Health & Exercise Quickie: Vitamin D Deficiency, Taurine & Glycine. Multiple Sclerosis & Epstein-Barr. Paracetamol & Muscle Gains. Gender & Fatigue from Workouts. HIIT, LISS & Appetite. Plus: Scientists Debate: Light vs. Heavy Weights

While there is a positive trend in the percentage of US adults who meet the 2008 federal physical activity guidelines according to which they have to "devote at least 150 minutes/week to moderate, or 75 minutes/week to vigorous intensity exercise, or an equivalent combination", the number of people who have gotten the message that a combination of both strength and aerobic training (red line) is much more efficient than doing just aerobics (blue line) remains the same (CDC. 2013)

48%! That's the SuppVersity figure of the week and the percentage of US adults aged 18 and over who met the 2008 federal physical activity guidelines for aerobic activity in 2013 - that's 5% more than in 1997. It would be better to see it up in the 75%+ region, but it's nice to see that more and more people are devoting at least 150min/week to moderate intensity exercise, or 75 minutes/week to vigorous intensity exercise, or an equivalent combination.

What's not so nice is that people are still way too focused on aerobics and the number of US citizens that's combining resistance and aerobic training to reach their exercise goals is stagnating below 20%. Moreover, best-agers and baby boomers, who would probably benefit even more from some weight lifting than the 36% of the young men (age 18-24) who make up the lion's share of the 'real' physical culturists who know about the importance of both, 'weights' and 'cardio', are - if they work out at all - still sticking to the tried and disproven LISS only regimen.

On Short Notice, today: A Health & Exercise Quickie

Apropos "LISS" as the headline of today's On Short Notice news quickie already gave away, light intensity steady state aerobic training aka LISS is one of the exercise related topics today. We will however start out with the health related news... and don't wonder that the first post is about polar bear health. I promise you will be intrigued, when you've read it ;-)

• 'Westernized' polar bears' bones look as if they would need vitamin D supplements, in reality all they are probably missing is sufficient taurine in their diet. I don't know but maybe you've asked yourself before: "How on earth can a white bear survive in the Arctic, when his nose is the only part of his skin that's exposed to the sun and would thus be able to produce vitamin?" (Please mind that this is not a serious question ;-) He eats his vitamin D!
  
  

  

  Scientists speculate: Their cousins in captivity suffer from rickets and fractures due to secondary vitamin D deficiency in consequence of insufficient taurine intake.

  Ok, first question first answer, but what about question #2: "How come that the clubs of his brethren and cousins in captivity get rickets and fractures as if they were vitamin D deficient, although they get the exact same amount of vitamin D from mother's milk and their later diet (sometimes the latter is even supplemented) as their wild counterparts?" Answer? No idea? Well, if you ask the researchers from the The University of Tennessee Health Science Center the answer is (Cheesney. 2009): A lack of taurine in the diet.
  
  Taurine plays a fundamentally important role in the conjugation of ursodeoxycholic acid to TUDCA and facilitates the uptake of fatty acids and fat soluble vitamins. With insufficient taurine in the diet polar beers (and human beings) can probably drink as much vitamin D in olive oil or whatever other fat base they deem more appropriate then dry tabs without any effects on their 25-OHD => calcitonin levels and consequently bone health (suggested read "Fat D-Ficiency! Study Shows, Even 50.000 IU of Vitamin D3 Useless, When You Ingest It Without Fat").
  
  Moreover, a recent guinea pig study from Department of Internal Medicine at the Medical College of the National Cheng Kung University suggests that glycine could be another 'pro vitamin D amino acid' due to its beneficial effect on the liver and subsequent protection of disturbances in vitamin D metabolism and low 25-OHD levels (Chen. 2008) - now, what if any of these, i.e. taurine or glycine, or simply insufficient bile acid, which incidentally depends on the consumption of the "bad, bad" cholesterol (cf. Kern. 1994), is the actual reason of the rampant vitamin D deficiency in our meat-, fat- and cholesterol-o-phobic societies?
• "Low vitamin D and remote EBV infection may be associated with clinical MS breakthrough within 2-3 years." (Décard. 2013) Usually I don't simply copy the study titles, but this one says it all. Even before the first symptoms of multiple sclerosis occur, i.e. in the so-called pre-CIS (=clinically isolated syndrome) interval, patients with quiescent multiple sclerosis have 50% lower 25OHD levels than their healthy peers and - what could actually be the causal factor, here - three times higher Epstein-Barr specific IgG levels (EBNA1). Can these observations a group of scientists from the Department of Neurology at the St. Josef-Hospital of the Ruhr-University Bochum in Bochum, German, really be mere coincidence?
  
  

  

  Figure 1: While it would be best never to be infected with Epstein-Barr your risk of EP-related MS is more than twice as high if you are exposed late (Ascherio. 2010)

  At least as far as the Epstein-Barr relation goes the answer of a 2010 review of the literature would be 'no, probably no coincidence' (Ascherio. 2010). It appears to be established that Epstein-Barr (EB) plays a pivotal role in the etiology of MS. Based on the observation that people without EB are virtually MS free, and the fact that their own previous research has clearly shown that late infections with EP increase your risk to develop MS by more than 2x (compared to people who have been exposed in childhood; see figure 1), Ascherio et al. argue that it is very unlikely that EP is not at least the trigger, if not the ultimate cause of MS.
  
