Log in
Advanced Prostate Cancer
7,985 members8,353 posts

Natural Vit E and Prevention

For example, it (the N.Y.Times article) mentions that studies have linked high-dose vitamin E with a higher risk of prostate cancer. In reality, a single study found a very small, and possibly questionable, increase in prostate cancer among people in that particular study. Importantly, the study in question used synthetic vitamin E, not the natural E. They also used fairly low dosages.

The salient point here is that there are studies looking at natural vitamin E, using all four tocopherols and four tocotrienols. These studies were not quoted, even though two such studies show tocotrienols — specifically gamma tocotrienol — actually prevent prostate cancer2 and even kill prostate cancer stem cells.3

These are the cells from which prostate cancer actually develops. They are, or quickly become, chemotherapy-resistant. Yet, natural vitamin E complex is able to kill these stem cells. Mice given oral gamma-tocotrienol had an astonishing 75 percent decrease in tumor formation.

A third study4 found gamma-tocotrienol was also effective against existing prostate tumors by modulating cell growth and the apoptosis (cell death) response. “Now, that has got to be newsworthy. The New York Times decided that's news not fit to print,” Saul says.

19 Replies
oldestnewest

It wasn't a small study, it was a VERY large randomized clinical trial. There were 35,533 men at 427 study sites in the study! It doesn't get much bigger. It was extremely well done - sponsored by NIH and was designed and evaluated by many of the biggest names in prostate cancer research. Their results were peer-reviewed and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association - there is no higher imprimatur.

The men took 400 IU/d of dl-α-tocopheryl acetate, which is the kind of high dose Vitamin E found in generic Vitamin E pills you would pick up in any store. They purposefully chose the kind of vitamin E and the dose that most men were using.

It found that the incidence of prostate cancer was 17% HIGHER among those taking Vitamin E, and the difference was statistically significant with over 99% confidence.

jamanetwork.com/journals/ja...

It's easy enough to look this up before spreading the kind of blatant misinformation that gives the Internet the reputation for spreading fake news.

Whether gamma-tocotrienol has been shown to benefit some mice in a lab is certainly not worthy of mention in the NY Times, or anywhere among patients.

2 likes
Reply

Probably the most important point made is that synthetic Vit E was used and no comparison with the naturally occurring form was made. Thus the study has an inherent bias and the blanket dismissal of Vit E is not justified.

3 likes
Reply

As I said, it's the kind of Vitamin E most men buy. in fact, it was a lot better than you can buy because it was assayed for quality, impurities, and correct dose in every pill. What people buy as supplements is of uneven quality and dose - some pills may contain no Vitamin E and some may have too much. "Natural" Vitamin E depends on the source, doesn't it? "Vitamin E" from annatto seeds, for example, contains a different mix of chemicals from "Vitamin E" from wheat germ.

Alpha tocopherol is what the FDA recognizes as "Vitamin E": " Alpha- (or α-) tocopherol is the only form that is recognized to meet human requirements." They set the average daily recommendation is 30IU of alpha-tocopherol.

1 like
Reply

Anyone who goes by FDA standards is doomed. 30 IU's a day is a miniscule dose. FDA also says Vitamin C dose is less than 100mg. Linus Pauling the only 2 time winner of Nobel prizes took 14 GRAMS a day. There is no cure for the common cold but high doses of C make the week go by faster. Or you can go to a Doctor and get rid of it in 7 days.

The FDA is run by big pharma and anything promising to our health is shelved in favor of high priced poisons. IMO.

2 likes
Reply

Your world seems to be just full of insidious plots. I'm glad you, at least, know better than the conspirators at the FDA (sarcasm).

Reply

The E used was actually "all-rac-α-tocopheryl acetate" & this is not to be found in any supplement sold by Swanson. "α-tocopheryl acetate" was found in a skin product, whereas "α-tocopherol" ("ol" not "yl", & no "acetate") found scores of products.

-Patrick

2 likes
Reply

"all-rac" is sometimes mislabeled as "dl" & "dl-α-tocopheryl" is sometimes misleadingly written as "dl-α-tocopherol", but the products I found were of the "d-" not "dl-" form.

-Patrick

1 like
Reply

It's not misleading -- "All racemic" is exactly the same thing as "dl" by definition. The "d" form is bioactive, the "l" form is not. So 400 IU of Vitamin E has 200IU of the active ingredient, making the result of the SELECT trial even more scary. Tocopheryl acetate is bioidentical to tocopherol. After it is swallowed it gets de-esterified - the ester is better because it prevents breakdown by stomach acids.

Reply

I've been taking Vitamin E since 1968 but I read about it and found that Dl meant it was not natural E. Why would anyone go the cheap route trying to save their life?

