doi:10.1016/j.metabol.2005.08.021
Short-term bioaccumulation of vanadium when ingested with a tea decoction in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats
Sodium orthovanadate suspended in a lichee black tea decoction effectively regulates blood glucose levels in rats with insulin-dependent, streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetes. The primary advantage of vanadate delivery with the tea decoction over conventional systems that use water suspensions of vanadate is a significant reduction in the toxic side effects of vanadate. It is unknown if the tea alters the bioavailability of vanadate. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were administered an intravenous injection of STZ to induce diabetes. Four days later, the diabetic rats were treated by oral gavage with 40 mg of Na-orthovanadate suspended in double-distilled, deionized water (V/H2O), tea/vanadate (TV) decoction, or were treated with the tea decoction alone. Vanadium concentrations were measured in blood and various tissues at 1 to 24 hours posttreatment using graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrophotometry. With the exception of bone, maximal vanadium concentration in plasma and tissue samples were observed 2 hours after ingestion, but steadily decreased after that. Plasma vanadium levels continued to decrease until 16 hours. In contrast, vanadium steadily accumulated in bone over the 24-hour period. Overall, rats treated with V/H2O contained similar or significantly higher concentrations of vanadium in all tissues compared with TV treatment. The pattern of vanadium accumulation was also similar over time in both treatment groups. Vanadium levels were highest in bone > kidney > liver > pancreas > lung > heart > muscle > brain in both TV- and V/H2O-treated animals. This study demonstrates that the accumulation of vanadium in diabetic rats is reduced when coadministered with a black tea decoction in comparison to administration of vanadium in water. However, this effect is unlikely to be of a magnitude to explain the full capacity of TV to reduce the toxic side effects of vanadate.
|
-
11-25-2007, 08:34 AM #61~
Wherever progression lacks.... regress can be found in abundance.
-
11-25-2007, 08:49 AM #62
- Join Date: Mar 2004
- Location: New York, United States
- Age: 44
- Posts: 28,068
- Rep Power: 57862
http://forums.musculardevelopment.co...ad.php?t=11651
There is someone on MD pushing high dose chromium and vanadyl on MD and people actually feel this guy is a genius. I get hammered because I offer safe and effective GDA's like KR-ALA, banaba, etc."I just use my muscles as a conversation piece, like someone walking a cheetah down 42nd Street." - Arnold Schwarzenegger
Heretic....
-
11-25-2007, 08:51 AM #63
Vanadium Distribution in Rats and DNA Cleavage by Vanadyl Complex: Implication for Vanadium Toxicity and Biological Effects
Vanadium ion is toxic to animals. However, vanadium is also an agent used for chemoprotection against cancers in animals. To understand both the toxic and beneficial effects we studied vanadium distribution in rats. Accumulation of vanadium in the liver nuclei of rats given low doses of compounds in the +4 or +5 oxidation state was greater than in the liver nuclei of rats given high doses of vanadium compounds or the vanadate (+5 oxidation state) compound. Vanadium was incorporated exclusively in the vanadyl (+4 oxidation state) form. We also investigated the reactions of vanadyl ion and found that incubation of DNA with vanadyl ion and hydrogen peroxide $({\rm H}_{2}{\rm O}_{2})$ led to intense DNA cleavage. ESR spin trapping demonstrated that hydroxyl radicals are generated during the reactions of vanadyl ion and ${\rm H}_{2}{\rm O}_{2}$. Thus, we propose that the mechanism for vanadium-dependent toxicity and antineoplastic action is due to DNA cleavage by hydroxyl radicals generated in living systems.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=009...3E2.0.CO%3B2-HLast edited by NO HYPE; 11-25-2007 at 08:54 AM.
~
Wherever progression lacks.... regress can be found in abundance.
-
11-25-2007, 08:53 AM #64
-
-
11-25-2007, 09:10 AM #65
-
11-25-2007, 09:34 AM #66
- Join Date: Jan 2006
- Location: Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
- Age: 43
- Posts: 1,482
- Rep Power: 1931
interesting thread NO HYPE . . . I can honestly say I was unaware of the potential risks of vanadyl sulfate until I started to read the info you supplied. I have not used it yet and I definitely will stay away from it now
Disclaimer: While I have an M.D. the views I express are not to be taken as medical advice under any circumstances. Please check with your own doctor if you want medical advice as he/she has access to your info and can provide the most accurate advice.
www.pubmed.gov . . . gotta love it
-
11-25-2007, 09:41 AM #67Certitude is the enemy of wisdom.
"We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another." Johnathan Swift.
Remember this principle: if you have to chew something, it ain't anabolic. Alan Aragon
NIMBUS NUTRITION "When Performance is Everything!"
POSEIDON
clay@nimbusnutrition.com
-
11-25-2007, 09:58 AM #68
-
-
11-25-2007, 10:24 AM #69
-
11-25-2007, 10:26 AM #70
-
11-25-2007, 10:28 AM #71
-
11-25-2007, 10:33 AM #72
-
-
11-25-2007, 10:39 AM #73
-
11-25-2007, 10:41 AM #74
-
11-25-2007, 10:45 AM #75
-
11-25-2007, 10:49 AM #76
There are so many other ingredients that can produce that effect, without the issue of toxicity.
