Maybe anitoxidants aren't such a good idea?

[DaddyR]

New research suggests that neither an overabundance of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) nor an underabundance may be good when it comes to avoiding cancer. The good news is the body apparently normally regulates ROS levels carefully.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture10189.html

...enhanced ROS detoxification and additional Nrf2 functions may in fact be pro-tumorigenic.

What it boils down to is that though ROS may contribute to some cancers (hence everyone thinks taking anti-odixdant vitamins is so healthy), supressing them too much may play a role in others. Interesting, but probably too technical for this forum...

[desslok]

Yeah I read something about that recently, but haven't had a chance too look at the full study. Would be interested in Alan Aragon's opinion on this.

[ironwill2008]

Agreed. Lots of conflicting information about vitamin, and especially anti-oxidant, intake.

[Marius_Ursus]

Balanced diet for the win!!!!!!!!

[Wayne Evans]

Regarding the title about 'anti-oxidents' I'll say this....

When I started lifting weighs (about 6 years ago) I dialed in diet and made sure I got plenty of the so-called anti-oxidents EVERY day without fail.
(IE: broccoli, blueberries, Concord Grape Juice, almonds and high Vit. C stuff)

I can state, without exaggeration, that I have not had any of the winter ailments everyone seems to get each year whether colds, flu, sore throat or whatever.
That's 6 solid years without a sniffle or threat thereof.
So...I go with what has proven itself to me.

Vitamins supps...IMO...marketing hype and a waste of money if one is eating smart barring any congenital deficiencies which a doctor determines.
If one use supps as some sort of fail safe that's a judgment call.

So...anti-oxidents have kept me un-sick for a long time.

This is my experience and hope this is still on topic....ha.

Carry on...

[discdoggie]

Interesting, but probably too technical for this forum...

Are you calling us dummies, DaddyR?

[bigtallox]

When I started lifting weighs (about 6 years ago) I dialed in diet and made sure I got plenty of the so-called anti-oxidents EVERY day without fail.
(IE: broccoli, blueberries, Concord Grape Juice, almonds and high Vit. C stuff)

I can state, without exaggeration, that I have not had any of the winter ailments everyone seems to get each year whether colds, flu, sore throat or whatever.

Yeah, I don't get sick in the winter either, but personally I think it's because exercise improves performance of the immune system.

[tmonkey]

It seems like more and more 'they' are discovering that vit. d plays a bigger role in cancer prevention then ever thought and may end up being the single most important vit. to keep a eye on.

just my 2 cents

[Wayne Evans]

exercise improves performance of the immune system.

I agree......but will state that both (in my experience) are necessary for an immune system to function at it's optimum.
It's all aspects working together not one having more effect necessarily.
I think we are in agreement but I just wanted to throw that out.

Plus, I don't want to piss you off...I hate running.<grin>

Ahh...the next forum competition can be who gets sick first and debate 'why'?.

Carry on....

[winnicandle]

Yeah, I don't get sick in the winter either, but personally I think it's because exercise improves performance of the immune system.

This 100%.

Regular intense exercise goes hand in hand with healthy eating and good sleep...I think the whole package is what has kept me from any of the winter ailments also...not any one kind of food.

[bigtallox]

It seems like more and more 'they' are discovering that vit. d plays a bigger role in cancer prevention then ever thought and may end up being the single most important vit. to keep a eye on.

just my 2 cents

Oh boy, look out. Now the feds will make natural occurring vitamin d illegal and synthetics only available by prescription. They already did that with a form of vitamin b.

[DaddyR]

Are you calling us dummies, DaddyR?

Not at all. Just noting that it's a bit unusual for this forum. Just posting it here because I dislike posting most anywhere else.

[tmonkey]

Oh boy, look out. Now the feds will make natural occurring vitamin d illegal and synthetics only available by prescription. They already did that with a form of vitamin b.

you do know the best source of vit d is the sun right?

[bigtallox]

you do know the best source of vit d is the sun right?

Yes, but the government can't control that yet.