Reply

I guess a short chemistry lesson is in order. Asymmetric organic molecules (like alpha tocopherol) come in two forms. d stands for dextro (right), l stands for levo (left). Those symbols are used because a purified solution of either form will rotate polarized light to the right or the left. When both are combined in equal proportion, it is called racemic or "dl". Our bodies have evolved to only use one of them, the other is simply ignored and excreted. For Vitamin E, our bodies use the d form, d-alpha-tocopherol. If you take a racemic mixture, the l form is excreted. The two are difficult to separate in the lab, and since the l form is harmless, manufacturers don't bother. The cost per IU would more than double, so it is cheaper but no less effective to simply double the dose.

Reply

My source says D is natural and dl is synthetic. Synthentic is not as good as d-alpha.

Reply

Gamma---is always in my inventory.

Nalakrats

2 likes
Reply

I would say that there appears to be some truth in almost all the posts on this subject so far. I don't think anyone is intentionally trying to mislead anyone here but rather trying to make a point about a broader view of the subject.

I will say that I think more research should be conducted with Gamma E, as this is what many people take. It would be worth knowing if there is a difference from the previous study.

I would like to think that this is a place for discussion and sometimes debate but not for put-downs. If you are more knowledgeable about a topic, that's great-share it to educate others not berate them.

3 likes
Reply

GAMMA E.

Reply

Thanks people , it was a study that made me quit vitamin e . I feel better safe than sorry.

1 like
Reply

A I O U. its out.

Good Luck and Good Health.

j-o-h-n Monday 05/28/2018 5:57 PM EDT

Reply

know your enemy.

the FDA's RDA for vit. C was 25mg back in the good old days. it's pathetic how conservative idiots will take as gospel ANYTHING our lovely medical establishment shits out, as long as the best govt money can buy is paid to say it's ok.

heard the same disingenuous argument from "doctors" (not healers, only pill-pushers) about how vit. retailers market low-quality products that may not even contain the product they're selling... when Big Pharma's govt-bribed products get the Lying Sack of Shit approval stamp whenever they want it. what a crock of crap.

the capitalist system is based on competition - how many vit. retailers do you suppose we have in the US? and how many of them stay in business by marketing crap? i'll match Puritan and Swanson products for purity and accurate mass with anything Pfeizer puts out. oh wait... drug companies don't produce vit and suppls.... YET! and if some of our worthier congressmen have anything to say about it, they won't EVER!

was put on Simcor (simvastatin + niacin) which not only lowered my cholesterol but brightened my days considerably (i tend to be depressed a lot). An excellent GP suggested red yeast rice, when the statin controversy was in full swing. was taking both and almost passed out one day. guessing the cause, i stopped taking the simcor; total cholesterol's been fine ever since, ~175. LDL's always been a bit high because i LOVE butter and cheeseburgers...no, not together! My HDL's always been a bit low, so started taking salmon oil gelcaps, 1,000mg/day. within months, HDL is above normal, for the 1st time in years.

i know all this is anecdotal evidence, but i've caught drs. lying to me close to a dozen times now, always singing the same song: no cure except drugs. i've found vits and suppls that proved them wrong, from "incurable without surgery and/or meds" IBS and gall stones to T2diabetes, diverticulosis, hypertension and beyond. PLEASE don't get me wrong; my people have the highest regard for western medicine and doctors... as to I. but i don't take anyone's expertise as infallible. a big pharma re-purposed (and renamed, of course) drug (thalidomide) is saving my life right now. and with all the loopy-loo bullcrap online about radiation tx for prostate cancer, i'll be getting 39 doses of IMRT. so what's my point here?

trust your instincts, do your research, and for God's sake, make sure you ask questions and get sensible/accurate answers from your drs. in consults! you hear something you don't understand? GET an explanation!

2 likes
Reply

I worked many years with an MD who spent 14 years as a board certified Emergency Medicine doctor and 10 as a board certified Family Practice physician. He warned me when we were working on a medical triage system that I needed to lower my LDL (this is the stuff we talked about during our coffee breaks). He said get it below 100. In all his years in emergency medicine he never had a patient present with a heart attack who had a LDL below 100. He said his experience was supported by the Framingham (MA) Heart Study. That was 22 years ago. My LDL went below 100 in 90 days after his urging by taking red yeast rice from Solaray. No one should settle for a LDL above 100 - you are pushing up this risk factor when you don't need to.

Sounds like you JPOM have a handle on the chol issue. Congrats. It apparently makes a difference also in managing PCa.

your happy vegan CalBear74

1 like
Reply

red yeast rice does contain a natural statin: lovastatin i believe. although the capsules are filled with the exact quantity of rice powder, the exact % of the lovastatin is not controlled. pros and cons here: the con i just mentioned. the pro is that the statin is NOT concentrated by extraction. why is that a good thing? because all the natural enzymes, proteins and healthy components are not lost and contribute to ameliorating the toxicity you find in big pharma products. i have brought that up to doctors many times, and while waiting for a response, have heard the sound of crickets and bird calls. they never have a good answer for me because big pharma's marketing agents have not given them the proper verbal excuses they need to answer. invariably, they fall back on "well you don't need that other stuff anyway". really? really??

well, carry on, cal - good luck to you, buddy. thnx for the encouragement!

1 like
Reply

You may also like...