• Quality Assured
  • See Contact Page for details
  • Free GB Delivery on 10kg/£75+
  • Quality Assured
  • See Contact Page for details
  • Free GB Delivery on 10kg/£75+

Minerals, and it's All-Change

New data on synthetic chelated v. natural sulphates

5.6.21

For those of us who over the years have been hit round the head with feed and supplement brain-freeze, I think we can all agree on one thing – a horse has a very complex biological system, especially when it comes to … minerals.

I vividly remember back to around 2007/2008 when I took my horses barefoot, and the phrase 'mineral balancing' first hit our world. Those of us who were embarking on this new barefoot adventure experienced the trial that was blending our horses' minerals at home, or should I say attempting to. Back then I didn’t have a science-y cell in my body so all this science stuff was an absolute minefield – all those elemental mineral ratios and percentages gave me proper brain-ache. (Don't panic though - over the years since and with a ton of very intense studying, my brain's been retrained!).

But ohhh how I remember those obligatory lungfuls of mineral dust-cloud amidst kitchen-bombsite as each week I'd line up bagfuls of various powders in front of numerous jars and labels, then attempt to blend a weeks' worth of minerals for 5 horses - this is how we all started! In the beginning it was an almighty mess, but I soon cracked it, then intensively studied it, and finally back in 2013 our EquiVita range was created.

Cut to nearly a decade on, and these days we're all now clue'd up on the importance of mineral balancing, especially as new data comes out by the day from the latest research. Which means ... practices/methodologies have to change with the times. Of course this is no bad thing as we advance our knowledge on how to care for our horses. And as I type, right now is no exception, because the latest research is now relooking at what has been thought of as the gold-standard of minerals, namely chelated (chelation being the act of chemically bonding a molecule to an amino acid), which originally hit the headlines a few years back, and upon which all us equine supplement companies dove on to provide our clients with the very best product available.

Specifically relating to copper and zinc, this new, very complex, laboratory-made, chelated mineral kicked the former commonly-used 'sulphate' version into touch. Every equine company abandoned sulphates quicker than a quick thing, and chelated soon appeared on every product analysis against the copper and zinc entry, and occasionally magnesium, usually with the words organic, chelated, or BioPlex, which is the well-known brand of these chelated minerals. And there’s another one – selenium became organic selenium yeast.

BioPlex chelated minerals had two USPs (Unique Selling Points) - they were said to be more 'bioavailable', and they were 'organic'. The 'organic' USP punched a fair blow, suggesting that chelated was a more natural, uncontaminated product, and with the formerly preferred mineral type, inorganic sulphates, sounding chemical, synthetic and therefore rather undesirable.

Wrong! As it turns out, when it comes to minerals, the term 'organic' has a very different meaning to what we think of when it comes to plants/veg/fruit. Organic is actually the chemical, synthetic, made-in-a-lab version; 'inorganic' is the natural mineral form, coming directly from soil or rock. So, in this instance, organic v. inorganic is completely the reverse to our normal way of thinking, unless you're a chemist.

Then there was the improved bioavailability claim, and we'll get to this further on, but who didn't love the concept of a super-supplement getting into the body quicker? Allegedly ... 😉

So, let’s get stuck into the How & Why, and bring ourselves up to date with the current research. But first up ... before there’s an almighty outcry - it’s not that these chelated are good or bad minerals; this is all about the extra biological process that the liver has to go through to metabolise this synthetic form of mineral. As it turns out, it’s a right old faff, and makes the liver have to work much harder than it should, simply because it has to undo what humans have done to mess around with chemistry.

Let’s start at the beginning

In nature, minerals are usually in an inorganic form, while organic minerals are almost consistently synthetic because they simply don’t exist in nature. The two terms actually derive from chemistry itself - organic chemistry deals with everything built from carbon atoms (I know, horribly science-y, but stay with me - it gets more obvious); inorganic chemistry takes care of the rest.

