20 replies to this topic

[edward]

http://www.cell.com/...4131(07)00256-2


I stumbled on this study. Basically the worms not given sugar lived longer than those who were given sugar. The authors theorize: "glucose restriction promotes mitochondrial metabolism, causing increased ROS formation and cumulating in hormetic extension of life span". But when supplemented with certain vitamins and antioxidants this effect was eradicated, basically the animals were not stressed out enough to adapt at a cellular level

The same sorts of metabolic changes with regards to mitochondrial metabolism, density etc are seen in Ketogenic and Calorie Restricted diets, some changes are also seen in highly exercised individuals though not as extreme. The goal of Resveratrol and other supplements is to try to mimic some of these changes without the dietary restriction....

So this at least supports us not popping antioxidants/certain supplements all day long, maybe once a day or maybe every other day. It definitely shows that dietary restriction (of some sort) or mimicking some aspects of dietary restriction (resveratrol, hormetic supplements etc.) plus constant antioxidants especially pure antioxidants with no hormetic components is not a winning combination

Edited by edward, 29 October 2008 - 05:55 PM.

[JLL]

If that's true, then it makes things pretty difficult. I've been thinking of getting rid of some of the antioxidants I'm taking, since I'm doing IF, which possibly is beneficial precisely because of the hormetic effect.

Still, I'm not sure whether taking things like 1,000 mg of vitamin C is good or bad when doing IF. Then again, stopping IF and taking antioxidants doesn't seem that good an idea either, since we have at least some evidence pointing towards life extension benefits with IF but not with mere antioxidant supplementation.

[Mind]

First of all, there are plenty of human studies indicating no lifespan improvement by anti-oxidant supplementation (even some negative outcomes). I know many of these have poor design or bad formulations but its out there, the the mouse study linked above should not be a big surprise. Secondly, I know there are a couple discussions going here in the forums about anti-oxidants interfering with the beneficial aspects of exercise/muscle growth and this also jives with the above study. Oxygen radicals do carry out many critical functions within the human body so overdosing on anti-oxidants might not be a good thing. Many of the vitamins are essential, but not in large quantities.

I think some of the anti-oxidant hype came from the observation of failing mitos pumping out too many oxygen radicals, but that is not a big worry for most of us.

[JLL]

Maybe, but cutting out all antioxidants would mean you'd have to stop drinking green tea and eating berries etc. They might not be considered supplements, of course, but wouldn't any antioxidants negatively affect the stress response?

[edward]

Green tea, berries, most herbals and the like are not pure antioxidants, they are complex substances that affect many pathways, some of which are hormetic (arguably most plant substances are hormetic, cause stress, thats how evolution designed them-> cause stress on those that would eat the plants so they won't eat them-> in many animals large doses will cause them to get sick (either because they eat a lot or the animal is small and just nibbling will cause problems), in bigger animals this is not such an issue).

Green Tea, Berries, Chocolate etc have been hyped by the media and marketing engines for their antioxidant values but in truth their real value lies in other areas like how the body adapts to the chemical insults and their effect on various systems not their standalone antioxidant value.

[StrangeAeons]

It appears truth is more counterintuitive than hype; this leads to 2 questions:
1) what aspects of the body are being insulted, and therefore what adaptations are implemented?
2) can we identify specific pathologies where these adaptive measures are compromised, and therefore know when to avoid all these "goodies"?

[JLL]

Green tea, berries, most herbals and the like are not pure antioxidants, they are complex substances that affect many pathways, some of which are hormetic (arguably most plant substances are hormetic, cause stress, thats how evolution designed them-> cause stress on those that would eat the plants so they won't eat them-> in many animals large doses will cause them to get sick (either because they eat a lot or the animal is small and just nibbling will cause problems), in bigger animals this is not such an issue).

My understanding is that this applies to vegetables, which do not rely on being eaten by animals as a means for spreading, but not to fruits and berries, which have been "designed" by evolution to be eaten, as this is their primary way of spreading.

As I wrote that it occurred to me that some berries are, in fact, toxic - I'm not aware of toxic fruits, though. I guess the berries that are toxic to humans are not toxic to some other animal that eats them?

Green Tea, Berries, Chocolate etc have been hyped by the media and marketing engines for their antioxidant values but in truth their real value lies in other areas like how the body adapts to the chemical insults and their effect on various systems not their standalone antioxidant value.

So is your opinion that their other effects negate the antioxidant effects? I'm not an expert on biology, so it's not clear to me why any antioxidants would not negatively affect hormesis - i.e. why is it a bad idea to take a pure antioxidant supplement but a good idea to ingest antioxidants as long as they're in a natural form.

