I looked at that list and many flags raised up from prior reading. I use none of them, but...some I may. It is an interesting list. Speaking of interesting, I was the one that brought the attention of the board to DPA and went through a thread of much trashing that is starting to resemble this one's direction regarding the "cute animals".
So I guess I will go right on down the line and I'd love to hear your response as many of these I've looked at and some I've passed on (a few due to responses from other posters on this very board).
1.)Acarbose - It doesn't block glucose or fructose and the undigested carbohydrates goes further down the GI tract and ferment as they are worked on by bacteria, causing horrific gas as I understand it. This drug was dropped from marketing in our country due to these side effects and the carb-heavy diet we have. A low carb diet can find some success with this drug, but at that point (and if you're not NIDDM) why use it?
2.)ALT-711 - this was a holy grail above the glorified Resveratrol with anti-aging, but as I remember it many on this board dumped it for legitimacy. One issue is that it hasn't been found what AGE it supposedly breaks in humans. I thought there was data on hepatotoxicity in mice and cancer in some cases and it halted some human trials. It has been in research since 1999 and while stated to "loosen arteries" it had effects on hypertension. Whatever crossbreaking it might do is limited and further still this "research chemical" can have issue with quality/purity out on the open market.
3.)aminoguanidine - It can break clots, help with diabetes, improve atherosclerosis, suppress tumors, AGE breaker...etc. A ton of positive, real data with nearly no downside. This one seems to be a keeper. Although between the LEF and the FDA there is a bit of heat on this one, stating that at 900mg qd it is toxic (some toxicity noted - specifically I don't know what that means) and at 600mg there was none noted. So, the discrepancy is a bit concerning and I would certainly watch the dosing.
4.)Arimidex - under an MD managed with labs seems ok. It is favored among AI's for longer-term use and doesn't have near the risk of tamoxifen. There are over the counter AI's that are cheaper, but then again having the management of the MD is key here.
5.)DPA Gold - A supplement! - Like I said I took heat for bringing this one up, but the data on DPA is interesting and offers unique benefits over EPA/DHA. I am not even a big fan of DHA and would use EPA Brite if given a choice between "fish oils". DPA seems to be 10x more effective than EPA. After I mentioned it other threads, it got a thread of its own by another poster asking to discuss it. Again, tread lightly...people swerve of science and get into feelings...
http://www.imminst.o...amp;hl=seal oilOverall, my thoughts on DPA Gold is the best I've found as far as seeming quality. Although a more concentrated source of DPA/EPA/DHA would be nice and may negate the advantages. I might try this one myself still though. I've been kicking it around lately and thought it interesting you brought it up here.
6.)Ribose - As a sports nutritionist and researcher, this one, makes me cringe a bit. It seems to be a complete boon, in the hall of many other hyped sports nutrition supps in the past.
I'll quote a bb.com article that addresses a fellow ISSN'er's study:
http://www.bodybuild.../fun/mohr86.htmThe next study was conducted on dietary supplement sold to enhance performance. While there are a number of positive studies with ribose on a clinical population, very few have considered its application as a performance enhancer. Let's take a look at one that did.
Ribose was introduced to the dietary supplement market several years ago with claims of increasing energy and enhancing athletic performance. To date, there is an exiguous amount of research on ribose among a healthy, athletic population; however, its utility in clinical populations has shown promise.
The problem is, healthy athletes are using ribose relying on extrapolated research results from clinical populations which is like putting bicycle tires on a car with the assumption that a wheel is a wheel.
The Purpose Of The Study
This study was conducted to determine whether oral ribose supplementation could improve anaerobic performance or recovery in a healthy, athletic population of young men.
The Test
After familiarization with the exercise protocol, subjects performed two bouts of repeated cycle sprint performance. After the second bout, subjects received either 32 g of ribose or placebo over the subsequent 36-hour period. The authors noted this dose of ribose was selected due to previous pilot data from their laboratory.
The Results
Ribose supplementation did not result in statistically significant increases in mean or peak power (which were the outcome parameters utilized in this protocol) in previously trained men. The authors noted that the typical recommended dose is 3g/day. They failed to see any significant benefit with 32 g over a 36 hour period (4 x 8 g doses); therefore, it is apparent that 3g/day would not produce results either.
The practical application of this study is that ribose supplementation does not appear to be effective for performance enhancement in a healthy, athletic population.
John M. Berardi And Tim N. Ziegenfuss
Effects Of Ribose Supplementation On Repeated Sprint Performance In Men.
Journal Of Strength & Conditioning, 17(1), 47-52, 2003
So my question is, it appears in nearly every study to have no benefit with the athlete (healthy population) and studies that do show benefit are impaired in cardiac function and rehabbing post surgery, etc. Often requiring mega-dosing like some of the other supps we mentioned above. 10-50g often. I am not sure I see the point of using this supplement.