Basically, inorganic is what we see in the wilds of the natural world, as mentioned above from rock or soil; organic is where scientists have tweaked it, and added – attached - something on to the mineral - in the case of copper and zinc it's an amino acid. There's no denying it's not awesomely clever, but either way, and here's the important bit - it's not the form that the body naturally recognises, and evolution, our old friend in our horse world, has optimised the horse's digestive tract to only recognise natural, inorganic, aka derived from nature, minerals.

And herein lies our problem. The horse’s gut only recognises the chelated mineral as an amino acid (a broken-down protein), and not the mineral itself which is hidden away within the protein, so it’s sent off to the liver as such. The liver then gets confused because it too only sees the amino acid as a protein and not a mineral, so metabolises it as a protein. So, these chelated, aka made-in-a-lab synthetic minerals, immediately add to the workload of the liver, which is already under a ton of toxin strain as it is.

This is it in a nutshell - the gut and liver don't recognise a chelated mineral as a mineral, full stop. But let’s dig a little deeper into what actually happens cos there’s even more to it.

It's all about the receptors

In the small intestinal (SI) wall membrane where the main digestion/absorption processes happens, there are special receptors to which minerals selectively tie. These receptors recognise what minerals it needs, i.e. they see copper, and if the copper stores are empty, they know to actively absorb and store the copper. If they say ‘No ta, we’ve got enough,’ the mineral stays in the digestive tract and passes on through to be eliminated with the poop at the end of the journey.

A wonderfully simple, biologically natural, in-built, self-selection process which takes what it needs and doesn’t overload itself with what it doesn’t need.

Now, back to those chelated (synthetic) minerals, bound to those amino acid proteins. The mineral gut receptors don’t recognise them because they’re not in their natural mineral form, so ignore them. Instead, they bind to the protein receptors, so the mineral therefore enters the bloodstream as a blind passenger on a protein.

Once it gets to the liver, the liver then finds that this amino acid is a defective protein because there’s a mineral in it where it doesn’t belong, so the liver now has to degrade the defective protein to get at the mineral, and send the debris off to the kidneys for elimination, so the mineral can be released back into the blood.

A right old round-the-houses pallava. If the horse's body needs the mineral it’s a lot of extra work for the liver, which is already working hard enough, and now with these minerals hidden in a protein, it has to work even harder.

But - it's not just a significant extra burden on the liver; the kidneys are now involved as well, as they also have to eliminate the mineral if it’s superfluous to requirements (because it's too late to find its way back to the gut system and out via the poop), plus there's extra urea -which is the waste product when amino acids are broken down - which isn't great news as higher urea levels disrupt the microbiome, and we all know about that! So a right old pallava indeed.

More bioavailable?

Meanwhile, back to the improved 'bioavailability', the key USP for BioPlex chelated minerals, and yes, it's true; chelation, the act of chemically bonding a molecule to an amino acid, increases bioavailability, as the aim is to mimic chelation in nature so the body recognises the mineral supplement as 'food' rather than a mineral rock molecule. The result is said to be increased absorption.

To quote from "Death by Default", by Doctor E Jackson Stockwell:

"If you were to take a metallic calcium molecule that is only 5% absorbable and coat it with a protein molecule, then introduce it into the digestive tract, the walls of the small intestine thinks it's a protein and absorption increases (because it thinks it's a 'food'). Chelated minerals = more bioavailability."

So now we're going to throw that theory under the bus, because ... bioavailability simply means the time it takes for absorption from the gut into the bloodstream. That’s it. No further. Only as far as the bloodstream. It has nothing to do with what happens thereafter, as in how well the body's cells can use the mineral; it only describes the increased levels of the mineral in the blood after the absorption intake of the mineral. Which I think we’ve already established isn’t what’s happening here.

Which links us nicely to selenium

Again we have the same scenario, except it’s a little more vital to get this one right as there’s a very fine line between safe selenium intake and selenium toxicity.

Selenium’s organic, synthetic form is known as selenium 'yeast'; its’ inorganic (and therefore natural) form is sodium selenite (this is what we include in our EquiVIta composition).

