Customer Reviews: How to Live Longer and Feel Better
Your Garage Editors' Picks Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Dolly Parton Fire TV Stick Happy Belly Coffee Totes Amazon Cash Back Offer PilotWave7B PilotWave7B PilotWave7B  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Introducing new colors All-New Kindle Oasis Shop Now

Format: Paperback|Change
Price:$13.61+ Free shipping with Amazon Prime
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on April 21, 2007
I was a CHEM major some 35+ years ago, and Dr. Pauling was sort of an icon among we BioChem wannabes - undoubtedly one of the great biochemists of the 20th century. To me the proof of the pudding is in the eating:

I cannot trace a single male member of my family, back into the early 1800s, who lived to see their 60th BD. My great grandfather died at 54, my grandfather in his early 40s, my father at 59 and my only brother of conjestive heart failure at 54. Are you impressed by now?

God willing, I will see my 70th this fall. People tell me I look like I'm in my late 50s, I haven't had a cold in at least 25 years, I've never really been seriously ill, and I feel good - thank you very much.

I first read Dr. Pauling's stuff on the wonders of Vitamin C (especially taken in conjuncton with Vitamin E) and became a devotee more than 30 years ago, based mainly on his reputation. I've been a Pauling vitamin popper for over 30 years now, although cut back to 10 grams per day, of Vitamin C years ago. I'm not sure my great health is due to the good Doctor's advice, but I'd be willing to bet the farm on it, if there was any way of knowing.

There is a lot of rather boring stuff in the book, like double-blind studies, which I place the nice-to-know category. Dr. Pauling's condensed recommendations for a healthy life, right at the start of the book, is about all you need to know IMHO. Start these straight away and read the rest of the book at your leisure is my reommendation.

Concerning this book, I believe three things:

1. Natural preventive medicine, properly applied, is the secret to a long and fruitful life, at least physically.

2. Dr. Pauling was a practical genius, and he was so far ahead of organized medicine it's amusing. They are still struggling to catch up more than 30 years later. The influence of $$$$$ perhaps?

3. Every person should buy, read and study this unbelievable little book. And if you do, you are likely to be very amazed at the results and how inexpensive the investment was.
66 comments| 307 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 23, 2009
Reviewed by Andrew W. Saul
Assistant Editor, Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine

My Dad always said that when you want to know something, talk to the organ-grinder, not the monkey. With that epithet in mind, may I suggest that you promptly borrow or buy a copy of Linus Pauling's How to Live Longer and Feel Better, recently reissued in an updated 20th anniversary edition. Yes, this is THE Dr. Pauling: the man your chemistry teacher idolized and your family doctor tries hard to ignore. Why? Because Linus Pauling committed the cardinal sin of allopathic medicine: he, a medical outsider, dared to present, directly to the public, his insightful reviews of the scientific literature to demonstrate that high doses of vitamins cure real diseases. What's more, Pauling reassessed many supposedly open-and-thoroughly shut "vitamins-are-useless" studies and explained how the researchers had skirted the fact that their data actually demonstrated that vitamin therapy did indeed have statistical value. Again and again, Pauling criticized study authors who failed to interpret their own work fairly, or even accurately, and had passed off biased opinions as valid conclusions from their work.

When negative studies are revealed to actually be positive, organized medicine has egg on its beard. Hence, it has long been open season on Pauling, arguably the world's most qualified, and certainly the world's best known, critic of our scorbutic (vitamin C deficient) medical system. Pauling's two unshared Nobel prizes (he is the only person in history with that distinction) are no protection from ignorant critics who slam vitamins without reading the research first.

Like me, for example. I first encountered Linus Pauling's Vitamin C and the Common Cold in 1973 while I was a student at the Australian National University. In addition to being the author of my organic chemistry textbook, Pauling had also just visited our university. In the uni refectory (that's "campus dining hall" for you Yanks), I hereby confess that we privately made fun of Pauling. A physics student and I casually calculated on a serviette (that's a paper napkin, mate) that you'd have to do nothing but eat oranges all day if you wanted to consume the amount of vitamin C that Pauling recommended. Two Nobels or not, we thought he was past it, and we were not alone in our sophomoric view.

Some years later, now back in America and, quite suddenly, with two kids in diapers, I was reading all the Pauling papers and books I could get my hands on. Now, you see, I had become a man with an all-too-prosaic mission: to keep my two little kids healthy. Life for me has not been the same since, nor for my children. I raised them both all the way into college without a single dose of any antibiotic. I saw for myself that Pauling was right. Vitamins worked, for prevention and for cure.

