Isn't it dangerous for a human to take that much in a day? What about for a month every day?
I experimented 5+ years with it and took on several occasions 100+g per day with regular input between 10-15g per day.
The only problem I had after 5 years is slight pain in esophagus immediately after taking C, but it passed after I switched to taking C on full stomach.
Note: you MUST use pure AA powder, nothing else. Timing of C is essential - you must do it right, or the effects are minimal (you basically have to simulate the liver ancestral production now disabled in humans).
Vitamin C is a miracle thing IMO, especially 4 kids. My daughter was taking 1g since age 1 (now has 5) and she has remarkable health (she is sick once or twice per year for 2-4 days without any complications with being in kindergarten with 30+ kids since age 1, although the non-vitamin-c factors are contributing to this picture quite a bit).
Vitamin C is the most effective virus killer in large doses if you time it right. It is poor antibiotic but you have many options in plant world for that.
But the argument you are giving is quite pointless - vitamin C has no side effects and it is dead cheap so there is no harm in trying it out for several months and deciding on your own if its good or not for you.
Worked in what way? You made no mention of what it actually did, except maybe prevent some viral infections?
For instance check my protocol here
https://www.paleohacks.com/sick/how-do-you-take-care-of-your...
I'm not aware of evidence that this is true for megadoses (e.g. 10g per day, as you mentioned).
Given that you are making a claim not supported by mainstream medical consensus (that megadoses of vitamin C have positive health effects), you are essentially arguing that megadoses of Vitamin C have a different effect than regular doses. Given that you admit that megadoses have a different effect to regular doses, what is your evidence that megadoses have no side effects?
Also studies conducted on animals (especially primates) that cannot synthesize vit-c on their own, show that they intake about upto 80x the RDA value of vitamin-c. So, humans intake as low as 1.25% of vit-c levels that monkeys eat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_C#Daily_requirements
Most often than not, RDA values are a joke and should be treated as bare minimum levels to prevent diseases such as scurvy and not as the optimum level. Sub-clinical deficiency in essential vitamins and minerals always happen.
Do you also have any comprehensive resources that explains if vit-c supplements can affect recovery from lifting weights or general exercise?
There isn't any that I am aware of except bowel tolerance method. IMO, timing during healthy state is relaxed - twice per day is probably enough for most people; during stress however individual dose shouldn't be higher but should be taken more frequently (until bowel starts to complain, which means C is not absorbed any more and passes to colon where it causes diarrhea trough osmosis). What is remarkable here is the difference between bowel tolerance in healthy (low) and disease (high) state which suggests that vitamin C absorption increases.
See my answer here: http://www.paleohacks.com/vitamins/vitamin-c-supplementation...
> Also what form of supplement & which brand did you intake? Liposomal vit-c?
I take pure synthetic AA with sodium bicarbonate half of the time (3-5g x2). I don't have experience with liposomal vit-c but I am sure it is way better then regular C, altho far more expensive.
> Do you also have any comprehensive resources that explains if vit-c supplements can affect recovery from lifting weights or general exercise?
I don't have one at hand now. Some people think it prevents adaptation during exercise and don't take it. I personaly think it reduces stress so it simply gives you an option to work more. Since exercise can actually reduce your immune system if you overdo it or have concurrent stressor, AA intake will certainly be more beneficial on the long run then any supposed adaptation shortcomings.
The claim it is not supported by mainstream medicine is nonsence. Like I said its not investigated. Only small doses are.
You don't know that - it could have been other unknown factors that made the difference. The same claims of 'working' are made for homoeopathy etc.
In general 'trying stuff' is a waste of effort, time and money unless there is supporting evidence for efficacy.
If you have a real problem to solve effort and money may be irrelevant. It was for me. I had 5 times a year common cold up until i did vit C thing.
Which viruses? All viruses? With what mechanism? This is nothing more than molecular fanboyism. Nothing is a panacea.
It works 4 some bacteria too , like h. Pylori. 5g pd eliminated infection in 1 study in 30% of patients which is really good result.
I'd be curious to see if you still hold the same opinions. (It's a very entertaining podcast too!)
(I also think that article lead is irresponsible, because if it turns out this study holds up, and vitamin C is a viable treatment for this kind of cancer, we have soundly shown it does not work in the many areas we have tested it.)
[1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11700812?dopt=Abstract
[2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23440782
[3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8191227, shows some positive evidence, which may be noise, and concludes "needs more research" - despite there already being a lot, with no clear positive signal.