So, as before, the liver meets the tweaked selenium, usually attached to either cysteine or methionine amino acids. Gets a bit science-y now but hang in there as it all comes out in the wash, promise. Stand by your guns - here we go - Science Alert ...

Cysteine/methionine are usually bound to sulphur in a certain position, which stabilises the protein structure, but the protein can only work when this 3-dimensional structure is fixed, which is only completed by that sulphur bond. I know, I know ... read it again, rinse and repeat. And a bit like the chelated copper and zinc, when the liver doesn’t see the sulphur and sees selenium instead, it recognises it as … our new friend, an unstable protein!

Here's where selenium is now different to copper and zinc. The liver doesn't know what to do with these particular unstable proteins so sends them out to the cellular tissues, where it can take a year for proteins to be degraded - seriously, read that bit again - up to a year for proteins to be degraded. So they remain in the body, unused, for a very long time, which means there's now the risk of subclinical selenium toxicity bubbling under the surface.

How do we see the effect of this? Typically we'll see this in the hooves – we know both cysteine and methionine as important proteins to build hoof wall/keratin and body hair, but when you feed synthetic selenium it's been noted that the hoof capsule's quality changes. The hoof wall becomes weaker/softer, as well as being behind multiple hoof abscessing, white line disease, and a brittle mane/tail that breaks. And all because there’s selenium in the protein when it should be sulphur.

To conclude

So now we get to the potential backlash. Of course there will be some that say that liver stress hasn't been well documented, or that chelated minerals behave like inorganic minerals anyway, but if you look at Alltech's BioPlex promo video, it tells a very different story - https://www.alltech.com/bioplex - that the mineral is absorbed into the bloodstream as an amino acid, not an inorganic (naturally recognised mineral) - and the video also doesn't explain what happens after the bloodstream absorption.

As for selenium yeast, again some will say there's no more danger of toxicity than with inorganic because with selenium it's dosage dependent, and that subclinical (aka asymptomatic) toxicity is a meaningless claim unless toxic levels are confirmed by blood work. Thing is though, like BioPlex copper and zinc, the selenium’s bound in the protein, hidden like a Trojan Horse, so bloods won't show selenium levels, just the proteins.

For me this has to be a no-brainer, and with my EquiNatural hat on, the clue's in our name - we are nothing if not as natural as we can be, and this is no exception. Evolution has made the gut receptors only recognise the natural, inorganic mineral form and they know whether the body needs it or not, so absorbs the mineral straight into the bloodstream, which means evolution’s design for the horse’s natural gut:liver function operates as it’s meant to. Whereas ... synthetic chelated minerals mess with the body’s biological metabolism and confuse the whole process, putting extra work on the liver and kidneys, as well as risking dysbiosis in the microbiome.

And lest we forget, chelated minerals also provide a lot less mineral for your buck - they provide just 12% elemental mineral compared to 25% from the sulphate form, so we need to feed a much higher measure, and they're considerably more expensive. Sulphates go a lot further ...

To conclude, and in my humble opinion, In order to ensure a natural, evolved absorption of what's needed into the bloodstream to then be utilised directly by the cells, thereby avoiding stressing the already fragile equine metabolism, inorganic natural minerals in sulphate form have to be the better choice.

Learnings - Dr Christina Fritz / Feed Your Horses Fit workshop, 2021. If anyone fancies taking this course, it's all via the very lovely Sharon Blomsfeld, The Horse Therapist. Next dates Sept'21 - https://thehorsetherapist.ie/gb/workshops/233-advanced-course-feeding-horses-fit.html

Finally, my sincere thanks to Lorraine Dearnley, of Coppermead Equestrian, https://www.coppermead.co.uk/, for nudging me to do the course. Another example of genuine horse-folk all working together for the sake of the horse 😉

https://equinatural.co.uk/c/online-shop/mineral-solutions-equivita-and-vitacomplete