[drudixon]

New research suggests that neither an overabundance of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) nor an underabundance may be good when it comes to avoiding cancer. The good news is the body apparently normally regulates ROS levels carefully.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture10189.html



What it boils down to is that though ROS may contribute to some cancers (hence everyone thinks taking anti-odixdant vitamins is so healthy), supressing them too much may play a role in others. Interesting, but probably too technical for this forum...

Very good article Daddy. That said, I'm not sure why that was a mystery to anyone. The body is a complete system and it does it's absolute damndest to maintain balance while meeting any extraneous demands place on it, take the body's maintenance of PH levels for example. Regardless of what you eat or drink, unless it's inherently hazardous, there's scant little you can do to affect PH one way or another.

I think the mistake people make is thinking that any one constituent ingredient (carb, protein, fat, vitamin, mineral, etc) has only one purpose in the body, and that's simply not true. A proof of this fact can be found in cellular differentiation, refernce a zygote for example. We have one DNA. That's it (unless you're a chimera). How the hell does a cell become a skin cell, smooth muscle cell, bone cell etc when there's only one set of instructions. How does a baby in the womb for example grow with just one set of instructions. A sperm and egg meet, the dnas are mixed in no predetermined pattern, and a new cell is created. It replicates and creates an exact copy of itself again and again. Based on this exact copy premise, how do the cells change? The process is called cellular differentiation.

To understand cellular differentation, you have to first understand poly-peptide bonds relevance to dna. Basically these bonds are markers placed on sections of DNA to turn sections on/off, or even combine sections. These bonds move through the life of the cell, activating and deactivating different traits of the cell.

So what then causes these bonds to move? Temperature and nutrient availability cause the bonds to move. Without going into too much detail, the body works on a first come, first serve basis. Meaning, as the blood flows through the body, the cells closest to the nutrient origination point (functionally the liver for nutrients, the lungs for oxygen) get first pick of said nutrients. The parts per million of any nutrient selected by those cells is reduced greater and greater until said unit of blood is returned to the origination point. Waste products from the earliest accessible cells will flow throughout the body, past all other cells until those wastes are returned to the origination point as well.

Going back to our zygote example, imagine a big ball of cells, all identical. As they divide, there are cells in the middle, and some on the outside. The cells on the outside will have a different variety of nutrients to absorb than those in the middle. Likewise the temperature of the innermost cells will be fractions of a degree different. These very small differences cause the poly-peptide bonds to move, and thus cellular differentiation occurs.

As cells diverge, going through the conversion from embryonic stem cell, to adult stem cell, to conventional cell, the requirements of each changes. How they use nutrients also changes. For instance a muscle cell uses a glucose molecule very differently than a fat cell (as all bodybuilders are painfully aware). Additionally, what benefits one cell, may in fact be hazardous to another. The only way the body can accommodate both types of cells is to maintain a balance of the nutrient not to the detriment of the other. Too much one way or another, and problems happen.

So, let me provide an example. My largest knowledge of how this works is due to being in a medical study at Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary (affiliated with Harvard Medical School). In the study, I (as a person with a retinal disease) was to study the affects of mega-dosing Vitamin A Palmitate and DHA fish oil (only found this out at the study's end). I took a mystery pill and 15,000IU of Vitamin A daily. The premise was that Vitamin A intake assists in the formation of retinal proteins (yes, your body makes proteins, not just consumes them), thus an abundance of Vitamin A would greater assist in this endeavor. The conclusion showed I had no noticeable improvement in vision loss. Theoretically my loss could have been worse without it, but that's unknown. In other words, having no Vitamin A means my cells can not produce a key protein. Having too much had no help for my eyes, but it did piss my liver off and fck up the levels (which are normal now).