  The scientists also refer to the hygiene hypothesis which has been advanced by other authors before, unfortunately, however, getting rid of the 'cleanliness' and exposing your immune system to the training it needs by exposing yourself to the virus at an earlier age, is of little use, if not totally stupid. After all it would only reduce your risk to develop MS to a level that's still more than 1,000% higher than in people who have never been exposed to the virus in the first place (see figure 1).
  
  Due to the inconclusive data on the long and short term effects of Epstein-Barr infections on the B-cell and T lymphocyte response, the Ascherio et al. are not yet sure about the exact mechanism by which EP stimulates, triggers or drives the development of MS. All that can be said with relative certainty is that Epstein-Bar infections contribute to the increase in multiple sclerosis. Aside from the previously mentioned correlations the mere fact that those regions of the world where Epstein-Barr is quasi non-existent are virtually MS free is probably the best evidence of its involvement in autoimmune attacks on your brain. So if you want to protect yourself you better make sure you don't get infected!  Since EP is part of the herpes family and transmitted via saliva this is unfortunately not exactly easy...

• 

  Figure 2: Overall there is no statistical significant downside to chronic paracetamol supplementation, but there is a slight advantage for the NSAID free group in term of increases in lower body strength - the time course (not shown) of the strength gains was by the way identical for both groups, as well (Jankowski. 2013)

  Paracetamol does not interfere with muscle gains in elderly men. The issue whether or not NSAIDs will interfere with resistance training induced gains in skeletal muscle is certainly relevant for everyone. If there is one group of people for whom it could be of paramount importance, though, this would be the men and women in their best ages (>50 years) who have finally realized that muscle is not just metabolic currency, but a true life insurance.
  
  Against that background the most recent results from the College of Nursing at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus may be important news (Jankowski. 2013). I mean, if the use of N-acetyl-4-amniphenol (ACET) aka paracetamol would hamper or even forestall muscle gains, the training efforts of the men and women who take ACET would be to no avail.
  
  Now the good news is that the chronic use of paracetamol at a daily dose of 1,000mg did not reduce the lean mass gains in the 17 men (age >50y) who actually participated (instead of giving up) in all of the 3-5 days A/B resistance training sessions
  
  • workout A: R three sets of lateral pull down, bench ress, hip abduction and adduction, biceps curls, seated row, and ssisted chin ups
  • workout B: overhead press, leg press, triceps xtension, knee extension and flexion, heel raise, and shoulder external rotation
  • warm up / cool down: 10 min warm-up on the treadmill, a stair climing intermezzo after the first warm up sets and another 10 min cool down
  that were performed with at 80% of the 1-RM and with at least 1 day off in-between over a period of 16 weeks.
  
  
  The chronic ingestion of paracetamol is not advisable regardless of its negligible detrimental effects on skeletal muscle gain. Only recently, Kane et al. have shown that older people in are particularly prone to the hepatoxic effects of this (imho falsely OTC available) NSAID (Kane. 2013). If there is no way around it, because you cannot stand the pain, a safer (at least for the liver) and more effective medical approach could be the combination of tramadol (75 mg), a weak opioid analgesic, with low dose of paracetamol (325-650mg, max!; cf. Pergollizzi. 2013).
  In as much as the nonexistent negative effects are good news, they are likewise strange news, because according to the expression of proteins involved in the protein synthetic response to exercise, it should actually have hampered the gains:
  

  "[...] in the ACET group that the expressions of the anabolic gene p70S6K and the catabolic gene MAFbx were significantly reduced at week 16 of PRT. Given that the increases in FFM in response to PRT were not significantly different between the groups, it is possible that the suppression of catabolic signaling was sufficient to offset reductions in anabolic signaling in the ACET group." (Jankowski. 2013)

  As the authors point out future studies will have to elucidate the exact mechanism this at first sight contradictory results.
  
  In the mean time Jankowski et al. do yet speculate that the loss of prostaglandin signalling and supsequent increases in p70S6K, the protein that's responsible for muscle protein synthesis may be countered by the normalizing effects paracetamol exerts on the expression of Akt, the ameliorative effect on the overexpression of nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) and the reduction of the age-relatedly increased myocyte apoptosis.
  

• 

  Compared to Hope Solo or Serena Williams Olympian Brian Lochte, is probably a weakling - of course only as far as the fatigabilty of his skeletal muscle is concerned - as far as the risk do develop the Athlete's Triad is concerned, this may yet be advantage.

  Men and women tire differently - men (once more ;-) the weaker sex Let's face it guys,  we are weaklings. At least this is what Beth W. Glace and her colleagues from the Nicholas Institute of Sports Medicine and Athletic Trauma at the Lenox Hill Hospital in New York report in their latest paper. Other than the quadriceps muscles of our significant others, our muscles fatigue after 2h of cycling with intermittent one minute sprints every 20 minutes.
  
  In women, in this particular case just like their male counterparts trained cyclists or triathletes with a training load of at least 100km per week, on the other hand, it's solely the central nervous system fatigue that will keep them from cycling 'forever'. Unfair, right? Us men have to battle both, central as well as local muscular (=peripheral) fatigue.
  
