MSN Home  |  My MSN  |  Hotmail
Sign in to Windows Live ID Web Search:   
go to MSNGroups 
Free Forum Hosting
 
Important Announcement Important Announcement
The MSN Groups service will close in February 2009. You can move your group to Multiply, MSN’s partner for online groups. Learn More
The Scientific Debate Forum.Contains "mature" content, but not necessarily adult.[email protected] 
  
What's New
  
  Disclaimer: Read this page first.  
  Links  
  Messages  
  General  
  Nutrition  
  "Mission Statement."  
  Why the "germ theory" is not science.  
  The Underlying Cause of "Disease."  
  The Scientific Method.  
  How dangerous are bacteria and viruses?  
  The Contributions of Hans Selye and others.  
  How direct effects are often ignored, and indirect markers used  
  Understanding "disease" at the molecular level.  
  Understanding disease at the molecular level, part II.  
  What the "common cold" can teach us about illness.  
  The AA connection to today's common "diseases."  
  How easy the key experiments would be to do.  
  The best practical diet and the explanation for it.  
  Fish oil quotes you might want to read  
  Where the "immune system" fits into this view of "disease."  
  How many 'scientific studies' violate the scientific method  
  Why you have to be careful with antioxidants.  
  Why Cancers today are more aggressive than those of the past.  
  The Latest Evidence.  
  Some studies worthy of note.  
  HSWC "in action."  
  How language can impede science.  
  How language impedes science, part II.  
  More on why "germs" don't cause "disease."  
  How a latent virus actually causes "disease."  
  A new report that "says it all."  
  The science "show" must go on?  
  Odds and ends  
  Some thoughts on a book by Robert Gallo.  
  Saturated fatty acids are the solution, not the problem.  
  It's stress, not "germs" that causes disease.  
  Epidemiology: Facts versus "factoids."  
  It's stress, not germs, part II.  
  The latest on "inflammation."  
  Why many nutritional claims make no sense  
  The use of hypotheticals in science.  
  What "viral infections" really do to the body.  
  What determines longevity?  
  An example of an anti-"saturated fat" study that is flawed.  
  A Rough Guide to a Gentle Diet.  
  A unified "AIDS" hypothsis without "HIV."  
  A unified "AIDS" hypothsis without "HIV." Part II.  
  Okay, so when is this diet going to kill me?  
  Scientific Debate Forum Pictures  
  The EFA Claim Was Refuted Long Ago  
    
  
  
  Tools  
 
All Message Boards : AA supplementation
Choose another message board
 
     
Reply
 Message 1 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknamercmdevil74  (Original Message)Sent: 6/8/2006 6:44 PM
I am a member of a bodybuilding forum where a new supplement is AA. It is recommended to take 1 250 mg pill 3-4 times daily. after reading over your site i posted my concern of this type of supplemenation and the designer responded the following:

'When resistance-trained people supplement AA the effect is very different from sedentary people consuming high levels of AA. In one instance (the latter) the excess AA may add fuel to the inflammatory process (which is in of itself more of a concern when measured in decades not days), which can be dampened by Omega 3's. In the other instance (X-Factor supplementation) we have trained individuals who constantly are using up and turning over their skeletal muscle AA stores.

Hopefully this will be the last time I have to say it before the data is release:

AA supplementation with resistance-training does NOT appear to be pro-inflammatory at all. Quite the contrary, it may PROTECT against inflammation. The result was surprising (though I suspect not so much for Phosphate), though we believe have a good understand of why."

Is there any validity to this at all.


First  Previous  20-34 of 34  Next  Last 
Reply
 Message 20 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameHansSelyeWasCorrectSent: 4/18/2007 10:29 PM
Well, there is some useful information there - it's just not interpreted well, at least for me (a non "body builder").  For example, they say PGs are created upon stress and that they result in "inflammation."  I am trying to limit "inflammation" so that it is quick and successful, but only occurs when absolutely necessary.  It appears that Mead acid is the only fatty acid (for humans) that accomplishes this.  However, for those doing "body building," this may be what they want (assuming they don't care about the long-term health consequences).  It's also true of losing weight, that is, one can release PUFAs from their cells by adopting certain diets, but this may be dangerous for long-term health (if it is not done correctly). 

Reply
 Message 21 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknametaka00381Sent: 5/3/2007 3:05 PM
I would really like to measure the long-term damage such as gene mutations in people supplementing with AA ... Just for those interested in what the manufacturer/reseller of AA supplement claims about its action and the underlying molecular mechanism here are some links:

SOURCE:
http://www.dextersportscience.com/products/molecularntr/xfactor.html
QUOTE: The search for the "X" began over a decade ago, when Llewellyn was seeking the missing connection between training and muscle growth. He was looking for the link, the signal, or biochemical event that started the anabolic cascade after the muscle fiber is stimulated and stressed from intense exercise. He dubbed this unknown factor the anabolic "X-Factor", and was determined to find it.
Miraculously, 35,108 hours of intense research and 5,832 published clinical studies later he uncovered the mysterious "X-Factor". The "X-Factor" is a biochemical released from the muscle tissue during intense exercise. This anabolic-response amplification nutrient Llewellyn discovered is called arachidonic acid. This discovery was so significant to muscle building that Llewellyn appropriately named the substance "X-Factor�?, and applied for a U.S. Patent on his work.

