sdyer@bbncc5.UUCP (Steve Dyer) (08/24/85)
[This is an exerpt of a message from a read-only net.med participant.]
Steve, I'm not sure you're involved or interested in this stuff, but
I thought perhaps it added to the discussion over vitamin names
and you might post it if you like. (I've tried to keep it very
non-technical).
With regards to vitamin naming history, 'vital amines', as these
micronutrients were first thought to be got coined by Funk into
the term vitamines. In the search for factors influencing
reproduction, fat soluble substances were distinguished. Very
nearly simultaneously factors were discovered that influenced
bone integrity (vit D) and growth. The nomenclature started out
with factor A, B (which was water soluble), C (present vitamin C),
D, E, F and so on. Vitamin B turned out to be
several things, hence Vitamin B1, B2, B3, etc. Many of the early
factors however turned out to be the same as others or not vitamins
at all. We are left with the fat soluble vitamins A,D,E and K and
the water soluble vitamins C and B-complex. The B-complex vitamins
have specific names but some (B1, B2, B6 and B12) still retain
their 'number-names' for much of the general public.
On another subject, you might clarify people's confusion over 'sugar',
glucose vs fructose vs sucrose.
Sucrose is a disaccharide composed of 2 monosaccharides, one molecule
of glucose and one of fructose. Glucose could be thought of as
'blood sugar' and sucrose as 'table sugar'.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dale M. Forsyth | Assoc. Prof. | Purdue University Animal Sciences
{ihnp4|decvax|icalqa|purdue|uiucdcs|cbosgd|harpo}!pur-ee!pucc-h!qqc
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
--
/Steve Dyer
{harvard,seismo}!bbnccv!bbncc5!sdyer
sdyer@bbncc5.ARPA