Who is a "Better Half" - Natural vs Synthetic Vitamins?
Controversy over natural versus synthetic vitamin is constantly growing.Consumers are lead to think that "natural" vitamins are more beneficial than "synthetic" ones, due to a recent marketing campaign launched by Yakult. In fact, manufacturers of natural vitamins claim they are "superior" to synthetic kinds. Is there any substance in their claims?
It is rather difficult to make a distinction between "synthetic" and "natural" vitamins. Some define a natural vitamin as a concentrated nutrient, derived from a quality natural source. The "Holy Grail" is to obtain a maximum retention of natural material.
Artificial colors, sweeteners, or preservatives should not be used, of course.
A natural source contains so called "co-factors" that come with the nutrients. For instance, some co-factors that are usually found with Vitamin C are known as bioflavonoids. These "noids" are concentrated from its natural source, and the process is truly painstaking. No extreme heat, pressure, or possibly toxic solvents must not be used. Sugar or chemical tablet coatings are not favored. Sourcing a high quality raw ingredients is a must. No artificial chemicals are added. Harsh binders and fillers do hinder absorption when ingested.
Synthetic vitamins are made in a laboratory setting from coal tar derivatives. No co-factors are present. Most of the food supplements sold on the market today are synthetic, and often they are cheaper to produce than their natural counterparts.
An additional way to compare natural and synthetic is to consider differences in their molecular structures. e.g. Is the molecular structure of natural vitamins altered by the synthetic process?
Proponents of natural products claim that synthetic vitamins are simply useless and ineffective. In turn, some doctors (of conservative nature) and nutritionists claim that synthetic vitamins have a molecular chemical structure identical to the natural vitamin, and that they are just as effective.
Who is right and who is wrong?
It is reasonable to expect "the evil twin" to function similarly and be bio-available in identical amounts to your body, as long as there is no such alteration. Furthermore, the same natural vitamin derived from different natural sources or raw materials will be the same so long as no other substances unique to that particular source are included.
Laboratory-produced compounds provide the biochemist with numerous advantages. One example is dose consistency. In nature, one orange may contain 50 mg of vitamin C and another may contain only 10 mg. It depends on where it was grown, when it was harvested, and under what conditions it was transported and stored. Conversely, nutritional supplement companies must guarantee that their products deliver precisely what is on the label.
Purity is another advantage. Laboratory-produced nutrients are “USP grade,” meaning that they come from licensed production laboratories and meet the rigid standards of the United States Pharmacopeia. It is ironic to note that some of the most highly contaminated products in health food history were ones which made the most fanfare of the “all natural” issue, and did not utilize USP ingredients.
Furthermore most synthetically made vitamins and many other nutrients are either identical to their natural counterparts or easily convert to the natural form in the human body. Also, most synthetic vitamins and nutrients are both cheaper and purer, with less potential for contamination.
Quality in vitamins and nutrients is extremely hard to quantify. The list of ingredients and their amounts is the most important aspect when making your choice. If that list is approximately equivalent, then price should be your guide, unless you are given some clear and objective reason why you should buy the natural form.
P.S. Vitamin supplements are most effective in liquid form because liquids absorb 5 times better than pills.
이탁영 특임
2010.08.23