Posted by GWA on June 30, 2007, at 9:33:53
In reply to Re: Nothing suggests Vitamin b destroys Nardil » GWA, posted by Honore on June 29, 2007, at 15:22:10
> You still haven't dealt with my main point, which is that the article calls Nardil a "vitamin b6 antagonist"
That doesn't preclude the antagonism's being mutual. The article is concentrating on its main subject, B6 deficiency, not on the tribulations of bloodstream phenelzine.
>-- it doesn't deal in any way with whether or to what extent anything else is true.
I think it does, in the sentence I've quoted twice.
>The proposition for which you cite that article, >that vitamin b6 destroys nardil is not what the >article reports, proves, or even implies.
I think it does, for the reason I've given: it says that there is a reaction between PP and the hydrazine phenelzine, which gives rise to a hydrozone; necessarily, given the most basic chemistry, this reaction eliminates the phenelzine taking part in it. I don't see how you can not understand this. If the fact is not underlined in the article, it is because, once again, and as you say, it is about B6 deficiency rather than about the less common problem of Nardil deficiency. If you don't accept this, let's agree to disagree. A B6 supplement of only 100% of the recommended daily allowance should prevent B6 deficiency while taking Nardil,
poster:GWA
thread:765488
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20070630/msgs/766844.html