|Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Chromium deficiency.
|WikiProject Medicine||(Rated B-class, Low-importance)|
- 1 The
- 2 My guess: this is fringe science
- 3 Further Information
- 4 Stress on the commercial patented picolinate and omission of the natural GTF is NPOV ad copy.
- 5 The therapeutic potential of glucose tolerance factor. PMID 7005627
- 6 ad copy moved here from main page (Image of patented proprietary picolinate form)
The whole "glucose tolerance factor" thing seems to have been abandoned as a serious line of enquiry many years ago. Why are we still giving it so much weight? This was the subject of an edit war in diabetes mellitus a while ago. JFW | T@lk 07:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
My guess: this is fringe science
The article assumes that a biological role for Cr is established, when in fact the so-called problem of chromium deficiency is probably a construct of the marketers of nutritional supplements. Biochemically, the topic appears to be either unimportant and flimsy, based on the lack of references. I cant find much on beneficial bio-Cr either.--Smokefoot (talk) 16:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
If Chromium is linked to how the body establishes cholesterol and has a significant ability to reduce the bad cholesterol (LDL), why if this not the first port of call with the doctors to reduce peoples high LDL, then they still have the contingency plan which is to give patients STATINS!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 17:29, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Stress on the commercial patented picolinate and omission of the natural GTF is NPOV ad copy.
Some reference needs be made in this article to Glucose Tolerance Factor (GTF) chromium. The natural form of chromium from yeast is better, cheaper, and not patented. There is a large NPOV advertising-like bias in favor of the commercial picolinate product by the complete omission of GTF.
The natural form of chromium from yeast (GTF chromium) is has better-established health effects, and is cheaper. GTF chromium is not patented, because it cannot be - it's a natural substance. Chromium Picolinate was an attempt to profit by patenting an analogue to the beneficial GTF chromium, and it was heavily promoted based on very thin research, and without mention of GTF chromium. I believe the FDA finally cracked down on the claims.
Glucose tolerance factor (GTF) in Wikipedia redirects to Chromium deficiency, which lays out the threadbare claims for picolinate without ever directly mentioning Glucose Tolerance Factor chromium. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 14:51, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
The therapeutic potential of glucose tolerance factor. PMID 7005627
The therapeutic potential of glucose tolerance factor.
Med Hypotheses. 1980 Nov;6(11):1177-89.
Glucose Tolerance Factor (GTF) is synthesized in vivo from absorbed dietary chromium, and acts as a physiological enhancer of insulin activity, binding to insulin and potentiating its action about three-fold. Since GTF is well absorbed orally, the development of sufficiently concentrated and stable supplementary sources of this agent may enable convenient and physiologically appropriate pharmacological modulation of insulin activity. A review of the numerous physiological actions of insulin suggests a number of therapeutic applications for GTF, in such diverse ailments as diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, reactive hypoglycemia, obesity, cancer, protein malnutrition or malabsorption, endogenous depression, Parkinsonism, hypertension and cardiac arrhythmias. GTF supplementation may also have value in preventive medicine.
The tone of this article is that chromium deficiency is very rare and only occurs when people are on TPN. There is even a line questioning if it is a nutrient. I would like to suggest that any benefit from a supplement will only be seen if the person is deficient. If the person is getting adequate amounts from food, then there will be no benefit from the supplement. This is true for all nutrients. So to see the effect of a chromium supplement, you have to find a population that is deficient. The place to look for that is in the subpopulation of people over age 65. I think if you go to any retirement home, at least 50% of the folks there will be deficient because they can no longer absorb it properly from the food. I am in that group. I was experiencing severe muscle weakness that was getting worse and worse. I tried boosting iron and B12 to no effect. Finally I found references that said chromium deficiency could cause the symptoms I was experiencing. I tried boosting my supplement dose up to 70%RDA and the problem was quickly fixed. Here is a ref that better captures the symptoms: www.newsmax.com/FastFeatures/deficiency-of-Chromium-signs/2010/11/id/371438 Please update this article so it takes into consideration older people that cannot absorb. I was not able to use this article as written to get the help that I needed.Bluesky2013 (talk) 13:32, 24 December 2012 (UTC)bluesky2013
I concur with the point made above, is somebody is not deficient in a mineral, they are clearly not going to benefit hence the negative comments based on 'healthy individuals' are irrelevant and of inappropriate tone. The purported benefit of these supplements is on those individuals with poor energy generation and/or insulin resistance hence clearly only people with these illnesses will benefit. Finally Chromium is not commonly tested, hence any statements about the commonality of otherwise are questionable. I was recently tested (not by my doctor) for intracellular minerals and was found to have minor Chromium deficiency despite it never having been tested.