It would be difficult to imagine that his advocacy of the practical medical application of vitamins would ultimately cause more of a ruckus than Pauling's previous overhaul of our knowledge of chemistry, or even the vicious blacklisting that Pauling got from the US government when he opposed nuclear testing. After bringing high-dose vitamin C therapy for colds and flu to the public's attention in the early 1970s, Dr. Pauling had to spend quite a bit of time defending much-larger-than-RDA nutritional medicine from an abundant supply of under-informed critics. By 1986, when he first published How to Live Longer and Feel Better, he'd had a lot of practice.

Pauling had the rare gift for making the complex understandable, and his talent shows most clearly in this book. Distilling thirty pages of scientific references into logical, common-sense advice, he covers vitamins and cancer, heart disease, aging, infectious diseases, vitamin safety, toxicity and side effects, medicines, doctors' attitudes, nutrition history, vitamin biochemistry and a good deal more. And, with all that, he still finds time to clearly summarize as he goes, and to include some personal thoughts on attaining world peace. This is perhaps the strongest presentation ever written on the need for supplemental vitamins. The new edition benefits from added notes, an introduction outlining Pauling's career, and the welcome inclusion of cartoon illustrations previously dropped from the mass-market edition. There are many good reasons why a one-second Google search for Linus Pauling will bring up nearly a million responses. How to Live Longer and Feel Better is definitely one of the best.
55 comments| 264 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 5, 2002
I was lucky enough to be home one afternoon 15 years ago watching the Phil Donahue show. Linus Pauling was on the show promoting this book opposite Jack La Lanne (the fitness guru), who was hyping some expensive vitamin regime he was selling. I had never taken a vitamin in my life (28 years old!), but something about the sincerity and wisdom of what Linus was communicating made sense to me. I bought the book and followed the guidelines. I haven't had a serious cold or flu in 15 years. Oh yes, I feel the viruses and germs attack my system, and I will occasionally be congested or run a slight fever when a strong flu strain races through the population, but I just start taking 1000 mg of Vitamin C an hour at the first hint of illness and the symptoms never become more than a minor inconvenience.
I'm not claiming miracles, because believe me I've had my share of physical infirmities (ruptured lumbar disc, bursitis of the shoulder, vertigo) and I'm not a new age nut who completely rejects western medicine. However, the vitamin regimen that Linus outlines in this book will give you a turbo-charged immune system.
Please consult the text and learn about many other benefits of Linus' prescription for optimal health. Two teasers: First he explains why cheaper is better--don't pay a lot of money for natural, organic, bioflavinoids, etc. So even if the vitamin thing doesn't work out for you, at most you've spent 50-75 cents a day (because of inflation it may be a buck now, but I doubt it). Secondly, Vitamin C is a fantastic natural laxative. Talk about feeling good!
This sweet man with two nobel prizes has given the gift of health to humanity and it is yours for next to nothing. Don't be stubborn, be skeptical, but run a thorough trial and error test yourself. I have no doubt what the result will be.
77 comments| 279 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 2, 2004
I read this book in August 2003.
The same month I ordered vitamins as suggested by Linus Pauling on the internet and started taking them. I started with about 3-4 grams of vitamin C daily. Slowly, initially reluctancty, my wife too joined me. And then we started giving our 5 year old twin kids 1 gram of vitamin C daily.
Since then,
(1) nobody from our family has needed to visit a doctor. (earlier we had multiple visits per month)
(2) i have not had a cold, or a cough or a sore throat.
(3) my wife's allergies and asthma have improved.
(4) my kids do not get colds or sore throats or ear aches.
(5) my mother has also started vitamin c and her allergies of 20 years have disappeared.
Now, I sing praises of vitamin C and Linus Pauling in front of anybody who cares to listen !
44 comments| 131 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 13, 2007
Linus Pauling, best known as an advocate of the health value of mega doses of Vitamin C, and a two time Nobel Prize winner.

In a major cancer hospital in 1976, they carried out a study of terminal patients for whom conventional treatment was stopped. The control group of 1,000 who had no Vitamin C therapy all died by August 10, 1976. The test group of 100 patients who were treated with Ascorbate (Vitamin C) had eighteen people surviving by this date. The average survival time of those getting Vitamin C therapy was 4.2 times longer than the control group, on average living over 300 days longer. Some of this group continued to live indefinitely. You can probably imagine that people in a less dire state would show even better results.

Another study indicated that people with cancer tend to have lower amounts of Vitamin C. It is possible that the Vitamin C is depleted because it is being used by the body to fight disease, and therefore it might be reasonable concluded, according to Dr Pauling, that an ill person would need more of this supplement.

Dr Pauling himself took about 18g a day.