X-Factor�?is a powerful muscle building and definition-enhancing supplement that amplifies the muscle’s anabolic response to physical activity. X-Factor�?is the patented bio-chemical - arachidonic acid. By intensifying the release of the body’s main tissue-repair messengers (prostaglandins), X-Factor�?creates a powerful shift in post-exercise physiology, promoting muscle growth, strength increases, muscle endurance, and fat loss. X-Factor is a natural dietary supplement, and was approved a U.S. Patent on January 11, 2005 (# 6,841,573) for the purpose of increasing muscle mass in humans. UNQUOTE.

SOURCE: http://www.bodyconcept.com/family/1438/display.html
QUOTE: Arachidonic acid is considered an "essential" fatty acid because it is an absolute requirement for the proper functioning of the human body. In this case it is vital to the operation of the prostaglandin system. More specifically, it is the base material used by the body to synthesize a key series of hormones referred to collectively as dienolic prostaglandins (the major prostaglandins in mammals4). This includes the prostaglandins PGE2 and PGF2a, which are the primary focus of our investigation. The ability of the body to output normal levels of these prostaglandins is therefore directly dependent of the availability of this fatty acid. This is of crucial importance to the athlete, because among several other important physiological roles, prostaglandins are integral to protein turnover and muscle accumulation. They operate right at the very core of muscle growth, and are responsible for regulating the direct local (muscular) response to physical exercise. UNQUOTE.

SOURCE:
http://www.mysupplementstore.com/xfabymonu.html
QUOTE: To make things a little more difficult for athletes, both animal and human studies show that exercise lowers the content of arachidonic acid in skeletal muscle tissue . One such investigation divided human subjects into exercise and sedentary (inactive) groups, giving both the same standardized diet with an equivalent makeup of fatty acids and arachidonic acid (total food intake varied slightly between groups). The sedentary group noticed about a 5% increase in arachidonic acid concentrations during the course of the study, while the exercise group exhibited a moderate 7-8% depletion of this fatty acid. This was in spite of the fact that the exercise group actually consumed 13% more food on average compared with the sedentary group, which would account for a slightly greater total intake of fatty acids. Since dienolic prostaglandin synthesis is inextricably tied to the amount of available arachidonic acid, lower levels can only result in less arachidonic acid being release with the stretching of eccentric exercise, as well as less muscle-building PGF2a being synthesized to increase muscle protein synthesis. UNQUOTE.

SOURCE:
http://www.anabolicsbook.com/news_story_3.html

QUOTE: X-Factor�?Reduces Inflammatory Marker

Study suggests arachidonic acid may offer health-protecting benefit to exercising individuals.

June 17, 2006: Jupiter, FL.
Researchers at the Exercise & Sports Nutrition Laboratory in Baylor University have concluded their preliminary studies into the effects of arachidonic acid (AA) supplementation (X-Factor�? Molecular Nutrition) on resistance-trained males. Their results were presented at the International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) conference this past weekend in Las Vegas Nevada. One facet of this study looked at the effects of AA supplementation on Interleukin-6 (IL-6), a primary regulator of inflammation in the body. Analysis of the data showed that the X-factor group noticed a trend towards significant reductions in serum IL-6 after 50 days of supplementation.

In addition to being a central regulator of inflammation, Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is the primary stimulus for the hepatic production of C-reactive protein. IL-6 is associated with a number of adverse health conditions including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, autoimmune disorder, rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, osteoporosis and cancer. IL-6 is used as a primary serum marker of inflammation, and is an independent predictor of mortality in a number of serious illnesses. A decrease in serum IL-6 may represent a protective effect against systemic inflammation. UNQUOTE.

Reply
 Message 22 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameHansSelyeWasCorrectSent: 5/4/2007 6:09 AM
It's an interesting issue, though probably only of relevance to those who do hard physical work or intense exercise.  I would not doubt that a high omega 6 PUFA diet is considerably less dangerous for those who do such things, assuming that the diet is "good" in all other ways.  It's not a risk I'd want to take.  In any case, AA seems to speed up the healing process, which leads to things like scars, but the internal scars of things like weight lifting are what those who lift weight want, at least in terms of short term results.  Have you looked to see if there are studies on the overall mortality of those who do intense exercise versus the general public?  I did see a study about how certain kinds of exercise do damage to a particular part of the heart (one of the valves, I think), and there are also studies of the oxidative stress generated (you could probably find these on pubmed.com with a quick search).