  Now what seems nothing but advantageous can however turn against you. In a way the low fatigability of female muscle is also part of the reason why are way more susceptible to the athlete's triad (click here to learn more) than men: They are simply able to work their CNS into the ground, because their peripheral musculature is less prone to exhaustion.
• Recent study puts question mark behind assumed appetite reducing benefit of HIIT sprints vs. classic aerobics - but does that mean that aerobics is the way to go? Not yet in press, but already intriguing are the results of a recent study by  Kevin Deighton et al. from the School of Sport at the Loughborough University who say that they found that ...
  

  "[a]n acute bout of endurance exercise resulted in lower appetite perceptions in the hours after exercise than sprint interval exercise and induced a greater 24 h energy deficit due to higher energy expenditure during exercise" (Deighton. 2013)

  

  Figure 3: Intentionally or not, based on the conclusion of the abstract you would probably not have expected to see these results (data adapted from Deighton. 2013)

  Now this sentence from the abstract certainly suggests that sprinting would have nothing but negative effects. The actual data you see in figure 3 does yet tell you something different. The sprinters may have had increased ghrelin and lower PYY levels with the expected downstream effects on perceived hunger, but this did not translate into significant differences in food intake. In other words, even longish sprint exercises like the ones in the study at hand won't put you at danger of overeating - despite transient increases in ghrelin levels.
  
  In fact, the increased ghrelin amplitude can actually be an advantage (see August 04, 2013) and the calories in vs. out calculation the scientists do is so irrelevant to the real world health and body composition effects of exercise that I refuse to repeat it here ("No, you cannot eat that extra piece of layer cake because you ran on the treadmill earlier today" ;-)
  
  In the end, comparisons like this always suggest you had to choose between doing one or another mode of "cardio", when a combination of both, i.e. cycling HIIT and LISS, yet not both in one session, would be the most productive way to go. And no, Mr. Taubes, none of them is "just going to make you hungry" (see "Every Dog Has His Day: Dr. Oz Was Right, Exercise Does Not "Just Make You Hungry", But Reduces Energy Intake!")
  
• Researchers debate the "low vs. high weight" conundrum. In the editorial to the next issue of the Journal of Applied Physiology Mark D. Schuenke, Jennifer Herman, and Robert S. Staron reject the criticism they received from Nicolas Burd et al. for the pro heavy weights arguments they put forward in their recently published study on the effects of high vs. low weight training (Schuenke. 2013a; covered on the SuppVersity on October 01, 2013). Now while this back and forth between the two groups does not deliver any new data, I believe that it is still interesting and highly educative to see how science is actually a matter of negotiated not set truths. So, let's see how Schuenke et al. respond to Burd's assertion that ...
  

  

  Figure 4: Changes in body composition (left) and changes in muscle fiber cross-sectional area in response do different training regimen (Schuenke. 2013a; this study was discussed here on the SuppVersity on October 01, 2013)

  "[t]he authors’ views continue to contribute to a resistance training doctrine that is incorrect, most notably the belief that heavier weights are better concept. This conclusion is likely due to the relative dearth of quality studies assessing the hypertrophy potential of lower load resistance training paradigms, in contrast to the large number of studies employing ‘traditional’ resistance training intensities (*70 % of maximal strength).

  Clearly, evidence exists to support the concept that light(er) loads can support training-induced muscle hypertrophy both independently and by comparison to heavy loads. We would propose that so long as the stimulus is an overload, performed with high effort (fatigue), and progressive then even the most seasoned lifters would see progression,  at the very least no regression, in strength or muscle mass." (Burd. 2013)

  I will briefly summarize the most important points the researchers from the University of New England College of Osteopathic bring forward to defend their "go heavy or go home" argumentation:
  
  • The list of previous studies which confirm the the efficacy of training with high(er) weight for "optimal" gains in hypertrophy and strength is extensive.
  • Low load training is not as Burd et al. suggest "simply a milder form of low-load blood flow restrictive exercise", of which the researchers state that it is "interesting".
  • Schuenke et al. specifically refer to a Y2k study by Takadara et al. which shows that without the cuffs light loads don't build anything (Takadara. 2000).
  • The researchers point out that the claim by Burd et al. that "maximal muscle fiber activation can be achieved in any circumstance as long as the effort is to failure is unwarranted and unsubstantiated".
  • The study by Mitchel et al. Bird et al. cite to prove their hypothesis may not report significant differences between knee extensions performed at 30 % of 1RM for 3 sets, 80 % of 1RM for 1 set, or 80 % of 1RM for 3 sets as far as the isometric strength and hypertrophy between the three types of training are concerned, but
    

    "[t]his result is not surprising considering the following: (1) no control group was used, (2) each subject trained each limb using a different protocol (cross-over effect), (3) only one single-joint exercise was used (low volume versus a much higher volume of training used, for example, in Schuenke et al.: 3 sets each of leg press, squat, and knee extension), and (4) only fiber types I and II were delineated (severely limiting interpretation of the results).

    In that the last parentheses is obviously another direct criticism of what Schuenke would probably call "cherry picking" studies and specific results to support an unwarranted hypothesis.
  Based on this line of argumentation, Schuenke et al. conclude their deliberations on the note:
  

  

  One should not forget that it's not only about light vs. heavy, but in as much about appropriate and inappropriate weights. If you go by the quantity of the evidence there is however no debating that those weights are too light - probably even for a Lady in her best years.

