Pat Sullivan Blog

Why I take High Dose Vitamin C

I have been a proponent for sometime of the benefits of taking lots of Vitamin C.  I now take close to 10 grams per day of Jigsaw Health's Sustained Release Vitamin C , and am gradually increasing it.  There are tons of studies I can point to that show it has a tremendous impact preventing and even reversing a number of chronic illnesses. There are some studies you see talked about in the press saying Vitamin C does not do much but ALL of those studies were done using very low doses of C.  Like doing a study on birth control pills, giving the women 1 pill per month and then saying "See, birth control pills doesn't work."

C is also the most versatile anti-oxidant you can take.  But these studies are not why I am taking C.  The real reason I take lots of Vitamin C and believe everyone else should too, is because I believe our bodies were designed to make Vitamin C but lost that ability through a disaster to our DNA.  Virtually all mammals make their own C and they make a lot of it.  Up to 3 times more when they are under stress.  It takes 4 different enzymes in mammals to turn glucose into Vitamin C.  Humans all have 3 of the 4 enzymes needed to do the same thing.  But we lost the ability to make the 4th enzyme. And we DO have a non-working gene in our DNA for that 4th enzyme! 

This is a disaster!  Think about it.  If the body could turn excess sugar into Vitamin C instead of only turning it into FAT, no one would be fat.  No one, would likely have diabetes.  Excess sugar and fat impacts virtually all the disease processes.  AND now we no longer have all the wonderful protective, preventive properties of Vitamin C.

Everyone who reads my blog knows that I also believe we were Intelligently Designed by a Creator.  But I also believe in evolution!  No, NOT the kind of evolution that says we all got here by chance.  That is called Macro evolution.  I don't believe in that at all.  Not even close.  But I do recognize that mutations to our DNA absolutely do happen.  The problem is that those mutations are 99.99% of the time damaging to our DNA and to us.  They don't add information to our DNA, they delete information.  Dr. Sanford from Cornell U wrote a book called Genetic Entropy that does a great job of proving that.  I have my own theory of when, where and how this happened to us but suffice it to say that somewhere early on, this gene mutated and all of us lost the ability to make Vitamin C.

That is why I take lots of Vitamin C.  And if you read a bit you will also find lots of scientific reasons to take high dose Vitamin C as well.  This book is a GREAT one to start with.  Or go here to read what Jigsaw says about it.

Darwinists still losing the marketing war

I did a post last year that got many Darwinists in an uproar with many hateful comments on my blog and the post being copied and trashed on numerous other evolution blogs.  Basically I said that I thought the Darwinists were losing the marketing war for the minds of the American people.  I said this because a Gallup poll found that 66% of Americans believed that God created the world and still did not believe in evolution.  And this after a total domination of Darwin only teaching in public schools.  One would have thought that virtually everyone now would believe in evolution.  But they don't.

And now it is getting worse.  A recent Zogby poll reports that 78% of Americans think that teachers should have the academic freedom to teach BOTH the strengths AND weaknesses of evolution in the classroom.  This of course is cause for apoplexy for the Darwin Fundamentalists who want Dawinism taught as though there were no weaknesses.  They want it taught that it is absolutely true and no weaknesses exist.  They want total control of the classroom so that absolutely no contrarian views sneak in to attack their religion, Darwinity.

It gives me great hope for America that the concept of academic freedom is still valued by the great majority of Americans.  The censorship that the Darwinists want may still happen by government or judicial fiat, but it won't be because Americans want it!  Of course, that doesn't matter to the Darwinists!

Thoughts on DNA, Vitamin C and Origins

I have not blogged much the past months for a variety of reasons.  Mainly I have been very focused on getting Flypaper on solid ground.  We have made a lot of progress and I am more confident in our ultimate success than I have been since becoming CEO a year ago. Dec and Jan will be big months in launching the Flypaper Platform aimed at Corporations and Service Providers who use and create lots of Flash content. 

With this post I decided to dip my toe back into the ID controversy.  Even though I am not a scientist and I tend to get hammered when I do this. The post is a bit "random"and I hope it hangs together as you read it.

I read an interesting book and have had a number of thoughts (insights?) that I want to share  primarily to other layman for their consideration.   I am well aware that scientists on both sides of the ID/Darwinist arguments will have already delved deeply into these issues and both will have even better arguments for or against my thoughts and ideas. That is fine.

1.  It was interesting to me to learn that it is likely that the human body once had the ability to make Vitamin C. Most likely in large quantities.  I had wondered why most mammals make large amounts of Vitamin C but humans did not. Under stress, animals will make even larger amounts.  Vitamin C is a great antioxidant and is involved in MANY enzymatic reactions including the making of neurotransmitters.  I wondered why the "Designer" gave this ability to goats and such, but not to us? 

Well I learned that we actually have 3 of 4 needed enzymes present in our systems to turn glucose into vitamin C.  And we apparently have in our genome the ability make the 4th enzyme, but a mutation somewhere in our history caused this last enzyme to not be made.  This had to happen very early in our history since no one can make Vitamin C.  I wondered why we don't see a mixture of some who do and some who don't make it? 