There are anecdotal stories in the book. One in particular of a man who took 10-12g a day for a 52mm liver cancer lesion. The cancer was stopped from progressing, and eventually much to the surprise of medical experts shrunk 32%. Dr Pauling recommended he up the dose to 25g daily, and he eventually on his own initiative went to 36g. At the time he wrote to Dr Pauling he had survived two years.

One of the key issues we face as we grow older is disease of our connective tissue, and inflammation. This is manifested through conditions such as arthritis. I remember reading somewhere that about 80% of people age 60 have some form of arthritis. Vitamin C is an excellent anti inflammatory, and also great for allergies and colds.

If you are interested in learning more about health and longevity, I recommend reading this book, and I wonder if this was helpful.
77 comments| 79 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
TOP 1000 REVIEWERon October 12, 2000
Linus Pauling was a man who challenged every conclusion another scientist would reach, only to draw his own conclusions. His conclusions on Vitamin C are backed by the gurus of the health field, namely Gary Null, Dr. Joel Wallach, etc.
This book is much better than his Vitamin C and the Common Cold book, which I bought first. 'How to Live Longer...' has pretty much the same exact information as his other books, but there is also valuable information about his vitamin regimen, that his other books fail to go into detail with. For years, I have taken divided doses of C throughout the day, even as much as 10 times. Pauling likes to take 3/4 of your daily C in one shot, in the morning. After adopting this method, I noticed a remarkable difference.
This book can change lives and like the title says, can help you add 15-30 years to your life, regardless of your age.
0Comment| 74 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on October 17, 2000
The orthodox medical establishment doesn't yet realize it but America is in the midst of a major shift in the paradigm of health. To its credit orthodox medicine has conquered virtually all of the infections diseases which were the major ailments a century ago, but it has made little progress against the major ailments of our time -- heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and other degenerative diseases -- because it refuses to recognize what Linus Pauling saw clearly: these diseases are caused by nutrient deficiencies. They will not be cured by pharmaceutical drugs with harmful side effects but rather with appropriate nutrient supplementation -- especially vitamin C. Linus Pauling was a genius. He was the only person ever to win two unshared Nobel Prizes and, quite probably, was the greatest chemist of the 20th century. In this book he presents his simple common sense prescription for a long healthy life. I wish everyone would read this book and heed Pauling's advice. By the way, recently the American Medical Association reversed its long-standing opposition to nutrient supplements and now recommends them. Get this book and get the details about nutrient supplementation from the expert on this subject, Linus Pauling.
0Comment| 76 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on July 27, 2012
No Cold or Flu for Years
My family take about 6 gram Vitamin C daily (along with other vitamins described below ) and have not had a cold or flu for years.
After reading this book by Linus Pauling, I am very convinced about Vitamin C and other vitamins for better health.

A little bit about Linus Pauling, Ph.D
Linus Pauling wrote this book when he was about 85 years old.

Linus C. Pauling, a brilliant chemist and an untiring political activist who received one Nobel Prize for chemistry and another for peace, died on Friday at his ranch in the Big Sur area of Northern California. He was 93 years old. His friend, Dr. Abram Hoffer, a Canadian doctor, also a pioneer in vitamins, lived to be 91 years old. (see below for more details on Dr. Abram Hoffer)

He received his bachelor of science degree in 1922, and the following year he married Ava Helen Miller. Two years later he received his Ph.D. from Caltech. Dr. Pauling received the prize for chemistry in 1954, as a result of his research into the nature of the chemical bond, the force that gives atoms the cohesiveness to form the molecules that in turn become the basis of all physical matter.
In 1962, at age 61, he received the Nobel Peace Prize.

For The Geek
Linus Torvalds (born in Helsinki, Finland) , the founder and creator of the Linux Operating Systems was named after Linus Pauling, the American Nobel Prize-winning chemist. Torvalds graduated from the University of Helskinki with a Masters in Computer Science. His Master's thesis was titled Linux: A Portable Operating System. He now acts as the Linux project's coordinator.

News: Vitamin C Cures Swine Flu
High dosage Vitamin C also has been therapeutically shown to cure many bacterial and viral infections. Try Google "New Zealand Farmer Swine Flu Vitamin C" to see the 60-minute story on how Vitamin C works.

The amazing story of a New Zealand dairy farmer who caught swine flu and very nearly died. Intensive care specialists were all set to pull him off life support, saying there was no hope. But his family refused to give up. They demanded the doctors try high doses of Vitamin C, a radical treatment well outside mainstream medicine. The hospital told them it wouldn't work but the family insisted. It turned into a fight, the family even hired a top lawyer. But in the end, as Melanie Reid will show you, the farmer is now very much alive.

