From: gts (gts_2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon May 12 2003 - 23:18:56 MDT
I wrote:
> "Benfotiamine" appears to be ordinary thiamine (vitamin B-1). At least I
did not
> see any research on that site to suggest otherwise.
Correction: I see now that Benfotiamine is a fat soluble form of B-1, not
quite the same as the water soluble form usually found in supplements. It
has 3 x greater bioavailability than ordinary thiamine HCL. However I
question whether only the fat soluble form has physiologic activity as
claimed.
It is claimed that only the fat soluble form showed alphaETK activity, and
that this is evidence that only the fat soluble form has physiologic
activity. I'm not sure exactly what "alphaETK" is in biochemical terms as a
marker of physiologic activity of thiamine. However I know that alphaETK is
also a marker of thiamine deficiency as found often in alcoholics, and that
ordinary water-soluble thiamine HCL corrects that deficiency. This suggests
that the claim for Benfotiamine is false: ordinary water soluble thiamine
HCL also has physiologic activity as measured by alphaETK.
Pharmaceutical and supplement manufacturers have a bad habit of modifying
ordinary compounds slightly for little apparent reason other than to obtain
a patent. It is for that reason that I am always suspicious of modifications
of ordinary nutrients. Ordinary thiamine HCL is dirt cheap and I'm sure
"Benfotiamine" is quite expensive. If bioavailability is the only issue at
stake here then I'm sure it would be cheaper to buy 3 units of thiamine HCL
to get the same plasma thiamine level as 1 unit of Benfotiamine.
-gts
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 12 2003 - 23:28:44 MDT