24 Observations on the Intelligent Design versus Macro Evolution debate

I kicked off quite a firestorm with my recent post on Marketing Darwin. The blogger Orac picked it up, shredded it to pieces, which led to dozens of comments at my blog and his.  Smelling fresh blood, Professor PZ Meyers takes me to task, and more comments ensue.  Basically, I get trashed really badly. Thank goodness I am secure in my old age!  :)

I find it all interesting.  Many of the commenters raise some really good points, and I agree with some of them.  Many though seem to deliberately misunderstand me, and then trash the misunderstanding.  I only spent about 15 minutes writing Marketing Darwin but would have taken more time to clarify myself if I'd known how it was going to be used. 

So I thought I would write another post, this post, partially in answer to some of those comments. I don’t expect to change the minds of my critics.  But I do hope that some of you reading this will gain insight into what has been going on for at least the past 10 years or so with the advent of the Intelligent Design versus Macro Evolution debate among scientists.

Update: This Should Scare Everyone But Won't

Here is an update to European Scientists trying criminalize Intelligent Design speech.

Here is a shocking article detailing Orwellian type censorship and punishment in Europe.  This kind of thing ought to scare the crap out of everyone including Democrats and Republicans, Evolutionists and IDists, pro-lifers and pro-choicers. 

Intelligent Design Blogs

I came across this blog that you may be interested in if you are interested in the continuing controversy regarding Intelligent Design.  Here is a list of other blogs that cover the same subject.

I really like this topic though rarely have the time to write much about it.  Regardless of those who think it really should be "Un-Intelligent Design" or "No-Design, just sort of happened", this is an area that will continue to receive attention. 

My opinion is that to any thinking person, they have to look at the incredible design of the human body, the earth, the universe we find ourselves in and conclude that there sure seems to be a lot of evidence that a really incredible designer was/is at work.  Makes sense to me.  The issue is, if you believe that what do you do about it?

Science and God

Dennis Prager mentioned this article this morning on his program.  Francis Collins, the director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute, claims there is a rational basis for a creator and that scientific discoveries bring man "closer to God".

He recounts his awe as he first looked at the "3.1 billion-letter instruction book that conveys all kinds of information and all kinds of mystery about humankind".  I have had two similar experiences.

The first was as a freshman in college.  I had been steeped in evolutionary thought and pretty well bought into it because it fit the lifestyle I wanted to live as a young man.  I did not like the idea that there was a God who cared about things that I was doing, right and wrong.  I took an anatomy class that was taught by a wonderful teacher.  He made it so interesting.  As I studied the marvels of the human body, the awareness that the body could NOT have come about merely by chance gradually dawned on me.  It shook me to the core.  There simply was no question in my mind that I was looking at something incredibly well designed.

The second was when we were building the first version of ACT!.  We were deep into discussions and arguments about how little details of the product should work.  ACT! was actually quite intricate and each feature raised lots of questions and issues.  If we did it one way, there would be advantages and disadvantages.  If we did it another, it raised another set of issues.  One day, it dawned on me that this was exactly the process God went through to design and create the world that we find ourselves in.  "Let's see, if I give them two kidneys that will provide a backup system, but there is only room enough for one liver.  Hmmm?  What about this free will thing?  If I give them free will, they can really make a mess of things but if I don't, they will be robots.  What should I do to allow for the problems free will might create."

After ACT! was shipping, there were always people who would criticize decisions we made.  The thing I realized was that they had no idea about the things we had wrestled with and why we had made the decisions that we made.  I sometimes wonder if we do the same with God.  God, why did you make it this way?  Do you sometimes wish that "Life" had different features??  What an interesting question.

I think it is a great when scientists dig deep into something and come away with awe regarding the incredible design that they see.  I always find it amazing when dogmatic evolutionist's insist that what looks like design, is actually simply a random series of accidents and chance events.  That boggles my mind and asks too much faith from me.

Gandhi

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

"The future depends on what we do in the present."

Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)
Indian political and spiritual leader

Thanks Gandhi, I needed that reminder today.

National Day of Prayer

(Posted by Patrick Sullivan Jr.)

From The Center for Arizona Policy, via an email forward from my mom.

Our country was built on a foundation of prayer. George Washington, in his First Inaugural Address spoke these words:

“It would be peculiarly improper to omit, in this first official act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being, who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States. No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the United States.”

George Washington called the entire nation to prayer in 1789 when he proclaimed a National Day of Thanksgiving. Following his lead, subsequent presidents also proclaimed days of prayer and thanksgiving. In 1952 Congress established a National Day of Prayer and in 1988 President Ronald Reagan signed legislation permanently setting the National Day of Prayer as the first Thursday in May of each year.

Interesting to read the words of Washington, especially that last sentence.  I've never read them before. 

And I've never found prayer to be a bad thing.

Double Standards

Double standards exist everywhere in our world today.  Here is another perfect example of a double standard.  On one hand, University Professors protest to protect the free speech rights of a leftist professor who was caught plagiarizing.  On the other hand University Professors want to crucify a Christian librarian who had the nerve to suggest that incoming freshman read a few books that were more traditional in their worldview.  Hypocrisy, whether it be on the Right or on the Left is ugly.