THE VITAMIN Recommendation from the Book (If you are lazy to read the book)

Linus Pauling daily vitamin regimen

Linus Pauling (two-time Nobel Prize winners), one of the most prolific scientists in the 20th century recommended the following:

* Take 6 - 18 g of vitamin C daily
* Take 400 IU of natural vitamin E daily
* Take 1 or 2 B-complex vitamin supplements daily
* Take 25,000 IU of vitamin A daily
* Take a multivitamin tablet daily
* Keep your intake of sugar low
* Eat what you like in moderation, but avoid sugar. Meat and eggs are good food; and fruit and vegetables are good. Don't eat too much of any one food and don't eat so much that you become overweight.
* Drink plenty of water
* Keep active, but do not severely overexert yourself physically.
* Drink alcohol in moderation only
* Avoid stress, work at a job you like, be happy with your family.

Read These Other Sources

For more details on nutrition, diet or health - please also read the following books:

- Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes
- Life Without Bread, by Wolfgang Lutz
- Stop America's #1 Killer, by Tom Levy M.D.
- Google "Pauling Therapy" for cardiovascular disease and prevention (3 gram Vitamin C + 3 gram Lysine daily)
- Learn about "Dr. Abram Hoffer" in YouTube or Google - a friend of Linus Pauling

Read about Dr. Abram Hoffer, a friend of Linus Pauling
Dr. Abram Hoffer, a Canadian doctor and friend of Linus Pauling, lived to be 91-years-old. Nobel Prize-winning chemist, Linus Pauling, PhD, coined the term orthomolecular medicine after meeting and working with Dr. Hoffer.

In YouTube, look for a video clip of Abram Hoffer, MD, PhD describing what he took in the way of vitamins, minerals and nutritional supplements).

Here is the list of vitamins, minerals, and supplements that Dr. Abram Hoffer was taking in 2008:
* B-100 Complex
one capsule per day--contains all the B-vitamins
* Selenium
600 mcg per day
* Niacin
4500 mg per day, taken as 1500 mg, 3 times per day
* Vitamin C
2000 mg per day, taken as 1000 mg, 2 times per day
* Vitamin A
30,000 IU's per day
* N-Acetyl-Cysteine (NAC)
3000 mg per day, taken as 1,000 mg, 3 times per day (with meals, I assume), it increases a naturally-occurring antioxidant in the body called glutathione
* Coenzyme Q10, (CoQ10)
300 mg per day, taken as 100 mg, 3 times per day
* Vitamin D (vitamin D3, I assume) 6,000 IU's per day
* Salmon oil (fish oil, omega-3 fatty acids), 2,000 mg per day, contains omega-3 fatty acids, DHA and EPA
* Zinc 50-100 mg per day
* Folic Acid - 5,000 mcg per day (which is the same as 5 mg)
* Vitamin E - 800 IU per day
* Alpha Lipoic Acid (Lipoic Acid)
600 mg per day, taken as 200 mg, 3 times per day

Pauling Therapy - Increase Vitamin C intake to prevent cardiovascular (heart disease, stroke)

High intakes of these substances, especially Vitamin C and lysine, is called the Pauling therapy. The Pauling therapy treats the root cause and it can rapidly reverse advanced heart disease. If the Pauling/Rath Unified Theory is correct, then the most likely reason you have heart disease is because your vitamin C intake has been less than optimal. You will want to increase your vitamin C.
From my research, you will want to avoid Statin . Google "Statin danger" to learn more about Statins or Lipitor.

Note on Vitamin A toxicity
Linus Pauling recommended 25,000 IU of Vitamin A daily - not Beta Carotene. Most people who research about Vitamin A will come across 10,000 IU upper limit of tolerable intake. The issue about Vitamin A toxicity is quite overblown. For details on Vitamin A vs Beta carotene, please Google it "Vitamin A toxicity overblown" or visit Weston A. Price Foundation website. Vitamin A is important for immune function and commonly known as the anti-infective vitamin, because it is required for normal functioning of the immune system. The skin and mucosal cells (cells that line the airways, digestive tract, and urinary tract) function as a barrier and form the body's first line of defense against infection. Retinol and its metabolites are required to maintain the integrity and function of these cells. Vitamin A a play a central role in the development and differentiation of white blood cells, such as lymphocytes, which play critical roles in the immune response.

The Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine Vol. 9, No.3, 1994
In Memoriam of Linus Pauling

Professor Linus Pauling died August 19, 1994, at 93 years of age. He was the most productive humanitarian scientist this world has ever seen. Of the world's 20 greatest scientists he is easily the foremost for his work, which spanned a period of more than 60 years. Dr. Pauling addressed three of the most serious problems facing humanity in the past 100 years. These are survival, prevention of disease, and improved treatment of disease.