Reply
 Message 23 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknametaka00381Sent: 5/5/2007 5:12 AM
I agree that intense exercise without proper regeneration is quite damaging to the overall health and longevity. However, humans have evolved to accommodate certain level of exercise so sedentary lifestyle with omega-6 PUFA diet is probably what's killing most people. Also, recently scientists compared the levels of oxidative damage in mole rats (20 years lifespan) versus mice (2 years lifespan) and found no differences. They concluded that rather the resistance to occasional bouts of intense stress may be what determines the species longevity. From that point of view low intensity high frequency/continuous exercise (e.g. gardening) may be the best strategy. Unfortunately some people like myself are confined to the chair and computer most time of the day or even several days in a row and then try to compensate by a vigorous workout in the gym. Combined with a poor climatic conditions/environment in a metropolitan city and some stupid countermeasures based on the "experts" recommendations like consuming omega-3 supplements is then a prescription for disaster.

As for bodybuilding I don't think AA catalyzes production of a scar tissue in muscles because scar tissue would not be functional but these people possess impressive power and physique. I would be really interested to see if weight training can deplete AA in the body (can AA or the omega-6 precursors be stored in adipose tissue?). The strategy in bodybuilding is to induce muscle "damage" by training followed by regeneration. The quicker the regeneration the sooner next training can begin and the faster the progress ... With the Mead acid in muscle cell membranes the regeneration would take longer though with less long-term damage side effects and this may be quite enough for natural levels of "exercise". The greatest deleterious side effects would be probably with omega-3 in the cell membranes. One thing which puzzles me is the mechanism how testosterone/anabolic androgens speed up the regeneration process. Young men with high testosterone levels or bodybuilders taking anabolic steroids can exercise with high frequency and regenerate not only muscles but also the connective tissue and cartilage incredibly fast. Could this be that testosterone affects the AA deposits in cells or is another mechanism at play?

Reply
 Message 24 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameHansSelyeWasCorrectSent: 5/6/2007 4:53 AM
My great grandfather, the one who lived to be over 100, was strong but short.  His son, who is now 93, is a little taller, lives a sendentary lifestyle, and does eat his share of omega 6 PUFAs (but hardly anything in the way of omega 3s).  He had a pacemaker put in nearly 20 years ago, has had hypertension for decades, and now has pain in his back and legs that can be severe.  I saw the mole rat story - Ray Peat pointed out that this animal has less oxygen available to it, which is of course necessary for oxidative stress.  Do you have a citation for it, so that I can see if it is the same story that I read?  If you look at the top killer "diseases" for humans, "heart disease" and cancer, and then look at the molecular-level mechanisms, you see that it's all about oxidized LDL (for heart disease) along with AA metabolites, in the vast majority of cases.
 
As to the muscle build up, you might want to think along the lines of cell stressors.  If cells are stressed, and there is "fuel," as well as the "building blocks" for new tissue available, there should be no "disease" in the young and healthy.  Ray Peat said something about testosterone and/or androgen having the potential to be helpful in this context, if I remember correctly.  Did you look on his site to see if he has anything on this subject?  He has more of a hormone and tissue understanding, whereas I find the molecular and cellular level to be easier to understand and more basic, at least in certain ways.

Reply
 Message 25 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknametaka00381Sent: 5/7/2007 2:22 AM
Here are some abstracts related to the mole rats. Maybe we should put this in a separate thread about the longevity strategies of different species?


Aging Cell. 2006 Dec;5(6):525-32.

Disparate patterns of age-related changes in lipid peroxidation in long-lived naked mole-rats and shorter-lived mice.

Andziak B, Buffenstein R.
Department of Biology, The City College of the City University of New York, New York, NY 10031, USA.

A key tenet of the oxidative stress theory of aging is that levels of accrued oxidative damage increase with age. Differences in damage generation and accumulation therefore may underlie the natural variation in species longevity. We compared age-related profiles of whole-organism lipid peroxidation (urinary isoprostanes) and liver lipid damage (malondialdehyde) in long living naked mole-rats [maximum lifespan (MLS) > 28.3 years] and shorter-living CB6F1 hybrid mice (MLS approximately 3.5 years). In addition, we compared age-associated changes in liver non-heme iron to assess how intracellular conditions, which may modulate oxidative processes, are affected by aging. Surprisingly, even at a young age, concentrations of both markers of lipid peroxidation, as well as of iron, were at least twofold (P < 0.005) greater in naked mole tats than in mice. This refutes the hypothesis that prolonged naked mole-rat longevity is due to superior protection against oxidative stress. The age-related profiles of all three parameters were distinctly species specific. Rates of lipid damage generation in mice were maintained throughout adulthood, while accrued damage in old animals was twice that of young mice. In naked mole-rats, urinary isoprostane excretion declined by half with age (P < 0.001), despite increases in tissue iron (P < 0.05). Contrary to the predictions of the oxidative stress theory, lipid damage levels did not change with age in mole-rats. These data suggest that the patterns of age-related changes in levels of markers of oxidative stress are species specific, and that the pronounced longevity of naked mole-rats is independent of oxidative stress parameters.
PMID: 17129214


Aging Cell. 2006 Dec;5(6):463-71. Epub 2006 Oct 27.

