Why do articles like this continue to push pseudo science about "damaging" free radicals and "helpful" antioxidants. Free radicals are damaging in the wrong places in the body but helpful in the right places e.g fighting infection. Although anti-oxidants help to mop-up free radicals, why do we assume that we don't already have sufficient anti-oxidants present in our body? Why do we also assume that by eating anti-oxidants that this will have a direct effect on free radical levels in our bodies? Anything that we eat first needs to be absorbed into the blood stream and passed through the chemical factory of the liver, substances are chemically altered by this process.
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
Ciaran Mc Caul