His research into the structure of molecules and how they interact with other molecules provided a major base for modern chemistry and medicine. Modern medicine would have been delayed many decades had it not been for his important work, for which he was awarded his first Nobel Prize. The development of modern complex molecules targeted for specific receptors would have been delayed even longer. He showed that genes were responsible for the structure of protein, following his classic work with the abnormal structure of the hemoglobin in sickle cell anemia. From this work he originated his concept of molecular medicine which later became Orthomolecular medicine and psychiatry. To honor him he received close to forty honorary Ph.D.s and D.Sc.s.

Professor Pauling had so much fun with his chemical research that he felt getting a Nobel Prize for that was a bit incongruous. His second Nobel Prize he appreciated a lot more, for he became very active in the anti-radiation and peace movement, and he did not enjoy that nearly as much. This time he felt it was well earned and he deserved it. His humanitarian spirit was challenged by his wife, Ava Helen, who urged him to do what he could in promoting world peace and in reducing the danger of atomic war and atomic radiation. This followed a presentation he made on the dangers of radiation when both the United States and Russia were doing their best to build up the most powerful nuclear armaments. This made him very unpopular with the U.S.A. government and also with Joseph Stalin. It is highly likely that but for this activity he would have received a third Nobel Prize for being first to determine the double helix structure of DNA. The State Department seized his passport so he could not attend an important international meeting in London. Had he been there he would have gained the additional information he needed to deduce the correct chemical structure. Dr. Crick, one of the three Nobel Winners for the discovery of the structure of the DNA molecule, stated that Linus Pauling had showed them how to solve the problem.

His work for peace steeled him to persist in working for what he considered the humanitarian and ethical thing, preparing him for the last major effort of his career, his work in Orthomolecular medicine in which he was involved for about 30 years.

Pauling's work for peace did not arouse any massive opposition from established professional groups, but his entry into the field of medicine and therapeutics created a storm of opposition and criticism from the healing professions, physicians, psychiatrists, social workers, psychologists, nutritionists and dietitians. For 30 years, at an age when most people have retired, he involved himself in the pursuit of the action of nutrients, how vitamins could be used in megadoses with no harm, and their therapeutic potential when used in optimum amounts, not just in tiny RDA doses. He was not an M.D., but this surely should not have been a barrier since many of the world's most important medical discoveries were not made by medical doctors. One of the best examples is Louis Pasteur who discovered that bacteria are involved in disease. If he had had an M.D. his work would just as surely been opposed, as was our work with the treatment of schizophrenia, but he might have been spared some of the personal attack he had to face.

The problem was that Pauling had suddenly jumped from one paradigm to another. The vitamin-as-prevention paradigm had been established by 1930 and has held sway. The vitamin-as-treatment paradigm, which is rapidly replacing the older one started in 1955 when Altschul, Hoffer and Stephen published the. study which proved that niacin lowered total cholesterol levels. Paradigm battles can be most ferocious. This is probably why it may take forty years before a new idea is accepted into medicine.

The vitamin-as-prevention paradigm had been very useful in determining what vitamins were and the type of syndromes their absence generated. It too was accepted very slowly and with difficulty. The medical profession stoutly resisted it for many decades refusing to believe that a disease could be produced by the absence of something. Prof. Virchow, the preeminent pathologist in Europe had declared that no disease was ever caused by an absence. He practised during the most active development of the connection between invaders and disease, i.e. bacteria, later viruses.

By 1950 the vitamin-as-prevention paradigm included a set of facts, more properly beliefs: (1) Vitamins are catalysts and therefore needed in minute quantities for the prevention of vitamin deficiency diseases such as beri beri, pellagra and scurvy. Catalysts are not destroyed. They are simply re-used. (2) Diseases not known as vitamin deficiency diseases should not be given vitamins. This follows the medical concept of one-drug-one-disease, or one vitamin one deficiency disease. Many physicians lost their license to practise because they violated this essential principal. In California it is considered malpractise to advise patients to take vitamin C if they have cancer. No one is allowed to tell their patients that the vitamin will be therapeutic.(3) Doses above those recommended, RDA doses, are contraindicated and even dangerous. Often where there is no toxicity it is invented, e.g. the false belief that vitamin C will cause pernicious anemia because it destroys vitamin B12 (it does not), or that vitamin C will cause kidney stones when it does not. This old paradigm became the bible for modern nutritionists and for the medical profession which had fled from any serious consideration of the importance of nutrition since about 1950, leaving the field to non clinical dietitians and nutritionists, i.e. to people who could not possibly use nutritional intervention as treatment and therefore could not see what nutrition or lack of nutrition could do. (4) A balanced diet will provide all the vitamins anyone needs.