High oxidative damage levels in the longest-living rodent, the naked mole-rat.

Andziak B, O'Connor TP, Qi W, DeWaal EM, Pierce A, Chaudhuri AR, Van Remmen H, Buffenstein R.
Department of Biology, City College of the City University of New York, New York, NY 10031, USA.

Oxidative stress is reputed to be a significant contributor to the aging process and a key factor affecting species longevity. The tremendous natural variation in maximum species lifespan may be due to interspecific differences in reactive oxygen species generation, antioxidant defenses and/or levels of accrued oxidative damage to cellular macromolecules (such as DNA, lipids and proteins). The present study tests if the exceptional longevity of the longest living (> 28.3 years) rodent species known, the naked mole-rat (NMR, Heterocephalus glaber), is associated with attenuated levels of oxidative stress. We compare antioxidant defenses (reduced glutathione, GSH), redox status (GSH/GSSG), as well as lipid (malondialdehyde and isoprostanes), DNA (8-OHdG), and protein (carbonyls) oxidation levels in urine and various tissues from both mole-rats and similar-sized mice. Significantly lower GSH and GSH/GSSG in mole-rats indicate poorer antioxidant capacity and a surprisingly more pro-oxidative cellular environment, manifested by 10-fold higher levels of in vivo lipid peroxidation. Furthermore, mole-rats exhibit greater levels of accrued oxidative damage to lipids (twofold), DNA (approximately two to eight times) and proteins (1.5 to 2-fold) than physiologically age-matched mice, and equal to that of same-aged mice. Given that NMRs live an order of magnitude longer than predicted based on their body size, our findings strongly suggest that mechanisms other than attenuated oxidative stress explain the impressive longevity of this species.
PMID: 17054663


J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006 Oct;61(10):1009-18.

Oxidation-resistant membrane phospholipids can explain longevity differences among the longest-living rodents and similarly-sized mice.

Hulbert AJ, Faulks SC, Buffenstein R.
Department of Biology, City College of The City University of New York, Convent Ave. at 138 St., New York, NY 10031, USA.

Underlying causes of species differences in maximum life span (MLS) are unknown, although differential vulnerability of membrane phospholipids to peroxidation is implicated. Membrane composition and longevity correlate with body size; membranes of longer-living, larger mammals have less polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA). We determined membrane phospholipid composition of naked mole-rats (MLS > 28.3 years) and similar-sized mice (MLS = 3-4 years) by gas-liquid chromatography to assess if the approximately 9x MLS difference could be explained. Mole-rat membrane composition was unchanged with age. Both species had similar amounts of membrane total unsaturated fatty acids; however, mice had 9 times more docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). Because this n-3PUFA is most susceptible to lipid peroxidation, mole-rat membranes are substantially more resistant to oxidative stress than are mice membranes. Naked mole-rat peroxidation indices, calculated from muscle and liver mitochondrial membranes, concur with those predicted by MLS rather than by body size, suggesting that membrane phospholipid composition is an important determinant of longevity.
PMID: 17077193


Mech Ageing Dev. 2006 Aug;127(8):653-7. Epub 2006 Apr 18.

Extended longevity of wild-derived mice is associated with peroxidation-resistant membranes.

Hulbert AJ, Faulks SC, Harper JM, Miller RA, Buffenstein R.
Metabolic Research Centre, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia. [email protected]

Two lines of mice, Idaho (Id) and Majuro (Ma), both derived from wild-trapped progenitors, have previously been shown to have extended lifespans in captivity when compared to a genetically heterogenous laboratory line of mice (DC). We have examined whether membrane fatty composition varies with lifespan within the species Mus musculus in a similar manner to that previously demonstrated between mammal species. Muscle and liver phospholipids from these long-living mice lines have a reduced amount of the highly polyunsaturated omega-3 docosahexaenoic acid compared to the DC mice, and consequently their membranes are less likely to peroxidative damage. The relationship between maximum longevity and membrane peroxidation index is similar for these mice lines as previously observed for mammals in general. It is suggested that peroxidation-resistant membranes may be an important component of extended longevity.
PMID: 16620917


Exp Gerontol. 2007 Mar 3; [Epub ahead of print]

Extended longevity of queen honey bees compared to workers is associated with peroxidation-resistant membranes.

Haddad LS, Kelbert L, Hulbert AJ.
Metabolic Research Centre, and School of Biological Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia.