Wouldn't this mean the best diet would be one with as little antioxidants and as much stress-causing substances as possible?

[Mind]

Maybe, but cutting out all antioxidants would mean you'd have to stop drinking green tea and eating berries etc.

I am by no means advocating cutting out all anti-oxidants, just don't mega-dose (my opinion). I eat a healthy diet with a lot of protein/fat, a decent amount of green leafy vegetables and a small amount of fruit/berries. On top of this I take a half dose of Ortho-core just to cover all the bases and get some D3. I might supplement a bit more D3 as I get older. I also take fish oil. Might try some resv soon.

See Michael Rae's Latest post on E and Selenium (which also links back to another negative supplement study).

Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw might have been the first real mega-dosing trailblazers. I am not sure how old they are today, but they are apparently still writing a newsletter. I don't know if the super mega-doses did them any good. Maybe someone else who is familiar with them can chime in.

[Dmitri]

http://www.cell.com/...4131(07)00256-2


I stumbled on this study. Basically the worms not given sugar lived longer than those who were given sugar. The authors theorize: "glucose restriction promotes mitochondrial metabolism, causing increased ROS formation and cumulating in hormetic extension of life span". But when supplemented with certain vitamins and antioxidants this effect was eradicated, basically the animals were not stressed out enough to adapt at a cellular level

The same sorts of metabolic changes with regards to mitochondrial metabolism, density etc are seen in Ketogenic and Calorie Restricted diets, some changes are also seen in highly exercised individuals though not as extreme. The goal of Resveratrol and other supplements is to try to mimic some of these changes without the dietary restriction....

So this at least supports us not popping antioxidants/certain supplements all day long, maybe once a day or maybe every other day. It definitely shows that dietary restriction (of some sort) or mimicking some aspects of dietary restriction (resveratrol, hormetic supplements etc.) plus constant antioxidants especially pure antioxidants with no hormetic components is not a winning combination

Michael mentioned the following on the CR thread:

"I would ignore studies on aging -- and CR in particular -- in non-mammalian species, despite all the hype they've received in recent years.".....

[wydell]

What type of antioxidants were used in the study? For some antioxidants (e.g., grape seed, pomegranate), I have never seen any negative studies. Beta Carotene and Vitamin E (perhaps they were both synthetic) I have seen negative results.

Without knowing more, I am not going to stop taking substances where there are repeated and redundant studies that show benefit because of the title of an article.

[aikikai]

I am using a lot of supplements, but I am in two camps here; I do belive antioxidant is important to prevent disease, but I am not so sure it will benefit longevity, due to that I am a more believer of the "programmed" aging theory to an extent. Maybe all these studies may disprove some main parts of the damage theory of aging. If heavy supplementation is fighting free radicals and other damage related effects, then longevity would appear by taking supplements, which the case doesn't seem to be.

[Dmitri]

Maybe, but cutting out all antioxidants would mean you'd have to stop drinking green tea and eating berries etc.

I am by no means advocating cutting out all anti-oxidants, just don't mega-dose (my opinion). I eat a healthy diet with a lot of protein/fat, a decent amount of green leafy vegetables and a small amount of fruit/berries. On top of this I take a half dose of Ortho-core just to cover all the bases and get some D3. I might supplement a bit more D3 as I get older. I also take fish oil. Might try some resv soon.

See Michael Rae's Latest post on E and Selenium (which also links back to another negative supplement study).

Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw might have been the first real mega-dosing trailblazers. I am not sure how old they are today, but they are apparently still writing a newsletter. I don't know if the super mega-doses did them any good. Maybe someone else who is familiar with them can chime in.

according to wikipedia duke and sandy are both 65 years old. Someone also posted a photo of them (taken in 1999) on a thread I posted a while back asking if there were any supplements that could extend youth; in that same thread it was mentioned that Sandy is a cancer survivor.

Edited by Dmitri, 01 November 2008 - 02:17 PM.

[aikikai]

http://www.theadvoca...urk-pearson.jpg

Durk? Doesn't look like the supplementation has had any anti-ageing benefits(?) on the appearance.

Edited by aikikai, 01 November 2008 - 02:49 PM.

[pycnogenol]

http://www.theadvoca...urk-pearson.jpg

Durk? Doesn't look like the supplementation has had any anti-ageing benefits(?) on the appearance.

Well, it is kinda hard to tell what they look like with that picture. Aikikai: how can you tell with only that photo?