Paradigms in medicine and science are replaced by better ones as more information accrues. Additional facts can no longer be accounted for by the old paradigm and eventually directly contradict it. This topples the old paradigm. The battle may be long and ferocious, and even when it is generally replaced there will remain a residue of fossilized scientists who will die swearing allegiance to it. Pauling was a respected member of the old paradigm, but one day his faith in it was seriously challenged and within a matter of days he had leapt from the old into the new, one of the first eminent scientists to make this quantum jump. The new vitamins-as-treat-ment paradigm which he endorsed and promoted so effectively, contains the following set of facts: (1) That vitamins are needed not only for deficiency diseases but for other conditions as well in optimum doses which may be small or large. There is no artificial restriction to only small doses. (2) They can be therapeutic for conditions not recognized as deficiencies, e.g. niacin for decreasing cholesterol levels. This is not a deficiency disease and niacin is used in doses 300 times the RDA. (3) Vitamins, even in large doses, are safe, especially the water soluble ones. The toxicity of vitamins has been grossly exaggerated. (4) Very few people eat diets so well balanced they obtain adequate quantities of many of the vitamins even when they are well. When they are under stress or ill, no diet is adequate without the supplementation of the important nutrients.

Pauling described his increase in interest in megadose vitamin therapy many times. One afternoon he and Mrs. Pauling were visiting a friend who had a copy of "How To Live With Schizophrenia" on her coffee table. It had been given to her by a father of a patient who had recovered from her schizophrenia after five years of failure on standard treatment. He borrowed the book and spent that night reading it. He was surprised at the fact that we were using such high doses of vitamin B3 and vitamin C with no harm to our patients. He then decided not to retire and instead he became interested in opening up this new field.


Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine Vol. 9, No. 3, 1994

It was a logical extension of his previous interest in molecular medicine. In a speech at California Institute of Technology, May 16, 1938 {Science 87:563-566, 1938) he said, "Organic chemistry was developed into a great science during the nineteenth century, and it seems probable that all or nearly all its fundamental principles have now been formulated. There is, however, a related field of knowledge of transcendent significance to mankind which has barely begun its development. This field deals with the correlation between chemical structure and physiological activity of those substances, manufactured in the body or ingested in foodstuffs, which are essential for orderly growth and the maintenance of life, as well as of the many substances which are useful in the treatment of disease."

This quotation 30 years before his Science report shows hows far advanced he was in his understanding of human biology and medicine. He was also in contact with Dr. Irwin Stone and had been taking ascorbic acid himself, three grams daily, and had found that troublesome colds which had continued to bother him vanished. In a lecture he expressed his wish that he could live another 25 years to be able to witness the interesting changes that would be forthcoming. Dr. Stone had assured him he could achieve his wish by taking megadoses of ascorbic acid. Dr. Stone invented the term megadose as applied to vitamins, not I, as some believe. He did live more than 25 years after starting to take the ascorbic acid.

Having read our book, Pauling asked several physicians if they were aware of our work. They replied that it was all a lot of nonsense. However, Pauling always did his own thinking and investigation. He examined the literature, could not find reports that our methods had been repeated. There was not a single negative report. He therefore was finally convinced this was a field worth examining. In 1968 his Science report, "Orthomolecular Psychiatry" he delighted those of us who were practising megavitamin therapy, but excited a tremendous amount of hostility and criticism from the psychiatric profession.

The American Psychiatric Association tried to suppress the publication of any information about the value of high dose vitamins in the treatment of schizophrenia. They eventually called Dr. Osmond and me before their committee on ethics in 1971 because a California psychiatrist had complained about our paper describing the patient who recovered and whose father had indirectly introduced Pauling to our concepts. Had the APA had their way, Pauling might not have seen our work and his interest might have been mislaid or delayed. After a heated meeting the APA advised us they would let us have their decision in a few weeks. We have not yet heard from them.

Pauling became very supportive of the work being done by our colleagues. Within a few years we agreed that we were in fact practising Orthomolecular psychiatry and that we should officially adopt this term as representative of what we were doing. In 1973 Dr. Pauling co-edited a book called "Orthomolecular Psychiatry." The Committee on Therapy of the American Schizophrenia Association held one of their meetings in Dr. Ross Maclean's home in Vancouver. During this meeting, where there was a free exchange of data, it occurred to us that we had an immense amount of valuable material which ought to be made known to the world. We all agreed to contribute and Dr. David Hawkins agreed to undertake the role as editor. Later we asked Pauling if he would be the editor. He refused to be editor but agreed to be co-editor on condition that he see every manuscript and approve of it before it was published. He did not want to be only a name. We were delighted. This amazing book has sold well - except to psychiatrists - and contains an immense amount of essential information.