In the honey bee (Apis mellifera), depending on what they are fed, female eggs become either workers or queens. Although queens and workers share a common genome, the maximum lifespan of queens is an order-of-magnitude longer than workers. The mechanistic basis of this longevity difference is unknown. In order to test if differences in membrane composition could be involved we have compared the fatty acid composition of phospholipids of queen and worker honey bees. The cell membranes of both young and old honey bee queens are highly monounsaturated with very low content of polyunsaturates. Newly emerged workers have a similar membrane fatty acid composition to queens but within the first week of hive life, they increase the polyunsaturate content and decrease the monounsaturate content of their membranes, probably as a result of pollen consumption. This means their membranes likely become more susceptible to lipid peroxidation in this first week of hive life. The results support the suggestion that membrane composition might be an important factor in the determination of maximum lifespan. Assuming the same slope of the relationship between membrane peroxidation index and maximum lifespan as previously observed for mammal and bird species, we propose that the 3-fold difference in peroxidation index of phospholipids of queens and workers is large enough to account for the order-of-magnitude difference in their longevity.
PMID: 17446027

Reply
 Message 26 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknametaka00381Sent: 5/7/2007 2:40 AM
SOURCE: http://bio.com/newsfeatures/newsfeatures_research.jhtml;jsessionid=D4UTQR2L2EDJJR3FQLMSFEWHUWBNQIV0?cid=22500003

Naked Mole-rat Unfazed by Oxidative Stress

10/09/06 -- The long-lived naked mole-rat shows much higher levels of oxidative stress and damage and less robust repair mechanisms than the short-lived mouse, findings that could change the oxidative stress theory of aging.

The new study comparing the naked mole-rat, which has a life span of 28 years, and the mouse, which has a lifespan of three years, will be presented Oct. 8 at The American Physiological Society conference, Comparative Physiology 2006: Integrating Diversity. The results fly in the face of the oxidative stress theory of aging, which holds that damage caused by oxidative stress is a significant contributor to the aging process.

Under this theory, naked mole-rats should be better at preventing or repairing oxidative stress than their much shorter-lived cousin, the mouse. The study, "High oxidative damage levels in the longest-living rodent, the naked mole-rat," was done by Blazej Andziak and Rochelle Buffenstein, of The City College of New York, Timothy P. O'Connor, of Weill Medical College of Cornell University, and Asish P. Chaudhiri and Holly Van Remmen of the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio. The study was presented during a poster session on October 8.

Don't toss the oxidative stress theory of aging out the window just yet, but prepare to modify it, said Buffenstein, the senior author. Her team suspects that the naked mole-rat's longevity stems from its ability to defend against acute bouts of oxidative stress. That is, the kind of oxidation that happens because of an unusual occurrence rather than the kind that happens as a result of normal aerobic respiration.

For example, when hydrogen peroxide is added to a culture containing naked mole-rat fibroblast cells, they remain viable and appear to repair the acute damage more rapidly than shorter-lived animals, explained Buffenstein.

What is old age?

We know that all organisms age and die. It's such an inevitable course of events that most of us spend more time thinking about how to hide the wrinkles and gray hair than we do about what our cells are actually doing to usher us to the end. Physiologists are looking at molecules and cells to understand this process.

One way to look at aging is to compare closely related organisms with different life spans. That's why it made sense to compare mole-rats and mice: They're the same size and they're rodents, but the mole-rat lives to 28 years, about nine-times longer than the mouse.

"Mole-rats must have something happening at the biochemical level to allow them to do this," said Andziak, the study's lead author. Specifically, he wanted to see if oxidative stress could explain the difference.

Oxidative stress occurs during metabolism when oxygen (O2) splits into single oxygen atoms, known as free radicals. These oxygen atoms may circulate by themselves, or combine with other atoms and molecules to form reactive oxygen species (ROS). ROS can damage DNA, lipids and proteins thus impairing normal cellular function. Antioxidants help to neutralize ROS, thus restricting the potential of ROS to damage biological molecules.

Mole-rat has more oxidative stress

The study compared two-year-old naked mole-rats to four-month-old mice. The researchers chose those ages so that the animals would be equivalent ages relative to their maximum lifespans, Andziak said.

First, the researchers compared the ratio of reduced glutathione, an antioxidant, to oxidized glutathione. As the body uses up its reduced glutathione to fight oxidative stress, the pool of oxidized glutathione increases. This ratio of reduced to oxidized glutathione is thus an indicator of oxidative stress: the greater the ratio, the less oxidative stress has occurred. The oxidative stress theory predicts that in naked mole-rats this ratio will be higher than in mice.

When the researchers measured this ratio in the liver, they found that the opposite was true. Mole-rats had less reduced glutathione and thus a lower ratio, indicating the mole-rat experienced much more oxidative stress. These results fit with the findings of a previous study in which Andziak found that naked mole-rats did not have superior antioxidant capacity when compared to mice. Mole-rats had much lower activity of the ubiquitous antioxidant enzyme, cellular glutathione peroxidase.

Mole-rat shows greater oxidative damage

The researchers next looked at how much damage the oxidation had caused. It is possible, they reasoned, that the mole-rat suffers greater oxidative stress, but its physiology had somehow prevented damage from occurring.

The researchers measured oxidative damage in lipids, DNA and proteins and found that naked mole-rats showed much greater levels of damage to each of these biological molecules, in all tissues assayed, when compared to mice. The study found multiple signs of lipid damage: The level of isoprostanes found in the urine was 10 times higher in the naked mole-rat, the level of malondialdehyde in liver tissue was twice as high and isoprostane levels in heart tissue was two-and-a-half times the level of the mice.