1. l-Arginine ethyl ester
2. Citrulline malate
3. L-Ornithine Ethyl Ester
4. Agmatine Sulfate
Having these alternatives, why VS? Because it's cheaper? not worth the health risks IMO.Last edited by cxm; 11-25-2007 at 10:53 AM.
-
-
11-25-2007, 10:54 AM #77
- Join Date: Sep 2004
- Location: Maryland, United States
- Posts: 2,642
- Rep Power: 4243
Cheaper, more effective, minimal health risks when used appropriately.
I'll take 1st hand experience over a study any day...............but that's just me.
If you guys don't like VS that's fine, no biggie. But there are alot of long time/respectable members on here that have used it with success.
It seems everyone is quick to jump on the band wagon of the new "hot" supplements but discount long time stables. I mean X-Factor's AA has multiple condemning studies but no one seems to talk about that. Why? Because it comes in a pretty bottle with a attractive label?
Seems odd to me.Last edited by cgcgraded; 11-25-2007 at 10:59 AM.
You have to put yourself first or people will put you second.
-
11-25-2007, 11:00 AM #78
-
11-25-2007, 11:00 AM #79
- Join Date: Sep 2005
- Location: Phoenix, Arizona, United States
- Posts: 39,730
- Rep Power: 32711
I think the theme of this thread fits that exact question. You and No Hype agree on that. If it is not needed, why do so many companies include potentially large doses of it???? I haven't seen any solid studies that suggest a major benefit for the average gymgoer.Russell Wilson, the first QB in NFL history to throw a game-winning interception.
"So you got fired again eh?" "Yeah, they always freak out when you leave the scene of an accident."
Spiders are like offensive linemen, the best ones do their job and you never notice them.
An obvious example of New Math.
"It was a 2% tax hike, dumbass. From 3% to 5%"-NRKF84
-
11-25-2007, 11:05 AM #80
- Join Date: Sep 2005
- Location: Phoenix, Arizona, United States
- Posts: 39,730
- Rep Power: 32711
That guy's a nut. There is no need to take that much of a trace mineral. 10mg several times a day, that is crazy. There's all sorts of self-professed "guru's" out there who recommend all sorts of random stuff that seems to work for them but is lacking scientifically.
I would be far more comfortable using cinnamon and R-ALA.Last edited by ElMariachi; 11-25-2007 at 11:27 AM.
Russell Wilson, the first QB in NFL history to throw a game-winning interception.
"So you got fired again eh?" "Yeah, they always freak out when you leave the scene of an accident."
Spiders are like offensive linemen, the best ones do their job and you never notice them.
An obvious example of New Math.
"It was a 2% tax hike, dumbass. From 3% to 5%"-NRKF84
-
-
11-25-2007, 11:16 AM #81
- Join Date: Sep 2004
- Location: Maryland, United States
- Posts: 2,642
- Rep Power: 4243
Don't understand what your saying, grammar is hard to understand?????
I don't care if they are gone or not lol, they still supported VS. Search through the VS threads. Of the top of my head I know pu12 is a big advocate of it, alot of guys are that PERSONALLY have used it in the appropriate doses/cycling methods.
BTW, alot of these studies being posted are not being conducted in the interest of bodybuilders.
If i can recall many studies say humans only need 50g of protein per day. But again, I guess we pick and chose which ones to listen to based on personal beliefs............Last edited by cgcgraded; 11-25-2007 at 11:22 AM.
You have to put yourself first or people will put you second.
-
11-25-2007, 11:43 AM #82
-
11-25-2007, 11:46 AM #83
That's cool you feel that you get results from vanadyl, but I ask you.... how do you define "appropriate doses/cycling", if there is little to no evidence that establishes an "appropriate" dosage for healthy adults?
I am really interested in hearing any benefits to this stuff (though I doubt there are many).... I'd just rather rely on evidence that is factual vs anecdotal.~
Wherever progression lacks.... regress can be found in abundance.
-
11-25-2007, 04:32 PM #84
- Join Date: Apr 2007
- Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
- Posts: 9,286
- Rep Power: 2702
-
-
11-25-2007, 08:22 PM #85
-
11-25-2007, 08:24 PM #86
-
11-25-2007, 08:32 PM #87
Then click here and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
-
11-25-2007, 08:38 PM #88
Lesson: NEVER take the word of anyone without researching yourself. It doesn't matter how much of a "guru" they are or how well known. Many "gurus" give horrible/dangerous advice (see des' example).
So please explain why this wouldn't be toxic to bodybuilders. Your naive logic doesn't work here.
Again, illogical argument. If you can't see the difference between protein studies and this, you shouldn't be posting here.
-
-
11-25-2007, 08:50 PM #89
-
11-26-2007, 12:41 AM #90
I think this basically just comes down to common sense. There are other alternatives that offer equal, if not better results, and have a better safety profile. I myself know the side-effects of this supplement are real. The reason I wanted to bring to light this specific ingredient is because of how widely available it is, is toxic even in lower dosages, and is often included in many of the sports supplements we take. The kid behind me in line may not even know he's taking it, all he sees is fancy packaging. If it is no longer included in these formulas, or there is at least a warning on the label, that would not be so bad. Thats my feelings anyway. Thanks to everyone who has replied.
Bookmarks