  "Low-load training appears to have some merit. How-ever, our data support the use of high-load, high-intensity resistance training to maximize fiber hypertrophy and strength. In addition, heavy loading of the muscle has an impact on bone and other connective tissues which are minimized/lacking using low-load training. Finally, Burd et al. appear to oversimplify the field of exercise physiol-ogy. To claim that any training load (light or heavy) con-fers the same physiological adaptations as long as the end point is volitional failure is shortsighted and similar to claiming that running for any distance or time will elicit the same effects as long as fatigue is reached." (Schuenke. 2013)

  If you asked me, both are right. While I personally tend to agree with Schuenke, the main reason that I do is that the heavy weights approach is tried and proven, while - just as Burd says - the sceintific evidence pertaining to low weights is scarce and ambiguous and the anecdotal evidence from 'big guys' is non-existent. I am still curious about the next move(s) on both sides of this divide. And by the way, conflicts like these have always been among the driving forces of scientific progress, so I am pretty sure that we as trainees can only benefit from this debate as well as potential follow-up studies, both groups will feel inclined to conduct in order to 'prove' their point.

That's all for today! I hope you enjoyed the stay, all have electricity and an intact water supply ... I mean it's nice if you have a fully charged iPhone to get your daily dose of SuppVersity news, but even I have to concede that some other things in live are way more elementary.

References

• Ascherio A, Munger KL. Epstein-barr virus infection and multiple sclerosis: a review. J Neuroimmune Pharmacol. 2010 Sep;5(3):271-7.
• Burd NA, Moore DR, Mitchell CJ, Phillips SM. Big claims for big weights but with little evidence. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013 Oct 20. 
• CDC. Early Release of Selected Estimates Based on Data From the January–March 2013 National Health Interview Survey. September 2013
• Chen CY, Wang BT, Wu ZC, Yu WT, Lin PJ, Tsai WL, Shiesh SC. Glycine ameliorates liver injury and vitamin D deficiency induced by bile duct ligation. Clin Chim Acta. 2013 Oct 23-
• Chesney RW, Hedberg GE, Rogers QR, Dierenfeld ES, Hollis BE, Derocher A, Andersen M. Does taurine deficiency cause metabolic bone disease and rickets in polar bear cubs raised in captivity? Adv Exp Med Biol. 2009;643:325-31.
• Deighton K, Barry R, Connon CE, Stensel DJ. Appetite, gut hormone and energy intake responses to low volume sprint interval and traditional endurance exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013 Oct 31.
• Décard BF, von Ahsen N, Grunwald T, Streit F, Stroet A, Niggemeier P, Schottstedt V, Riggert J, Gold R, Chan A. Low vitamin D and elevated immunoreactivity against Epstein-Barr virus before first clinical manifestation of multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2013 Aug 11.
• Kane A, Mitchell SJ, Carroll PR, Matthews S, Hilmer SN. Characteristics of older and younger patients with suspected paracetamol toxicity. Australas J Ageing. 2013 Sep;31(3):190-3.
• Kern F Jr. Effects of dietary cholesterol on cholesterol and bile acid homeostasis in patients with cholesterol gallstones. J Clin Invest. 1994 Mar;93(3):1186-94.
• Kappenstein O, Vieth B, Luch A, Pfaff K. Toxicologically relevant phthalates in food. EXS. 2013;101:87-106.
• Pergolizzi JV Jr, van de Laar M, Langford R, Mellinghoff HU, Merchante IM, Nalamachu S, O'Brien J, Perrot S, Raffa RB. Tramadol/paracetamol fixed-dose combination in the treatment of moderate to severe pain. J Pain Res. 2013;5:327-46.
• Schuenke MD, Herman JR, Gliders RM, Hagerman FC, Hikida RS, Rana SR, Ragg KE, Staron RS. Early-phase muscular adaptations in response to slow-speed versus traditional resistance-training regimens. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013a Oct;112(10):3585-95.
• Schuenke MD, Herman J, Staron RS. Preponderance of evidence proves "big" weights optimize hypertrophic and strength adaptations. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013b Oct 25.
• Sioen I, Fierens T, Van Holderbeke M, Geerts L, Bellemans M, De Maeyer M, Servaes K, Vanermen G, Boon PE, De Henauw S. Phthalates dietary exposure and food sources for Belgian preschool children and adults. Environ Int. 2013 Nov 1;48:102-8.
• Takarada Y, Takazawa H, Sato Y, Takebayashi S, Tanaka Y, Ishii N. Effects of resistance exercise combined with moderate vascular occlusion on muscular function in humans. J Appl Physiol. 2000; 88:2097–2106.

On Short Notice: Oxytocin to Boost Testosterone & Block Cortisol? Exercise for Life-Extension? Which Tea for Metal-Chelation? Which Fat to Reduce Calorie Intake by ~30%?

Image 1: This is still my preferred way to boost oxytocin - regardless of possible ergolytic effects ;-)

Due to the sudden heat-wave over here in good old Germany I thought, I'd use these early morning hours to get another installment of "On Short Notice" on it's way before my brain dries out (or I drown in the public swimming pool ;-). I hope you enjoy the four items on the recent interest in intranasal the hormone modulating effects of oxytocin, it's effect on cortisol and progesterone, estradiol and (I know you were waiting for that ;-) testosterone, my early morning / late evening (depending on whether you see this from my or Wyatt's perspective) 'intellectual' exchange on the potential longevity effects of exercise and why it probably is not life-extending in the literal sense, the different antioxidant potency of green, black and white tea and their ability to chelate metals (=help to remove all not just "bad" metals from the body) and the best fat, DHA or MUFA to blunt appetite and help you stick to your diet.