In the aforementioned scenario, an artificial imbalance was created to try and force a process to happen, that frankly the body did not want to do. The only result of this was that my liver was pissed and my eyes did not benefit. Salt works the same exact way, and is used in many more bio-mechanical processes than Vitamin A is. Without salt your nervous system will fail. Without salt nerves can't communicate with cells. Without salt, certain hormones don't function properly. Salt also plays a role in nutrient absorption. Any one of these processes needs a different ratio of salt to other factors (take potassium for example) in order to function. The body can not selectively increase as a whole how much salt is in which location, other than the fact that there is more salt parts per million in the beginning of the blood stream than there is at the end. So, your body uses hormones to regulate a systemic level of salt that will be as close to good for as many of the processes as need be.

The body can even trigger cravings for salt in cases where levels are too low. External variables like exercise or diet can influence salt's levels in the body. When we "megadose" things like salt, adverse conditions arise, and the balance the body works so hard to achieve to satisfy the constituent processes that all require salt begin to suffer. Consequently things like hypertension can occur.

Rather than blather on further, I think you get the point. Too much of anything is bad. Unless you can create a condition for your body within allowable limits of what your body can adapt to that creates an increased demand for something (ie exercise creates a greater demand for protein), then you don't need it.

[Rowyn]

New research suggests that neither an overabundance of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) nor an underabundance may be good when it comes to avoiding cancer. The good news is the body apparently normally regulates ROS levels carefully.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture10189.html


What it boils down to is that though ROS may contribute to some cancers (hence everyone thinks taking anti-odixdant vitamins is so healthy), supressing them too much may play a role in others. Interesting, but probably too technical for this forum...

Actually, I think you got it a little mixed up?

ROS ARE actually the mutagens, not the antioxidants. If a particular ****tic mutation is present, according to this study, additional antioxidants (which increase ROS detoxification) may enhance mutagenic activity.

"Indeed, ****tic mutations that disrupt the Nrf2–Keap1 interaction to stabilize Nrf2 and increase the constitutive transcription of Nrf2 target genes were recently identified, indicating that enhanced ROS detoxification and additional Nrf2 functions may in fact be pro-tumorigenic6."

I don't know how many of the general population develop this mutation.

Here's a link concerning ROS and how they function.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_oxygen_species

[cockywop]

Yes, but the government can't control that yet.

I dont know about that. I heard on FOX news that Obama may tax sunlight

[QUALITYGUY1]

Well, I guess as the older set here, we've all learned long ago that too much of ANYTHING is not a good idea....that is, without having to read about it...but it's always good to read something like this to reinforce the obvious for those that don't get it yet.

[Rowyn]

Balanced diet for the win!!!!!!!!

^^That pretty much sums it up, and if you follow that general premise, all this other stuff (new research, vit supps, blah blah blah) doesn't matter. Eat relatively whole and "healthy", moderate the processed, exercise, and stay at a decent weight.

Yeah, I don't get sick in the winter either, but personally I think it's because exercise improves performance of the immune system.

I know you are a strength person, but muscle building actually causes quite a bit of inflammation in the body, which makes eating a decent diet (with antioxidants) even more important.

you do know the best source of vit d is the sun right?

I lol'ed irl, on spread.

If some journalist took this article and turned it into "Maybe antioxidants aren't such a good idea?" they are misreading the paper and jumping to conclusions.....from mice to men, from one mutation to including the entire population....typical way to develop a hype article though.

The body will excrete excess water soluable vitamins anyway, you can't eat "too much" of them from that particular standpoint. Its not likely that one will overeat a particular vitamin in actual food without including supps. I don't know too many people that are eating pounds of brocolli, for example. Vit A, perhaps, since its in pumpkin, sweet potato, carrots and such.

[GhostAvenger620]

Regarding the title about 'anti-oxidents' I'll say this....

When I started lifting weighs (about 6 years ago) I dialed in diet and made sure I got plenty of the so-called anti-oxidents EVERY day without fail.
(IE: broccoli, blueberries, Concord Grape Juice, almonds and high Vit. C stuff)

I can state, without exaggeration, that I have not had any of the winter ailments everyone seems to get each year whether colds, flu, sore throat or whatever.
That's 6 solid years without a sniffle or threat thereof.
So...I go with what has proven itself to me.