7.)EUK-189 - even on the morelife page that lists many positives of the compound, the negatives (not safety or toxicity, but just ineffectiveness) are some doozies: "[I]n the absence of a superoxide generator, treatment with EUK-8 or EUK-134 did not increase life span, even at doses that were optimal for protection against pro-oxidants. Thus, an elevation of SOD activity levels sufficient to increase life span when it is limited by superoxide generators does not retard aging in the absence of superoxide generators. This suggests that C. elegans life span is not normally limited by levels of superoxide and its derivatives."R
"The superoxide dismutase mimetic EUK-8 has been reported to extend lifespan in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. However, in five trials administering EUK-8 in liquid culture with E. coli, and two trials using defined liquid medium, we observed no increase in C. elegans lifespan. Instead we saw a dose-dependent reduction of lifespan and fertility. We conclude that extension of C. elegans lifespan by EUK-8 may only occur under very particular culture conditions.
I am discovering more and more about ROS and oxidative stress and I often wonder if like the original theory of aging that used this avenue, which all but seems discarded is not actually impairing performance with antioxidants endogenously. Many of the benefits we see are from the nutrients other chemical effects in the body, for example with vitamin C or E over its impact on ROS. Moreover in studies, using antioxidants around workouts we often see decreased performance, not an improvement. Certainly, what makes this interesting to me is the SOD mimetic, which is the endogenous antioxidant..."empowering" endogenous production or mimicing it could have a much greater impact than any slew of exogenous ones and wouldn't impair adaptative responses that often benefit the person.
Undecided here. But it is interesting.
8.)Lactoferrin - Its antimicrobial and an iron scavenger. I had always wondered prior to LEF's product if taking lactoferrin, which itself contains iron and would potentially yield iron at some point and bind less if fully "filled" is effective...again an edogenous production would seem far more logical. But LEF did release an apolactoferrin, which is unbound (able to scavenge more) and iron-free. While I often think 90% of LEF's uniqueness is pointless marketing and not at all worth the price...this version of lactoferrin would seem to me the only logical choice. A good product for the immune impaired or potentially those exploring the iron reduction routes.
9.)Lyprinol...this one actually blew me away. Fascinating. I didn't know about it and the effects in comparison to nearly every other natural and synthetic anti-inflammatory is staggering. I do wonder how this impacts the user with chronic use. Acute use is obvious with this one and I may get it for this reason. I know, again, in sports nutrition and athletes COX-2 inhibitors reduce protein synthesis. Much like affecting ROS around a workout, reduction of inflammation around a workout will shutoff protein synthesis. ROS actually signal protein synthesis and number of other benefical things...not all evil as once thought. Many report significant gains in strength and mass with Arachidonic acid...the jury is still out on that for me, as I don't go out of my way to increase inflammation, but I certainly time my omega 3's and antioxidants to not be around a workout. While the working out thing may not be a big issue to anyone reading, protein synthesis may. I also worry about endogenously affecting something chronically with nearly anything, often there are backlashes to impacting homeostasis in such a way and the inflammatory cascade, while seemingly undesirable...there's more to it and not that simple. Growth with lean body mass certainly is impacted by inflammation, but its also the body's first line of defense against injury or infection. For those dealing with chronic inflammation: hepatitis, arthritis, etc. it may be warranted to chronically use anti-inflammatories, but I'd take an approach to improve diet, exercise more, do yoga, drink more water, stretch, meditate, etc. to not rely on chronic administration. Just my thoughts. Obviously, I have a healthy ratio of omega 3's in my diet and feel "balanced", which the SAD -standard american diet does not and would find significant benefit from a product like this. So, cool to me, but I'd use acutely.
10.)NtBHA - The spin traps! I've been researching these for a while and the data that's out there, shows much promise. I put more stock in these than any above as far as anti-aging...though, I still don't have conclusive human data so, it's not...conclusive...but, again the most promising. I've talked to Geronova about this one and they said they could not cap it with any stability. They said I'd have to cap it myself right before administration or put it in a tincture using grain alcohol, to which she explained how I'd do. So if you get it in caps or capped it all ahead of use I'd be reulctant to what benefit you're gaining. Further, she stated this is one that should be cycled on and off of as benefit is more short term and it works synergistically with the PBN, but only for a while and then there is a type of adaptation reducing benefit gained. She stated PBN could be used chronically and NtBHA could be used one month on and two off. Whatever that's worth. You may call them and discuss it more if you know more than I do (and you may very well).
I am playing devil's advocate a bit here as I like to challenge anything people recommend to see their response and logic...It helps me learn and may benefit others as well. I am not antagonizing and I hope you don't take it that way. You are one the pillars of the site and offer much wisdom. I've learned much from you in the past in your posting.
