Methyl B12 Absorption Comparison: Injections vs Sublinguals vs Oral

[arx]

Hi,

I would like to know the percentage of absorption in the three routes of consumption of mb12:
injections(IM), sublinguals, and oral route.

I know it is variable and differs from person to person, but a rough estimation of how much of the amount consumed is actually absorbed by us in each of the three routes would be really helpful.

I read somewhere that injections have 50 % absorption, sublinguals around 25 % and oral around 2 %. I would like to know if this information is correct or not.

Thanks!

 

[justy]

Sorry Arx - cant give you a figure, but can tell you how it worked for me.
Oral - no noticeable effect (MB12)
Sublingual spray - excitotoxicity encountered at full dose (MB12)
Sub Cut injections - marked improvement at 300mcg a day - excitotoxicity at 500mcg.

Justy x

 

[perchance dreamer]

Another delivery option is trandermal. Neurobiogix has this creme:

http://www.neurobiologix.com/Neuro-Immune-Stabilizer-B12-B6-Vitamin-D-Cream-p/46.htm

I get a compounded version of this without Vitamin D through Kendal Stewart. I prefer to take Vitamin D separately.

 

[arx]

Thanks justy and perchance dreamer.
Looking forward to more replies.

 

[Lotus97]

I was wondering about this too. There's also a discussion about taking adenosylcobalamin in this thread:
http://forums.phoenixrising.me/index.php?threads/anabol-dibencoplex-vs-source-natural-adb12.21575/
Everyone here says that you must take B12 sublingually rather than orally (and I believe them), but I noticed that Thorne's B Complexes and Multivitamins have large amount of folinic acid and methylfolate compared to the amount of methylcobalamin and adenosylcobalamin. I don't understand why they do that if the absorption of B12 is so low when taken orally. I realize that the main purpose of supplement companies is to make money, but why go to all the trouble of including active forms of b vitamins if the ratio isn't right or am I missing something?

 

[arx]

I was wondering about this too. There's also a discussion about taking adenosylcobalamin in this thread:
http://forums.phoenixrising.me/index.php?threads/anabol-dibencoplex-vs-source-natural-adb12.21575/
Everyone here says that you must take B12 sublingually rather than orally (and I believe them), but I noticed that Thorne's B Complexes and Multivitamins have large amount of folinic acid and methylfolate compared to the amount of methylcobalamin and adenosylcobalamin. I don't understand why they do that if the absorption of B12 is so low when taken orally. I realize that the main purpose of supplement companies is to make money, but why go to all the trouble of including active forms of b vitamins if the ratio isn't right or am I missing something?

I don't think everyone has low absorption in the oral form. People facing deficiency symptoms do have something wrong, and therefore sublinguals are preferred to oral. As it is for the medical and pharma world, it is just another vitamin, and those multivitamins and B-complexes you are talking about, I guess the amounts are decided as per the established RDAs of the individual vitamins, and obviously the ratios in which they should together be present.

Also, there will be no 'universal' correct ratio. As you will see the amounts of multivitamins in the market, say Thorne for example, they make so many formulas,with different ratios of things present in them. I agree with you,the active form just doesn't fit in as it's too less. But consider a person who is not chronically ill i.e. not suffering from CFS/ME/B12 def. or whatever, like a person who is not on a protocol but just needs to say, take a multivitamin. So for that particular market,which I call a slow and steady or a maintainance dosage consumer, those products are right for him. It is the 5000 mcg of mb12 that WE consume,not them. So for them,those products are fine, even if there is 1 percent absorption. They don't need to suck out all the B12. People on protocols do. Hence the need for individual supplements rather than combinations.

 

[Lotus97]

I don't think everyone has low absorption in the oral form. People facing deficiency symptoms do have something wrong, and therefore sublinguals are preferred to oral. As it is for the medical and pharma world, it is just another vitamin, and those multivitamins and B-complexes you are talking about, I guess the amounts are decided as per the established RDAs of the individual vitamins, and obviously the ratios in which they should together be present.

Also, there will be no 'universal' correct ratio. As you will see the amounts of multivitamins in the market, say Thorne for example, they make so many formulas,with different ratios of things present in them. I agree with you,the active form just doesn't fit in as it's too less. But consider a person who is not chronically ill i.e. not suffering from CFS/ME/B12 def. or whatever, like a person who is not on a protocol but just needs to say, take a multivitamin. So for that particular market,which I call a slow and steady or a maintainance dosage consumer, those products are right for him. It is the 5000 mcg of mb12 that WE consume,not them. So for them,those products are fine, even if there is 1 percent absorption. They don't need to suck out all the B12. People on protocols do. Hence the need for individual supplements rather than combinations.

I know that we need a lot more B12, but I find it puzzling that we don't need a lot more folate too. So you think for most people, Thorne's B complexes and multis are fine and don't require them to also take a B12 sublingual?

 

[arx]

These most people that I mention of are people who are not ill. They are fine, and not dependant on those vitamins. Whereas people on protocols are heavily dependant, those vitamins are their medicines.

 

[Lotus97]

These most people that I mention of are people who are not ill. They are fine, and not dependant on those vitamins. Whereas people on protocols are heavily dependant, those vitamins are their medicines.

I know, when I said "we" I meant people here