Question Regarding the Shelf Life of Mineral Supplements

  • Thread starter Thread starter scott123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Life
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the shelf life and stability of various mineral supplements, particularly in the context of long-term storage beyond five years. Participants explore the differences in stability between the mineral components and the organic compounds they are associated with, as well as the implications of storage conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that while minerals are generally stable, the organic components of mineral supplements may not be, potentially leading to a loss of potency over time.
  • One participant raises concerns about the stability of specific compounds, such as L-threose, which can undergo changes during storage due to isomerization.
  • Another participant emphasizes the ambiguity in the term "mineral," which can refer to both geological and nutritional definitions, complicating the discussion on stability.
  • There is mention of the potential for oxidation of organic components over time, which could affect the supplements' effectiveness.
  • Some participants discuss the challenges of measuring small doses of certain minerals, suggesting reliance on pre-packaged supplements for accuracy.
  • Expiration dates on supplements are mentioned as potentially arbitrary and influenced by marketing rather than scientific stability.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the stability of the organic components versus the mineral components of supplements. There is no consensus on the overall shelf life or the implications of storage conditions, indicating ongoing debate and uncertainty.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include the lack of specific data on the stability of each compound listed, the dependence on definitions of "mineral," and unresolved questions regarding the effects of storage conditions on the supplements' longevity.

scott123
Messages
12
Reaction score
1
I'm seeing somewhat conflicting advice for storing supplements long term (longer than 5 years). First, supplements are supposed to lose their potency with age, but, minerals are supposed to be stable for a very long time- possibly even indefinitely. Looking at this list:

  • magnesium glycinate
  • magnesium threonate
  • magnesium taurate
  • magnesium malate
  • copper glycinate
  • selenium glycinate
  • boron citrate
  • boron aspartate
  • boron glycinate
  • chromium nicotinate glycinate
  • lithium orotate
  • manganese bisglycinate
  • zinc gluconate
  • potassium citrate
are there any entries that jump out as being inherently less stable?

I'm going to be storing these in a basement- peak temp 80F, in plastic bottles (PETE). If damp is 10 and dry is 1, I'd give it a 5. Ideally, I'd like to be able to get 10 years out of them.
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
What are all of those used for?
 
@berkeman
They (1,2, or all) are added to filler, compressed into pills or stuffed into gelatin capsules and sold as mineral supplements.

Somewhat oversimplified answer:
One example: L-threose is a sugar. See the "L" ? That means it is a stereo isomer. R-threose is a completely different compound biochemically. "Flipping" handedness (L-threose -> R-threose) can occur in storage. Over time.

Enantiomers are non-superposable mirror images (R and L) of a single flavor of molecule. Human enzymes do not always play the same with both versions of an enantiomer. See the link below.

So the "mineral" atom is stable. Correct. The sugar molecule, amino acid or whatever may not be stable for years. Especially in home use.

Plus expiration dates may be required, and AFAIK you can put any reasonable future date on the label. Think arbitrary. Also expiration dates have a potential for increasing sales. You get to figure that one out.

Chiral chemistry has also given us non-caloric and low-calorie sweeteners (pop science):
https://www.wired.com/2003/11/newsugar/

A little more technical for chiral chemistry:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chirality_(chemistry)
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and BillTre
This borders self medication, which I guess was the reason @berkeman asked his question.

In general, as @jim mcnamara wrote, the organic part of all these compounds is not entirely stable, it will get slowly oxidized in time.

Part of the problem here is that the word "mineral" is used lousily. Sometimes it means mineral in geological sense, as in a "solid chemical compound with a fairly well-defined chemical composition and a specific crystal structure that occurs naturally in pure form", sometimes it means a mineral in a dietary or nutritional sense: "a chemical element required as an essential nutrient by organisms to perform functions necessary for life" (both definitions copied from wiki). And to make things even worse quite often the term is used as a shorthand to describe a compound used to deliver the element to organism.

So, while "minerals" in the first sense are in general stable (not all of them though, for example some require specific humidity conditions to survive), "minerals" in the last sense (as used by OP in this thread) can be quite sensitive and require short storage terms.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Bystander, jim mcnamara and BillTre
FWIW - some of those compounds are available in bulk packages. In that case you have to be able to measure a very tiny amount.

The US RDA for adults is 55 micrograms - The MW of Selenium Glycinate is 227.08g, so a putatively reasonable RDA dose would be less than 1mg. Good luck weighing that amount. The takeaway on this is you have to rely on pre-packaged supplements, which I think is what the OP is referring to. And yes, it is a borderline call about self-medication - which PF does not support.
 
jim mcnamara said:
@berkeman
They (1,2, or all) are added to filler, compressed into pills or stuffed into gelatin capsules and sold as mineral supplements.

Somewhat oversimplified answer:
One example: L-threose is a sugar. See the "L" ? That means it is a stereo isomer. R-threose is a completely different compound biochemically. "Flipping" handedness (L-threose -> R-threose) can occur in storage. Over time.

Enantiomers are non-superposable mirror images (R and L) of a single flavor of molecule. Human enzymes do not always play the same with both versions of an enantiomer. See the link below.

So the "mineral" atom is stable. Correct. The sugar molecule, amino acid or whatever may not be stable for years. Especially in home use.

Plus expiration dates may be required, and AFAIK you can put any reasonable future date on the label. Think arbitrary. Also expiration dates have a potential for increasing sales. You get to figure that one out.

Chiral chemistry has also given us non-caloric and low-calorie sweeteners (pop science):
https://www.wired.com/2003/11/newsugar/

A little more technical for chiral chemistry:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chirality_(chemistry)
It is D and L in the case of sugars. R goes with S for stereochemistry around a single carbon atom. For molecules with multiple carbon stereocenters, the various versions or isomers that are not superimposable and not mirror images are diastereomers.

The “shrubbery” like glycinate are there to aid bioavailability or absorption in the gut. In the case of Mg L-threonate, the mineral has an active organic compound that could isomerize which probably wouldn’t affect bioavailability but the activity of the organic acid would likely be lost.
 
@chemisttree - thanks for the corrections. I was oversimplifying too much it seems. Also did not mention oxidation.
 

Similar threads

Are some forms of calcium better than others?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
13K
Essential Fatty Acids: Nutrients in USDA Database
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K