Don't forget to come back later today (or maybe early tomorrow for some of you ;-), for a third installment of "On Short Notice", which will hopefully suffice to "get rid" of the stock I have... ah, I did not forget about the Circadian Rhythm Series, by the way, it's just that the SuppVersity rhythm got slightly out of sync ;-)

• 

  Figure 1: Effects of 26IU of intranasal oxytocin at rest on progesterone, estradiol and testosterone in healthy men (large; based on Gossen. 2013); effects of 24IU or 48IU of intranasal oxytocin administered before a steady state cardio session on cortisol levels in healthy young men (small; from Cardoso. 2013)

  Intranasal oxytocin to block cortisol & boost testosterone A whole series of studies has been published recently; all of them have one thing in common, they investigate the various physiological and psychological effects of oxytocin. Of these, the two studies by Gossen et al. and Cardoso et al. are yet probably of greatest interest for the average physical culturist. After all, the researchers from the Centre for Research in Human Development at the Concordia University in Quebec (Canada) were able to show that the administration of 24IU (not the higher dose of 48IU, though;see figure 1) effectively reduced the increase in cortisol in a 70% HRmax steady-state cardio session in 17 healthy young men (aged 18–3; mean ± SD; 23.1 ± 3.5), in the experiment they describe in their Aug 2013 paper in Psychoneuroendocrinology (Cardoso. 2013).
  And even though the German scientists from the University of Aachen report minimal, but statistically significant increases in testosterone in 8 young men (mean age 26.4 ± 2.6 years) at rest, 210min after the (likewise) intranasal administration of a minimally higher dose (26IU) of oxytocin (Gossen. 2013). Both of these observations are not just very similar to what your average natty test booster is supposed to do, their real-world effects are probably also as insignificant. Also, did you ever try to tear down the gym and rep out a couple of PRs a couple of minutes after having sexual intercourse? If so, you should actually be aware why oxytocin probably ain't the ideal pre-workout supplement - in this regard it is also somewhat unfortunate that Cardoso et al. did not do a real performance test (suggested read: "Will Sex Before A Competition Hamper Your Performance"; note: this is not about sex minutes before the competition ;-).
  And when it comes to building muscle, previous research from Phillips lab at McMasters University appears to suggest that blocking cortisol is a hilarious idea, anyway. After tall, cortisol was the only endocrine hormone the elevation of which in the vicinity of resistance training sessions showed a positive correlation (r=0.29, P=0.03 cf. West. 2011) with increases in lean muscle mass in the large-scale by West et a.
• Exercise gets rid of the junk in your body, but will it help increase your lifespan? Basically this could be the headline to an interesting exchange of thoughts, I just had with Wyatt Brown on the SuppVersity facebook wall - one I believe is well worth being "recorded" as a short news item. The discussion came about in response to me posting the link to a study by He et al. who found that the way exercise induces autophagy (=natural, healthy cell death) contributes to its beneficial effects in the prevention of all sort of ailments, above all cancer and neurological problems such as Alzeimer's & co, because it allows your body to get rid of the debris and junk that's accumulating from just living your life (no matter how healthy or unhealthy that may be). Since exercise is not the only thing that can ramp up autophagy, and caloric restriction (as in starving yourself to live longer) can do the same, Wyatt mused about whether or not you could achieve the same (more or less; for animals vs. humans) proven benefits of life-long caloric restriction by exercise.

  

  Image 2: Twin studies are one of the ways to identify whether genes or lifestyle are the fundamental determinants of how old we get. One of the consistent findings of the numerous pertinent studies is that lifestyle factors (diet, exercise, but also our outlook on life, friends and family!) determine how well we are able to use the time that our genes (or whoever you want) has granted us on earth. Not more, but not less, either: If 100 years are what we got, all exercise and healthy eating will allow us to make it to that age with great ease, not more... and let's be honest, if that was the biblical age of 100y, wouldn't it be ungrateful to ask for more?

  A very good question, indeed and one I do not have a definite answer to. In view of recent reviews of the role of exercise in the longevity of centenarians (the oldest of the old; cf. Venturelli. 2013), it does however seem more likely that exercise does not have direct effects on the life-span, but, as Huffman states, "[e]pidemiologic evidence in humans supports exercise as a strategy to reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality" (Hufmann. 2010). Unfortunately, a low mortality won't help you to make it past the 100 ± X years your genes have in stock for you. The insights into the genetic determinants from pertinent studies into single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs ~ single gene variations) does support this notion (Sorensen. 2013): The oldest of the old don't stick out, because their genes protect them from premature death, but simply because their genes allow for more cell cycles to occur before the 'natural reserve'. We already know that telomere length is a fundamental determinant of this 'reserve', so that it is not really surprising that telomere length at birth is one of the most reliable predictors of longevity (Heidinger. 2013)!
  Now, if we just use a totally random number to use basic math to make us understand, what this means, we could say that your telemore length at birth may be sufficient to make it to age 100, assuming that it is not prematurely shortened or you are dying from whatever other "natural" (not accidents etc.) cause, such as cancer, metabolic syndrome, CVD etc., exercise will of course help you to make it to those 100 years, but when the say 100,000 total turn overs that your telomeres allow for are done, you are done as well - no matter how "healthy" you eat and how much you exercise in the 99.99 years before. If you complement this "preventive" (=mortality reducing) effect by literally living on the slow lane, i.e. downregulating all your metabolic processes by starving yourself, you will obviously slow down the turn-over rate, as well. For simplicity of the calculation we assume that all these processes are linear (which I can guarantee they are not) and you are eating so little that you achieve a 50% slow down. That would mean that your turn-over rate would be reduced from 1,000 / year to 500 / year. Your reserves would last 2x longer and, assuming you eat and exercise and thus decrease your mortality risk, will allow you to make it to the ueber-biblical age of 200years! Great? Well you decide...