The researchers found significantly more protein damage in the kidney and in the heart. DNA damage was greater in the kidney and liver.

"All of the classical measures of oxidative stress are higher in the mole-rat," Andziak concluded. "Given that naked mole-rats live an order of magnitude longer than predicted based on their body size, our findings strongly suggest that mechanisms other than attenuated oxidative stress may explain the impressive longevity of this species."

Next steps

The next step is to determine how the mole-rats manage to live with the damage caused by oxidative stress. Buffenstein said she suspects that the mole-rat is able to fend off the occasional oxidative insult that can occur, and that may be more important than what happens with the steady-state levels of oxidative stress that result from normal metabolic activity.

Buffenstein theorizes that the naked mole-rats in her laboratory suffer higher levels of oxidative stress than they would in their natural underground habitat, where they encounter much lower levels of oxygen. But this exposure at an early age may provide some protection against acute oxidative stress and may be of considerable importance in their resistance to bursts oxidative stressors throughout their lives, she said.

"The naked mole-rat, with its surprisingly long lifespan and remarkably delayed aging, seems like the perfect model to provide answers about how we age and how to retard the aging process," Buffenstein said. "This animal may one day provide the clues to how we can significantly extend life."

Reply
 Message 27 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameHansSelyeWasCorrectSent: 5/7/2007 3:59 AM
After reading the first two abstracts, my thought was what the third study found.  That is, the long-lived animals are more resistant to omega 3 and/or 6 PUFA tissue incorporation.  As I said, if you look at the leading killers of humans in "advanced" nations, it's cancer and heart disease.  Heart disease is caused by oxidized LDL, which gets oxidized because it's got too much omega 6 PUFAs in it.   Most cancers are caused by an irritation, leading to AA metabolites being generated.  Free radical damage is probably overemphasized by some scientists; they are not considering the "inflammatory" nature of the "disearses" that kill most people.  I was saying to someone the other day that if you look at people who probably did a lot of drugs when they werre younger, that their skin looks different from most peoples.  My guess is that at least some of their tissues have sustained tremendous free radical damage, yet they are still alive, while someone live my grandfather (on the other side of the family) died in his early 60s of "heart disease" during the great "epidemic" (early 1960s).  He did not drink to excess or do anything else really unhealthy, except for his diet (he ate too much - a great deal of meat, and lived a sedentary life). 
 
As to starting a new thread, I would prefer to keep it here, since I don't know that there's much more to say.  I'd like to see more Mead acid studies, but that requires feeding animals or people a different diet for quite a while (or raising the animals on a diet that is not considered "normal").  Otherwise, my reading of the evidence as a whole is that much of the ill health in "advanced" nations is the result of AA in peoples' cells, rather than the natural Mead acid.

Reply
 Message 28 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknametaka00381Sent: 5/7/2007 9:54 AM
It seems that not all AA metabolites are damaging - e.g. here in Wikipedia EETs look like the good guys:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epoxyeicosatrienoic_acid

An interesting thread about the omega-3 and lifespan has been posted on the life-extension newsgroup but it isn't of much relevance to the "modern nutrition" induced diseases so I am posting just the link here:
http://tinyurl.com/fppsu

Reply
 Message 29 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameHansSelyeWasCorrectSent: 5/8/2007 4:56 AM
Think about it at the molecular level.  If the AA metabolite is very reactive, that's very bad.  LTB4 has been described as an incredibly powerful chemoattractant, for example.  My guess is that the "good" metabolites are either just not as bad as ones like LTB4, or else they are like Mead acid metabolites, and they are less powerful because there is better antioxidant protection (for whatever reason) and/or less oxidative stress.  All this is contextual; in other words, if you had a gaping wound and bleeding profusely, you might want LTB4.  However, I've found that my nosebleeds now clot much quicker than before, or else it may be that the clot is rubbery, and so does not break up easily.  In order to know for sure, all kinds of experiments would need to be done, controlling for all these molecules, and that's not likely to be done any time soon.  In the meantime, one must look at the evidence and try to make sense of it as a whole.

Reply
 Message 30 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknametaka00381Sent: 5/13/2007 7:34 AM
In my local newspaper there is a big article about fish oil stimulating muscle growth by increasing insulin sensitivity not only in cattle but also in bodybuilders. The "discovery" was made by the research team leader Dr. Carole Thivierge. She has a homepage here:
http://www.rowett.ac.uk/divisions/omh/c_thivierge.html
From my own experience I can say this is a total bullshit, perhaps she should try some serious weightlifting program while supplementing with 5g of fish oil daily for 2 years ...

I know there are many articles about the omega-3s increasing insulin sensitivity and curing diabetes. I don't know the molecular mechanism behind this but exercise alone (or fasting) greatly increases insulin sensitivity so this is enough for me.

