).
I love Mercolas site I think he has amazing info and I would advise anyone with health in mind to subscribe to his free newsletter he will challenge your way of thinking if you normally listen to the media.

Hi Ani,

Congratulations for not attaching excessive importance to a single study; One has to examine the propondeance of the evidence from the best work, not just read about the latest individual controversy.

The majority of studies have found that Vitamin E (tocopheryl) preserves your health, and slows the ageing process. Its solubility in lipids (fats & oils) allows it to enter and protect the myelin sheaths of nerves, the lipid rich brain, and cell membranes. Thus, Vitamin E is one of the antioxidants that help prevent premature ageing.

Because they neutralize free-radicals, antioxidant vitamins lessen the continuing damage to your mitochondria, DNA, and cell membranes. This minimizes ageing, allowing you to maintain your natural vigor, fitness and youthful appearance.

So if my claim is true, what could cause the results of a FLAWED study to be contrary?

First, by not getting the dose right. There is a known benefit region of ~400 to 800 IU per day, and higher or lower doses show less benefit. By using excessive doses, a study can stray beyond the KNOWN benefit range.

Second, by not getting the dosage form right. It is easy to let Vitamin E get excessive exposure to oxygen, and it will peroxidize to a free-radical generator when it is rancid. So you must have a good quality of the vitamin to begin with, store it properly in an air tight cotainer, protected from light and heat, and use it within a reasonable time after opening it. Any study not doing this can be using peroxidized Vitamin E.

Protection against oxidation is greatly improved with the "un-natural" acetate form. So chemical modification that stabilizes the Vitamin E protects you from one of the hazards of natrual Vitamin E (the more easily peroxidized form).

Third, by using "natural" Vitamin E of the wrong kind. Natural is NOT always better. "Natural Vitamin E" is typically extracted from alfalfa using solvents. This lipid extraction process produces a concentrate of Vitamin(s) E and also a concentrate of ANYTHING ELSE that is soluble in the solvents, like pesticides. Extracting conventionally grown plants that have pesticide residues in them produces a nice pesticide concentrate. Give that to your patients along with the Vitamin E, and yes, there will be an adverse response! So a study can go seriously wrong if they don't use Vitamin E extracted from organically grown (pesticide free) plants. Unfortunately, few clinicians test their Vitamin E for pesticide residue before using it in their clinical trials, making their results tainted with a side effect.

So is "natural Vitamin E" superior? If harvested from pesticide free plants, and stored properly it can be. Look for high quality products that address these issues, and don't be concerned about the acetylated form being "un-natural". The acetate is promptly hydrolyzed in your stomach (becoming vinegar, a nice natural product) and Vitamin E (another nice natural product).

I hope this helps, Live Well!

Shirley
http://www.ValueVitamin.com