Vitamins supps...IMO...marketing hype and a waste of money if one is eating smart barring any congenital deficiencies which a doctor determines.
If one use supps as some sort of fail safe that's a judgment call.

So...anti-oxidents have kept me un-sick for a long time.

This is my experience and hope this is still on topic....ha.

Carry on...

repped ^^ because thats exactly what I was gonna say!

[DaddyR]

Actually, I think you got it a little mixed up?...

No, actually, I was paraphrasing the study authors' own comments about the implications of their results, though I chose to post the actual study not the popular article where the author interprets it. But if you think you know better than the people who designed and conducted the study, well, whatever.

But hey you pimp the stuff regularly so it will take some time before you acknowledge you have been wrong for so long. Keep on pimpin'.

Oh and good job linking to wikipedia. That will earn you extra points as a complete amateur.

[pharmamarketer]

Yes, but the government can't control that yet.

It's part of the negotiation going on...hang tight

[JOHN GARGANI]

I hope everyone took the time to read Drudixon's excellent reply, but I have to bring out one important statement that he made:

In the aforementioned scenario, an artificial imbalance was created to try and force a process to happen, that frankly the body did not want to do.

what he has done with that statement is to get to the core of what we are all about: and we are ALL about FORCING nature: we try to do it all the time ( ie: 300 gms of protein a day, eating protein every 2-3 hours, etc and so on).....

we are definitely all culpable of the "more is better" way of thinking...it is sometimes unavoidable...

this not only applies to nutrition, but to training......


think about this: amounts of micronutrients from natural sources are relatively low: an orange yields, what, 60 mg of vitamin C, but we take tablets of 1000 mg, right?

also: maybe, just maybe, when our bodies start to get tired in training, it is just gently trying to tell us something?? but NOOOOOOOOOOO: we take super duper 1MR, or other over dosed CNS stimulant pre workout formulas to basically override what our body is telling us....


then, of course, we come on here with threads asking why this isn't happening, or that isn't happening! LOL.....

[Rowyn]

No, actually, I was paraphrasing the study authors' own comments about the implications of their results, though I chose to post the actual study not the popular article where the author interprets it. But if you think you know better than the people who designed and conducted the study, well, whatever.

But hey you pimp the stuff regularly so it will take some time before you acknowledge you have been wrong for so long. Keep on pimpin'.

Oh and good job linking to wikipedia. That will earn you extra points as a complete amateur.

Uhm, u mad bro?

Pimp what??

I pointed out that antioxidants work against ROS's, they can be mutagenic due to their tendency to produce free radicals i then directly quoted where the author indicated that a particular mutation was present in these mice.

Critical analysis is paramount when given data. Just because someone makes a suggestion based on research doesn't make it so. Yesterday a paper was discussed in the Female Forun that implied that more educated women were physically superior to less educated based on their waist to hip ratios when breastfeeding, lulz.

My intention was not to demean you but to analyze the findings but apparently you got butthurt enough to neg me and throw weird accusations around

[1972girl]

Balanced diet for the win!!!!!!!!

this I think that if you eat right you are way better off. I read about a study that found that people who take vitamins and minerals in a pill eat less fruits and vegetables because they don't think its as important if they are taking a pill. But that's also the general public, I would think/hope that people who are into working out and fitness would know better.

[freebirdmac]

http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?t...eorge&dbid=143

[DaddyR]

...apparently you got butthurt enough to neg me and throw weird accusations around

My butt is intact and feeling just fine thank you, but how about you quit riding it? I am not interested in your know-it-all (and in my experience, often wrong) opinions. You've insulted me before, and I am not interested ... go suck an egg.

I am glad to see science proving that the human body is far more complex than the nutritionists with mail order degrees keep trying to sell us on believing it to be. It's not at all surprising to learn that it is unhealthy to interfere with the interaction between man and his environment that God created. So many health claims and supps based thereupon are proven right one day and proven unsafe the next. A well-rounded healthy diet of whole foods is IMO better than obsesssing over antioxidants or ROS.