Reply
 Message 31 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameHansSelyeWasCorrectSent: 5/14/2007 3:40 AM
There's no reason why insulin should not be sufficiently "sensitive" in the first place.  My guess is that they are assuming (without even knowing it) that the people who come to their offices with diabetic issues are having problems with AA metabolites, and their sense of that is something along the lines of "the body is just breaking down with age," even when the patients are young.  Since the fish oil inhibits AA metabolization, it will look "beneficial" in short-term studies.  The idea that insulin loses its "sensitivity" for no reason is just ridiculous, especially for people who are middle-aged or younger.  I tell people to eat only three meals a day, spaced out at least 3 hours apart, and to eat nothing with calories in between meals.  In that way, the insulin will remain "senstive," so long as the diet is low in unsaturated fatty acids and sufficient in high-quality protein.  There is no need for a "supplement" to prevent insulin from losing its "sensitivity," so long as you know what and how to eat, from my reading of the evidence.

Reply
 Message 32 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknametaka00381Sent: 7/25/2007 9:56 AM
Some more on the AA supplement:

SOURCE: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=2281231

X Factor FAQ (version 4/14/07)
X Factor FAQ 4/14/07 (subject to revision later)

1. What is X factor

X factor is the name for arachidonic acid, an essential fatty acid normally stored in cell membranes that is responsible for signaling adaptive changes in response to stress and other stimuli.

2. What does it do?

Prostaglandins from X factor are intimately involved with protein synthesis and hypertrophy after exercise (1,2) . Arachidonic acid also is correlated with improved insulin sensitivity (3), satellite cell activation and proliferation (4), cell regeneration and repair (5) , and increases Nitric oxide formation in the muscle being trained. Other benefits include possible long term improvement in vascularity via stimulation of angiogenesis (6) in muscles being trained, PPAR beta/delta agonist properties (7) (increase Uncoupling proteins for a thermogenic effect), and inhibition of stearoyl-CoA desaturase-1 (8) (which is strongly correlated with negative partitioning in humans therefore paving the way for body composition improvement). On top of all this it inhibits resistin (9) which may have further benefits as far as insulin control goes.

3. How does it accomplish this?

When the muscle is stimulated by anaerobic metabolism (ie, muscle contraction) arachidonic acid is released from the muscle cell wall by phospholipase A2. Once released arachidonic acid interacts with the COX-2 enzyme forming prostaglandins such as PGF 2 alpha and PGE2. It is these prostaglandins that instruct the cell to increase protein synthesis and other beneficial responses to exercise.

4. Are there other reasons I should take it?

Muscle is not just protein and amino acids. There actually is a plasma membrane cell wall that needs to surround the contractile protein. The type of fatty acids (preferably essential fatty acids like x factor) determine the responsiveness of the skeletal muscle as unit to various signals. That is why this product is so "core" to the muscle building process and has effects above and beyond what protein can do.
.

5. Is it safe?

Yes, as a matter of fact it is a component of Baby food. Studies using up to 1.5 grams of Arachidonic acid per day for 50 days have shown no ill effects. (10,11,12) Our own study at one gram per day also showed no ill effects. (13) As a matter of fact x factor showed very strong trends at reducing an important inflammatory marker predictive of total mortality. The marker reduced was IL-6 while corn oil (another omega 6) meanwhile had no effect (14) So X factor may very well have a protective benefit.


6. Are their side effects?

Some people notice sore joints, headaches, insomnia. Others haven't notice any side effects.

7. What about these "bad prostaglandins" I have been hearing x factor makes?

"Bad prostaglandins" stimulate and lower cAMP and make platelets sticky when anaerobic metabolism is stimulated (like when a blood vessel cuts cut). In someone active and training "anaerobically"they are useful for improving glycogen synthesis (directly in the muscle) Why? Because cAMP phsophorylates glycogen synthetase and thus inactivates it. So you definitely need some "bad" prostaglandins if you are physically active and want to maximize glycogen synthesis.

Now.....

In someone sedentary they don't have active muscles so in general they are anaerobic everywhere due to the hyperinsulinemia. So pretty everywhere in there body is getting hit hard (which is the opposite in someone training.) That is in general the paradox here and this probably explains why in someone training X factor lowers IL-6 ( which comes from hyperinsulinemia )


8. How much do I take and when?

A: You take 1000mg the arachidonic acid (found in X factor) in divided doses. Each capsule contains 250mg AA. Ideally this total daily dose should be divided up into 3-4 doses during the day. Because insomnia has been reported we don't recommend you take the last dose close to bedtime.

9. Is it best to take x-factor with food or on an empty stomach or doesn't it matter?

A: Most likely taking it with food (particularly some fat) results in better bioavailability.

10. Can I take higher amounts of it for periods shorter than 50 days?

You could, but whether it works better or not is unknown. We ask that your first cycle is at the recommended 750-1000mg dose level for 50 days and if you respond well allow you to consider up to 1500mg for 50 days or 1000 mgs for 75 days as an option.

11. Anything I should avoid while taking x factor

NSAIDS are to be ideally avoided due to their direct effects on inhibiting the COX enzyme (central to the mechanism by which x factor works). However it may be that taking NSAIDS at certain times is worse than others with respect to muscle building. Certainly if you have a headache and are known to respond to NSAIDs you could probably take the medication without interference.


