There are several types of methylcobalamin on iherb.com
Some with NO sweeteners of any kind.
You don't have to place the sublinguals under the tongue. You can swallow them. (in fact that is what happens anyway...you swallow your saliva eventually with the B12 in it).
The oral use is as good as the injectable. I have put up papers that have shown this to be accurate, in the past. Here are two examples:
Quote:
Am Fam Physician. 2009 Feb 15;79(4):297-300.Links
Evidence for the use of intramuscular injections in outpatient practice.
Shatsky M.
Providence Medical Group, Portland, Oregon, USA. mlsdo2000@comcast.net
There are few studies comparing the outcomes of patients who are treated with oral versus intramuscular antibiotics, corticosteroids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or vitamin B12. This may lead to confusion about when the intramuscular route is indicated. For example, intramuscular ceftriaxone for Neisseria gonorrhoeae infection and intramuscular penicillin G benzathine for Treponema pallidum infection are the treatments of choice. However, oral antibiotics are the treatment of choice for the outpatient treatment of pneumonia and most other outpatient bacterial infections. Oral corticosteroids are as effective as intramuscular corticosteroids and are well-tolerated by most patients. High daily doses of oral vitamin B12 with ongoing clinical surveillance appear to be as effective as intramuscular treatment. Few data support choosing intramuscular ketorolac over an oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug unless the patient is unable to tolerate an oral medication. For other indications, the intramuscular route should be considered only when the delivery of a medication must be confirmed, such as when a patient cannot tolerate an oral medication, or when compliance is uncertain.
PMID: 19235496 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
|
from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...ubmed_RVDocSum
Quote:
Fam Pract. 2006 Jun;23(3):279-85. Epub 2006 Apr 3.Click here to read Links
Oral vitamin B12 versus intramuscular vitamin B12 for vitamin B12 deficiency: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Butler CC, Vidal-Alaball J, Cannings-John R, McCaddon A, Hood K, Papaioannou A, Mcdowell I, Goringe A.
Department of General Practice, Cardiff University, Wales, UK.
BACKGROUND: Vitamin B(12) deficiency is common, increasing with age. Most people are treated in primary care with intramuscular vitamin B(12). Several studies have reported equal efficacy of oral administration of vitamin B(12). OBJECTIVES: We set out to identify randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence for the effectiveness of oral versus intramuscular vitamin B(12) to treat vitamin B(12) deficiency. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review searching databases for relevant RCTs. Outcomes included levels of serum vitamin B(12), total serum homocysteine and methylmalonic acid, haemoglobin and signs and symptoms of vitamin B(12) deficiency. RESULTS: Two RCTs comparing oral with intramuscular administration of vitamin B(12) met our inclusion criteria. The trials recruited a total of 108 participants and followed up 93 of these from 90 days to 4 months. In one of the studies, mean serum vitamin B(12) levels were significantly higher in the oral (643 +/- 328 pg/ml; n = 18) compared with the intramuscular group (306 +/- 118 pg/ml; n = 15) at 2 months (P < 0.001) and 4 months (1005 +/- 595 versus 325 +/- 165 pg/ml; P < 0.0005) and both groups had neurological responses. In the other study, serum vitamin B(12) levels increased significantly in those receiving oral vitamin B(12) and intramuscular vitamin B(12) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence derived from these limited studies suggests that 2000 microg doses of oral vitamin B(12) daily and 1000 microg doses initially daily and thereafter weekly and then monthly may be as effective as intramuscular administration in obtaining short-term haematological and neurological responses in vitamin B(12)-deficient patients.
PMID: 16585128 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
|
from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...&term=16585128
Why anyone today would choose invasive costly injections, over a simple oral method is beyond me. Those needles can inflame deeper tissues, and if misplaced can cause nerve damage!
Methyl injections are available, but have to be compounded at a higher cost.
__________________
All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.-- Galileo Galilei
************************************
.
Weezie looking at petunias 8.25.2017
****************************
These forums are for mutual support and information sharing only. The forums are not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified health care provider. Always consult your doctor before trying anything you read here.