• 

  Image 3: If you want to get rid of metals, white tea should be your tea of choice, if you are already low on iron, copper, zinc & co. you should at least drink it away from your meals, though.

  Different tea preparations different effects antioxidant activity and metal chelation ability  It is nothing new that green and black tea will have differential effects on your physiology. What is yet a novelty is a comparison of the antioxidant and metal chelating activity the exact same hand plucked leaves of a specific cultivar (in this case PC108, bred in Malawi, typically used for black CTC tea production) will have when it is used for the production of either white, two black (Orthodox and CTC; both methods produce leaves of fannings or dust grades that are commonly used in tea bags, CTC = crush + tear + curl is processed by machines, while orthodox usually involves a mixture of mashine and manual processing) or two green (w/ and w/out caffeine) teas - a comparison like the one Patricia Carloni and her colleagues present in their latest paper in Food Research International (Carloni. 2013).
  As you will probably have expected the least processed green tea exhibited the greatest, while the most processed CTC black tea the least antioxidant activity (green ≥ low-caffeine green > white ≥ black Orthodox > black CTC), what may come as a surprise though is the superiority of white tea in the metal chelation essay the scientists performed. Closely followed by the orthodox black tea, the CTC tea (<50% of the white tea metal chelating activity) and the two green teas (<25% of the white tea metal chelating activity).

• 

  Figure 2: Reduction in calorie intake on standardized breakfast 20min after the ingestion of 6ml of a lemon flavored oil emulsion and in the course of the day compared to no oil control (based on Harden. 2013)

  Fat satiety effects: DHA > Olive Oil (MUFA) > regular diet That would be the ranking according to the satiety effects of the different fatty acids, as elucidated in a recently published study in the British Journal of Nutrition (Harden. 2013). For their study, the researchers had recruited 18 healthy normal-weight men. In a single-blind, three-way crossover study design the subjects received a single 6ml dose of either DHA or oleic acid (olive oil is 60-80% oleic acid, alternatives would macadamia ~60% and high-oleic acid sunflower oil >82%) with lemon flavor. The day before, the subjects had consumed standardized diets. 20min after the ingestion of the emulsion, they had a standardized breakfast, went home and went about their regular daily business for the rest of the day.
  The telephone interviews the researchers conducted on the next day showed that the ingestion of the DHA emulsion had exerted an, as the researchers argue cholecystokinin (CCK) dependent, decrease in energy intake of -20% and -29% for the breakfast and the total daily energy intake, respectively. That would make DHA a pretty effective tool to stick to my often-suggested -20% caloric deficit when you're dieting - at least for healthy individuals. Whether this will work for the obese, let alone morbidly obese with their deranged satiety signaling remains to be seen, though.

As I mentioned in the introduction, already. This was not the last "On Short Notice" item for this weekend. So, digest this, have some sex to calm down (unless you are about to work out, obviously), and drink a cup of tea to increase your chance to make sure that your end is not arriving before it's time and you can come back for more ;-)

References

• Cardoso C, Ellenbogen MA, Orlando MA, Bacon SL, Joober R. Intranasal oxytocin attenuates the cortisol response to physical stress: A dose-response study. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2013 Aug 10. 
• Carloni P, Tianob L, Padellab L, Bacchettic T, Customud C, Kayd A, Damian E. Antioxidant activity of white, green and black tea obtained from the same tea cultivar. Food Research International. 2013.
• Gossen A, Hahn A, Westphal L, Prinz S, Schultz RT, Gründer G, Spreckelmeyer KN. Oxytocin plasma concentrations after single intranasal oxytocin administration - A study in healthy men. Neuropeptides. 2013 Aug 9. 
• Harden CJ, Jones AN, Maya­Jimenez T, Barker ME, Hepburn NJ, Garaiova I, Plummer SF, Corfe BM. Effect of different long­chain fatty acids on cholecystokinin release in vitro and energy intake in free­living healthy males. British Journal of Nutrition. 2013; 108:755­-758
• He C, Sumpter R Jr, Levine B. Exercise induces autophagy in peripheral tissues and in the brain. Autophagy. 2013 Oct 1;8(10).
• Heidinger BJ, Blount JD, Boner W, Griffiths K, Metcalfe NB, Monaghan P. Telomere length in early life predicts lifespan. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Jan 31;109(5):1743-8. Epub 2013 Jan 9.
• Huffman DM. Exercise as a calorie restriction mimetic: implications for improving healthy aging and longevity. Interdiscip Top Gerontol. 2010;37:157-74. Epub 2010 Aug 10. 
• Soerensen M. Genetic variation and human longevity. Dan Med J. 2013 May;59(5):B4454.
• Venturelli M, Schena F, Richardson RS. The role of exercise capacity in the health and longevity of centenarians. Maturitas. 2013 Aug 7.
• West DW, Phillips SM. Associations of exercise-induced hormone profiles and gains in strength and hypertrophy in a large cohort after weight training. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013 Jul;112(7):2693-702. Epub 2011 Nov 22.