12. Do I need to eliminate everything that is anti-inflammatory?

No. The only anti-inflammatory in the literature (so far) known to have adverse effects on x factor's benefit in skeletal muscle are NSAIDs (or its herbal equivalent white willow bark) due to their direct effect on the COX enzyme. Indirect anti-inflammatory products (which many products claim as a side benefit) most likely have no effect on what x factor does. Actually some of the benefits of arachidonic acid appear to be through reduction of systemic oxidative stress/insulin levels (provided the muscle is active) which ironically may actually reduce COX-2 in non muscle tissues. So all this stuff can be in the same ballpark.


13. Do I need to avoid fish entirely?

You should still eat fish. In fact low dose supplementation of fish oil (2-3 capsules) does not appear to affect the effectiveness of X factor. The good thing is that in that in some cases the clinical benefits of fish oil appear to be directly tied to increases in cell membrane arachidonic acid. This is great news for the future of this supplement.


14. Are there any particular foods I should be eating to make the product better?

Focus on nutrient dense whole foods (basically your typical Body building diet) that have various minerals/vitamins/anti-oxidants in them. Possibly magnesium rich foods may hold some promise for some (spinach, brown rice, etc)

15. Can I use creatine with x factor?

You should always use creatine with x factor (whether it is CEE or some other type of creatine really doesn't matter)

This is because arachidonic acid is involved with skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity (2) and may very well be involved with the insulin secretion curve as well. So you might as well take advantage of this opporunity and use creatine (since its transported by insulin) otherwise you waste a chance at some extra synergy.


16. How about Nitric oxide products? Can I use those with x factor?

Yes! As a matter of fact blocking Nitric oxide (with a nitric oxide inhibitor, L-NAME) affected protein synthesis in the same way as taking NSAIDS did. Nitric oxide also uses COX-2 for its effects on protein synthesis (2)

Some people report the pumps being pretty heavy with X factor when combined with NO products so you should only add one at a time to see how it affects you first.


17. Any type of workout program that works best with x factor?

X factor works well with any training program. However, you may occasionally want to train muscle groups from different angles to tap into some of the AA in the more rested fibers. According to a couple of abstracts, a greater PGF 2 alpha response (therefore more anabolic) was found in fibers that were previously more rested/stabilized. (15)


18. Is there anyone who should not take X factor?

Anyone with a inflammatory condition or family history of inflammatory condition should not take x factor.

19. How much time off between cycles?

Take as much time off as you were on. So if you took x factor 50 days then take at least 50 days off.

20. Can I use anti-oxidants with x factor?

That would be a good idea. As a matter of fact beneficial PGF 2 alpha responses seem to be correlated with glutathione and resting cell membrane stability. (16)

21. Is PCT required?

No. Arachidonic acid does not cause any type of rebound effect upon discontinuation.


22. Is it safe for women to take?

Yes. Arachidonic acid has been taken by men and women for thousands of years. In fact, wild cattle and pigs have approximately 10-12 times more Arachidonic acid (per gram of fat) than the domesticated cattle we are used to eating today. (17)

23. Will x factor cause cancer?

No the ingredient in x factor is not a carcinogen but like other non cancer causing growth promoting agents could be used by an existing tumor

In one study involving the prostate arachidonic acid was observed to cause growth through the PI3K mechanism (PI3K inhibitors blocked growth promoting effects) (18)

PI3K is also the mechanism by which IGF-1 works. So one of the ways x-factor acts as an anabolic is similar to IGF-1.

Other studies have shown stimulation of protein synthesis by arachidonic acid through stimulation of the beta 2 receptor (19, 20) . But stimulation of beta 2 receptors doesn't cause cancer in non cancerous tissues.

Testosterone effects on cancer are analogous to the PI3K and beta 2 mechanisms I just mentioned. It doesn't cause cancer either, but cancer cells will make use of it as a growth promoting agent.

Reply
 Message 33 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameHansSelyeWasCorrectSent: 7/25/2007 9:57 PM
In the future, you can just cite the web site, rather than copying it all here. As I said, intense exercise is not something I consider healthy - it changes your biochemistry. It may make the person better able to handle AA than sedentary people, but most sedentary people are not living healthy live to begin with, so it would be hard to tell. I'd like to see some evidence on mortality among people who work out intensely and eat a typical diet. Within the next 20 years or so, such information will likely be available. The idea that corn oil is okay is laughable, as it turns on transcriptions factors and interferes with normal biochemistry more generally.

Reply
 Message 34 of 34 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknametaka00381Sent: 6/28/2008 9:48 AM
Interesting article about the effects of AA supplementation in the resistance training. The effects are marginal but they are using the corn oil for control. Why not to use something like coconut or olive oil or directly the Mead acid??? Will the "experts" ever learn?

http://www.jissn.com/content/4/1/21

First  Previous  20-34 of 34  Next  Last 
Return to All Message Boards