(I met them many years ago; they live in Tonopah, NV)

Edited by pycnogenol, 01 November 2008 - 03:09 PM.

[Mind]

Without knowing more, I am not going to stop taking substances where there are repeated and redundant studies that show benefit because of the title of an article.

There are plenty of great health promoting substances out there from berries to green tea to pomegranates and spices. The list goes on and on. In fact, right now I am drinking green tea and eating a few pomegranate seeds. I am just arguing (opining) that more is not always better. Mega-dosing might have adverse effects on health and longevity.

Another thing I have seen (subjective and anecdotal) is that some people who issue testimonials as to the healing power of antioxidants/vitamins are those who have a poor diet.....one of their friends gives them a concentrated dose of vitamins and they suddenly feel better. If a person has deprived their body of these essential nutrients and then suddenly receives a big dose, many aspects of the body/mind function improve. They then go on to spread the "gospel" of mega-dosing on vitamins. Just something I have seen at times through the years.

I know the members here are much more cautious.

[aikikai]

http://www.theadvoca...urk-pearson.jpg

Durk? Doesn't look like the supplementation has had any anti-ageing benefits(?) on the appearance.

Well, it is kinda hard to tell what they look like with that picture. Aikikai: how can you tell with only that photo?

(I met them many years ago; they live in Tonopah, NV)

I can only tell my opinion based on that photo. Then how he looks in real life, I don't know.

[pycnogenol]

http://www.theadvoca...urk-pearson.jpg

Durk? Doesn't look like the supplementation has had any anti-ageing benefits(?) on the appearance.

Well, it is kinda hard to tell what they look like with that picture. Aikikai: how can you tell with only that photo?

(I met them many years ago; they live in Tonopah, NV)

I can only tell my opinion based on that photo. Then how he looks in real life, I don't know.

By just one photo of him?!? Wow. I personally would never come to any conclusions of anyone (anti-aging supplementation usage or otherwise) based on 1 photo.

Edited by pycnogenol, 02 November 2008 - 02:39 PM.

[aikikai]

http://www.theadvoca...urk-pearson.jpg

Durk? Doesn't look like the supplementation has had any anti-ageing benefits(?) on the appearance.

Well, it is kinda hard to tell what they look like with that picture. Aikikai: how can you tell with only that photo?

(I met them many years ago; they live in Tonopah, NV)

I can only tell my opinion based on that photo. Then how he looks in real life, I don't know.

By just one photo of him?!? Wow. I personally would never come to any conclusions of anyone (anti-aging supplementation usage or otherwise) based on 1 photo.

It is not a conclusion, please read my previous post and you see that I am talking only about that photo, my opinion about that specific photo. I have never said I know how he looks in real life, but photos don't lie (unedited) and he doesn't look young in that photo.

I am a supplementation user myself, but that doesn't make me believe that every supplementation user should look younger. I am not that fanatic.

End of discussion.

Edited by aikikai, 03 November 2008 - 06:22 PM.

[Steve_86]

What type of antioxidants were used in the study? For some antioxidants (e.g., grape seed, pomegranate), I have never seen any negative studies. Beta Carotene and Vitamin E (perhaps they were both synthetic) I have seen negative results.

Without knowing more, I am not going to stop taking substances where there are repeated and redundant studies that show benefit because of the title of an article.

I am also very interested in knowing the type of antioxidants used.


Secondly; If true would this mean that we are better off taking supplements like ALCAR without increasing antioxidant intake? Maybe the antioxidants from our diet alone is enough.

[automita]

eat less live longer after that see a therapist

[pycnogenol]

http://www.theadvoca...urk-pearson.jpg

Durk? Doesn't look like the supplementation has had any anti-ageing benefits(?) on the appearance.

Well, it is kinda hard to tell what they look like with that picture. Aikikai: how can you tell with only that photo?

(I met them many years ago; they live in Tonopah, NV)

I can only tell my opinion based on that photo. Then how he looks in real life, I don't know.

By just one photo of him?!? Wow. I personally would never come to any conclusions of anyone (anti-aging supplementation usage or otherwise) based on 1 photo.

It is not a conclusion, please read my previous post and you see that I am talking only about that photo, my opinion about that specific photo. I have never said I know how he looks
in real life, but photos don't lie (unedited) and he doesn't look young in that photo.

I am a supplementation user myself, but that doesn't make me believe that every supplementation user should look younger. I am not that fanatic.

End of discussion.

Why even have an opinion when the photo quality is so very low? It would be another story if you found a 2008 high-resolution close up photo of the guy. Now that I wanna see and critique!