Y3K Fat Burners: Bile Acid Suppositories! Plus: How This Relates to Taurine, Cholesterol, Statins and Diabesity

Image 1: Is the US starving for sulfur amino acids and cholesterol?

You've learned in yesterday's post (cf. "Sodium-Alginate for 30-40% More Weight Loss and Body Fat Reduction on Mild Caloric Deficit") on the surprising fat-loss effects of seaweed extract, or sodium alginate, already that the "fat burner" of the future isn't going to be a stim, ... well, at least not necessarily or exclusively, but rather a compound that acts onto the GBA, the gut-brain axis by modulating your bodies response to food and fasting. Now, as gross as this may seem, a recently published study from the United Arab Emirates University does suggest that this fat burners may not even come in pill, but rather as a suppository!

A fat burning suppository? Wtf....

I see you are shocked, well so was I, but the alternative would be that you take a syringe and... ah, let's just assume they came out with a suppository which could deliver the same 0.66, 2.0, 6.66 and 20.0 mmol (0.36, 1.08, 3.58, 10.75 g) of sodium taurocholate the ten obese type II diabetic volunteers (!) in the study by Adrian et al. received rectally via a silastic cannula in 20 ml of 1% (wt/vol.) carboxymethyl cellulose over a period of 1 min after an overnight fast - a small injection with profound effects:

Figure 1: Response of insulin, blood glucose and GLP-1 to rectal administration of different doses of taurocholate to obese type-2 diabetics (based on Adrian. 2013)

As the data in figure 1 shows the injection of deliquescent yellowish crystalline bile acid, most people know for its involved in the emulsification and absorption of dietary fats and fat-soluble vitamins, exerted profound effects on hormonal peptides we have long believed to be produced mainly in response to the ingestion of specific nutrients or the gastrointestinal production of short-chain fatty acids from the latter (Tolhurst. 2013). In particular, the rectal administratoin of sodium taurocholate (the sodium stabilizes the molecule in water) lead to

• dose-dependent increases in plasma concentrations of active GLP-1 and total PYY (not shown in figure 1, but increase paralleled GLP-1) both of which were statistically highly significant (p<0.001) with the highest dose of taurocholate leading to a 7.2x increase in active GLP-1 and a 4.2x increase in PYY
• at the same time plasma insulin increased by 2.6x and the glucose levels decreased progressively over 60 min by up to 3.8 mmol/l

An impressive result which does yet beg the question: Is this good or bad? I mean a 2.6x increase in insulin? That must be bad, right? It certainly would - but if that's a 2.6x increase that does exactly what it's supposed to, i.e. reduce blood glucose levels in obese type II diabetics, it's unquestionably a good thing.

 Figure 2: Food intake 75min after taurocholate administration at different doses; subjects were provided with their favorite meals and advised to eat to satiety (based on Adrian. 2013)

What's yet even better are the downstream effects on subsequent food intake (see figure 2). 75min after the somewhat embarrassing treatment, the subjects had free access to a as much of their favorite food as they wanted. For 2h, their simple task was "eat as much until you are fully satisfied" and the subjects complied. On the occasions where their suppository contained the high dose of taurocholate, the chicken wings, hamburgers, fries and chocolate cakes or whatever these guys indicated were their favorite foods were almost twice as satiating! The 10mol dosage reduced the food intake by roughly 1/4 still and would be in the range of my recommended 'reduce your energy intake by ~20% if you want to maximize fat and minimize lean mass loss' recommendation - yet not as a result of pure willpower, but simply because more was not necessary and much more probably not even possible!
I can control my appetite I don't need these tools

I can see that some of you are now giving a sniff at those gluttonous fatsos who are not able to control their appetite and therefor simply cannot lose weight and I guess for a small minority of dieters that may actually be the case. The emerging research on the far-reaching metabolic effects  of the so-called "satiety hormones" PYY and GLP-1 does yet clearly suggest that gluttony is only part of the reason why the efforts of dieters all around the globe fail time and again. And it is therefore more than reasonable to assume that this satiety induced caloric reduction, contrary to the common will-power based mild to profound starvation,  will actually produce the expected weight loss results as long as it can be sustained over weeks and months.

Figure 3: It's as easy as can be - work against your body, starve yourself, never eat to satiety and lose (top) vs. work with your body, use gut-brain-axis (GBA) modulators and win (bottom)

Direct evidence for this hypothesis comes from yesterday's news, where the reduction in ghrelin, the hunger-inducing counterpart to GLP-1, PYY & co helped the dieters in the high algae fiber group to adhere to their diets, to lose weight and more importantly body fat at a constant rate over the whole 12-week study period (cf. "Sodium-Alginate for 30-40% More Weight Loss and Body Fat Reduction on Mild Caloric Deficit"). 

