Hi Andy.
No,this study is not outdated.Why should it be? It is even quoted by the LPI.The Rest is in my opinion a incorrect interpretation by the Paulus Linus Institute and not a fact.There isn't a word in "my" study that mentioned that there wasn't an adversely effect found.On the contrary this study mentioned crystal clear:
http://www.ajcn.org/content/37/4/553.abstractAlthough observed effects occurred within physiological ranges of normal values, this study confirms that a high ascorbic acid intake is antagonistic to copper status of men as has been demonstrated in laboratory animals.
So copper status is lowered within physiological ranges.
Another aspect to think of is that this studies were time limited,so it is possible that copper status fall below that ranges with a longer period of intake. It should be also clear that the reference range can not mean an optimal status for an individual. I think a reduction in enzyme activity by Vitamin C for example s not a point that should be ignored.
Serum ceruloplasmin activity was significantly reduced (p less than 0.01) at every data point throughout the ascorbic acid supplementation period
Ceruloplasmin is also an important part in Thalassemia,because of its role in preventing iron-induced oxidative damage.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21315066Andy,
You can see in the links i posted,that chelators are able to lower body stores which,in my opinion, are not able to be restored by a higher rate of absorption simultaneously in every case. You can see this effect even for Vitamin C. A higher rate of absorption must balance out the the depletion effects of the chelators. A significant balance in serum parameters must be recognized,but this is not the case. Only after 20 days you can recognize a significant increase of copper parameters after depletion to compensate this effect.
Furthermore there was a significant increase (p less than 0.01) in serum copper concentration 20 days after the supplementation period.
Ceruloplasmin has nothing to do with free copper. It represents the bound copper in the plasma. A significant reduction means inevitably a reduction in bound,maybe needed copper status in plasma and serum.
In the linked PDF Lyn Patrick,ND mentioned:
ALA is also able to form complexes with ferritin-bound iron both in vitro and in vivo.59 ALA has the ability to displace protein or vitamin C bound to iron and bind to Fe2+. DHLA can facili- tate the release of iron from the ferritin molecule and bind iron.41
http://www.thorne.com/altmedrev/.fulltext/7/6/456.pdf (p.456-457)
You can see the direct effect of bound,not free iron by Lipoic Acid here:
Molecular aspects of the removal of ferritin-bound iron by DL-dihydrolipoate.
Bonomi F, Cerioli A, Pagani S.
Dipartimento di Scienze Molecolari Agroalimentari, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy.
Abstract
The removal of ferritin-bound iron by the physiologic dithiol DL-dihydrolipoate was studied over the pH range 5.5-9.0. A novel method was devised for the determination of iron removal, making it possible to study the actual release of iron from ferritin, regardless of the oxidation state or complexation form. The overall iron-removal process appears to depend upon a balance between the deprotonation of the dithiol and the protolytic dissolution of the iron core inside the ferritin molecule. The amount of iron removed at equilibrium increases with the pH, at any of the dihydrolipoate/ferritin iron ratios tested. The formation of the binuclear iron-dithiol complex [Fe2(dihydrolipoate)3]-3 is not strictly required for iron mobilization, but it seems to affect the efficiency of the dithiol in iron mobilization by providing a stable complexation form for the released iron outside the ferritin protein shell. Comparison of the release of ferritin-bound iron by free and immobilized dihydrolipoate indicates that mobility of the dithiol is mandatory for the removal process to take place.
So we have two studys here,one says there is a negative effect on iron bound ferritin even in vivo as mentioned by Lyn Patrick and we have got the opposite. I don't know which one is right,but i know that we shouldn't discuss about effects on free metals only.
By the way, i have taken high doses of vitamin c for one year only and had a copper deficiency,including anemia within the anemia..;)