By now Pauling was fully identified with the new paradigm and with Orthomolecular psychiatry and medicine. In 1971 he established the Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine. There he and his colleagues began to study the relation between vitamin B3, vitamin C and schizophrenia, but he could not do any clinical research. He was our guest speaker at three annual Nutritional Medicine Today conferences, once in Vancouver and twice in Toronto. In Vancouver well over 1,500 people came to hear him.

A few years later he became interested in vitamin C's anti cancer potential. He had been invited to address the Ben May Institute which had recently been opened. During his address he suggested that vitamin C might he useful in the treatment of cancer. But one of his most severe critics, Dr. Victor Herbert, was there and was extremely critical of this statement. This challenged Pauling to examine the literature. He later met Dr. Ewan Cameron who was using vitamin C in treating his terminal cancer patients. Their book in 1979 was as major shock to the medical establishment. Had it been written by any other two people it would simply have been ignored.

This book was very exciting to me because by chance I has already seen what a combination of vitamin B3 and vitamin C had done to a few patients with terminal cancer. I had concluded that vitamin B3 was the main therapeutic factor but after reading the Cameron/ Pauling book realised that vitamin C was the key variable. Within a few years I began to receive large numbers of referrals from physicians in Victoria. By 1985 I had seen 41 patients. Most of them were terminal, having failed to respond to treatment, having relapsed, or were considered untreatable. I began to suspect that the patients on the regimen were doing better. I therefore examined carefully the outcome of all patients seen between 1978 and 1983. Eleven had not followed the program. Of this small group all were dead. They had lived 4.5 months after the day I first saw them. From the 26 who did follow the program 18 were alive and their mean survival was 16.2 months. I had decided to use the hardest, most reliable data available, i.e. the number of days alive after they were first seen.

Several years later I was at a Festschrift for Dr. Arthur Sackler. Pauling was there. He described his bitter debate with the Mayo Clinic and the New England Journal of Medicine. He was remarkably blunt and accused the Mayo group of lying about their study. The first morning I visited him in his motel room, next to mine. He had finished breakfast with Linus Jr. who had accompanied him to the meeting. I found him with a hand calculator doing some calculations. He told me he was recalculating electron orbitals. He added that he was able to understand them by doing his own calculations. I later told him that I believed he and Cameron were correct in their claim that vitamin C was helpful for the treatment of cancer. He asked me whether I intended to publish. I replied that I did not. I added that there was no point in preparing a report since no medical journal would accept it for publication. He then urged me to proceed with more careful follow-up studies on the much larger group I had seen by then, and that he would help me find a journal that would publish. I agreed that this would be a good thing to do. But when I arrived home I changed my mind. I did not relish the massive work that would be involved in doing a large scale follow up and I was not certain Pauling really was serious about this. I thought he was simply trying to be nice and friendly by his encouragement. I did nothing until two years later I received a letter from Linus in which he asked where the data was. I promptly apologized to him and said I would get to it immediately. I did a follow up on the first 134 patients I had seen from 1978 over a ten year interval.

In the meantime, Pauling had become interested in methods of calculating probable outcome using cohorts of patients based upon the Hardin Jones biostatistical method. He applied this method to the data I had sent him. My examinations of the data convinced me that the patients on the regimen had a much better outlook. His examination was much more detailed and showed a very significant improvement of the treated compared to the untreated group. We published the results of this and a subsequent study in this journal because even the Academy of Sciences, Washington, refused to publish Pauling's clinical papers. Pauling had been criticized severely after the two Mayo clinic reports were published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Pauling was incensed by these reports, not because they could not find any beneficial effect from their use of ascorbic acid, but because they claimed that they had exactly reproduced the earlier Cameron clinical studies when they had not done so. The journal would not accept a rebuttal paper by Cameron and Pauling. After almost a year, Pauling discussed this with a New York lawyer who wrote to the editor. Shortly after that Dr. Pauling received a letter stating that they had misplaced his file but were now informing him they were rejecting his rebuttal. Pauling had requested to be told immediately so he could, if he wanted to, submit his rebuttal to other journals, but he preferred to have it published in the same journal which had carried the two Mayo reports. The New England Journal of Medicine has been a powerful defender of the old paradigm, and generally refused to accept positive papers about megavitamin treatment.