Taurocholate suppositories, taurine, cholesterol, statins and yet another reason we are fat

Image 2: What do panic buying and overeating have in common? In both cases the affected people or their bodies expect that there is going to be a shortage in the future and they got to squirrel goods or nutrients away.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist or SuppVersity student to figure from the name alone that a molecule which goes by the name "taurocholate" could contain taurine and cholesterol, right? Right! So what happens if you don't eat enough sulfur(-amino acids) which are necessary as a precursor for taurine biosynthesis (Brosnan. 2006), because those are mainly found in yummy high cholesterol foods such as eggs and co? Right! You will neither produce enough taurine nor have enough cholesterol to produce those amounts of taurocholate and other bile acids as would be necessary to reach the enteroendocrine cells in the distal colon, which would then release those peptides that will signal your consciousness that you are satiated and your metabolism to keep burning those damn love-handles because there is plenty of energy coming in and no sign of impeding famine.

The result, a mismatch between energy intake and energy sensing / satiety, will not just have you eat, eat and... eat! as if there was no tomorrow (see image 2), it will also have your body squirrel away every calorie it can save right into your evergrowing adipose tissue. You develop diabetes and hyperlipidemia and your doctor who beliefs in "medical standards" throws a bunch of statins at you. The statins reduce your cholesterol further. There is less substrate for bile acid production. The mismatch becomes even greater, your energy metabolism is tumbling and you are hungrier than ever before... the perfect storm, it's raging!

"Where is the evidence?"

Image 3: What happens when you feed rats 375x more cholesterol than usual, from whole eggs of course? Right, their lipid profile improves! How do you know, did you read my previous blogpost on the study by Yang et al. (Yang. 2013)? If you didn't click on the image to get there.

There is no evidence for a hilarious theory like that? Well let's start with what happened, when we stopped eating nutritious foods, began throwing away egg yolks and started replacing regular foods with cholesterol-free junk... we got fatter: Year by year! Let's go ahead and take a look at the host of scientific evidence for the beneficial effects of taurine on glucose and lipid metabolism (e.g. Park. 1998; Hansen. 2001; Mühlfeld. 2011; De la Puerta; 2010; Nardelli. 2011). And let's finally combine that with the still hushed up pro-diabetic effects of statins (cf. "With >50% Increased Risk to Develop New-Onset Diabetes, Statins are "Starter Drugs" for Post-Menopausal Women"). I guess that's not conclusive scientific evidence, yet and as so often only part of "why we get fat", but it is certainly a promising hypothesis that adds another piece to a puzzle where the gut-brain-axis or gut-endocrine-axis is occupying a place that can hardly be underestimated.

References:

1. Adrian TE, Gariballa S, Parekh KA, Thomas SA, Saadi H, Al Kaabi J, Nagelkerke N, Gedulin B, Young AA. Rectal taurocholate increases L cell and insulin secretion, and decreases blood glucose and food intake in obese type 2 diabetic volunteers. Diabetologia. 2013 Jun 14.
2. Brosnan JT, Brosnan ME. The sulfur-containing amino acids: an overview. J Nutr. 2006 Jun;136(6 Suppl):1636S-1640S.
3. De la Puerta C, Arrieta FJ, Balsa JA, Botella-Carretero JI, Zamarrón I, Vázquez C. Taurine and glucose metabolism: a review. Nutr Hosp. 2010 Nov-Dec;25(6):910-9.
4. Hansen SH. The role of taurine in diabetes and the development of diabetic complications. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2001 Sep-Oct;17(5):330-46.
5. Mühlfeld A, Kubitz R, Dransfeld O, Häussinger D, Wettstein M. Taurine supplementation induces multidrug resistance protein 2 and bile salt export pump expression in rats and prevents endotoxin-induced cholestasis. Arch Biochem Biophys. 2003 May 1;413(1):32-40. 
6. Nardelli TR, Ribeiro RA, Balbo SL, Vanzela EC, Carneiro EM, Boschero AC, Bonfleur ML. Taurine prevents fat deposition and ameliorates plasma lipid profile in monosodium glutamate-obese rats. Amino Acids. 2011 Oct;41(4):901-8.
7. Park T, Lee K. Dietary taurine supplementation reduces plasma and liver cholesterol and triglyceride levels in rats fed a high-cholesterol or a cholesterol-free diet. Adv Exp Med Biol. 1998;442:319-25.
8. Stephan ZF, Armstrong MJ, Hayes KC. Bile lipid alterations in taurine-depleted monkeys. Am J Clin Nutr. 1981 Feb;34(2):204-10.
9. Tolhurst G, Heffron H, Lam YS, Parker HE, Habib AM, Diakogiannaki E, Cameron J, Grosse J, Reimann F, Gribble FM. Short-chain fatty acids stimulate glucagon-like peptide-1 secretion via the G-protein-coupled receptor FFAR2. Diabetes. 2013 Feb;61(2):364-71.
10. Yang F, Ma M, Xu J, Yu X, Qiu N. An egg-enriched diet attenuates plasma lipids and mediates cholesterol metabolism of high-cholesterol fed rats. Lipids. 2013 Mar;47(3):269-77. Epub 2013 Jan 11.