Linus Pauling was a great teacher, a brilliant investigator, a sensitive and honest colleague, and a great humanitarian. The foundation he laid will never be forgotten and the work he started has a momentum so great that it can no longer be hindered or stopped. A scientist will be judged not only by the goodness of the work and by the opinion of his peers, but also by the quality of his enemies and critics. Professor Linus Pauling had innumerable friends and supporters from the lay public, from his co-workers and colleagues who knew him and his work well. There would be too many to list nor are they even all known. His critics were few. As listed in the news reports following his death they included: (1) Senator Joseph McCarthy, Senator from Wisconsin, Chairman of the Senate Permanent Committee on Investigations. He labelled him a communist. The State Department took away his passport in 1952. This probably cost him a Nobel Prize for discovering the three dimensional structure of the DNA molecule. (2) Joseph Stalin, considered him hostile to the Marxist views and condemned his theory of resonance of molecules as pseudo-scientific and vicious, as a example of the world hostile view. (3) Dr. Arthur Robinson, who had been his colleague and supporter, who accused him of suppressing his research because it did not agree with Pauling's view on ascorbic acid and cancer. At the 1979 meeting of the Canadian Schizophrenia Foundation held in Victoria, Dr. Robinson, invited to discuss the research being done at the Pauling Institute, instead launched an attack against Dr. Pauling. This was embarrassing to those at the meeting who did not have the slightest idea this is what he would do. He later accused Dr. Pauling of hurting his wife who had cancer by giving her vitamin C. (4) Dr. Matthias Rath has charged Pauling with stealing his ideas about vitamin C and its role in the genesis of arteriosclerosis. This suit has not been settled. (5) Dr. Victor

Herbert has enjoyed attacking Dr. Pauling for his views on vitamin C. He maintained that Pauling was psychotic about vitamin C, calling him delusional. On a national CBC TV program, Dr. Herbert maintained that Pauling had shortened his life by taking vitamin C. He added that had Pauling not taken any vitamin C he would have lived to age 105. He must have been privy to information not available to anyone else, but his criticisms were major spurs which persuaded Dr. Pauling to investigate the connection between vitamin C and the common cold and cancer. We should thank Dr. Herbert for having been such a stimulus. If he had not, perhaps a lot of the excellent work accomplished by Dr. Pauling might not have been done.

I have just returned from the September meeting in San Francisco sponsored by the Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine. The topic was "Therapeutic Potential of Biological Antioxidants". A few months before this meeting it was suggested to Dr. Pauling that he record a statement to this meeting in the event that he died before it was held. He refused to do so, firmly believing he would be able to deliver it himself. As I listened to the various speakers, from about twenty universities from USA and around the world, it was amply clear that a meeting of this type could not have been held if Dr. Pauling had retired at age 65 when he first contemplated doing so. Tribute was paid to Dr. Pauling by scientists from France, from Croatia, from South America as well as from the United States and Canada.

Literature Cited

1. Altschul R, Hoffer A & Stephen JD: Influence of Nicotinic Acid on Serum Cholesterol in Man. Arch Biochem Biophvs 54:558-559, 1955.

2. Hoffer A & Osmond H: How To Live With Schizophrenia. Revised Ed. Citadel Press, New York, N.Y. 1992.

3. Pauling L: Orthomolecular Psychiatry, Science 160: 265-271, 1968.
22 comments| 51 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 21, 1999
It is the BEST from the BEST ... and let me tell you why. I am taking vitamins in large dosages as prescribed in this book for well over ten years. When I began this regimen after reading this book, most of the Doctors and Nutrition Specialists were against such large dosage of vitamin intakes. Over the last ten years, not only have they changed their position, but most now believe that it is not harmful, and some even prescribe the higher dosages. In this book, this is exactly what Dr. Pauling suggested. I am happy and healthy, physically keeping very active. Throughout these years, I have been monitoring my health and I have found not a single problem associated with this higher dosages of vitamins. Whether I will live longer is certainly an open question, but I am certainly keeping better than most of my peers in my age group. I highly recommend this book.
0Comment| 51 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on September 19, 2006
Dale Carnegie used to say this to help people accept opposition. Inspite of all opposition Linus Pauling takes on the counter arguments and cuts right to the facts. This is brilliant. Somehow people who didn't make it to a Nobel Prize seem to feel elevated when they run down Pauling's research. They remind me of Mark Twain: "The researches of many commentators have already thrown much darkness on this subject, and it is probable, if they continue, we'll soon know nothing at all about it." Pauling's research is not the only realm where this takes place. And I see a lot clearer why his work is great work. The book tackles the foes with mere facts. I can't but admire him after reading this book. As a byproduct I received splendid ideas and direction on how to live longer and feel better.
11 comment| 51 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse