3
   

Workouts and vitamins, pros and cons

 
 
Reply Tue 18 Feb, 2014 03:45 pm
I read an article in the NY Times that surprised me about this subject.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/12/why-vitamins-may-be-bad-for-your-workout/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
I'll quote some of it, and you can google the article if interested
quoting

FEB 12, 12:01 AM
Why Vitamins May Be Bad for Your Workout
By GRETCHEN REYNOLDS

Many people take vitamins as part of their daily fitness regimens, having heard that antioxidants aid physical recovery and amplify the impact of workouts. But in another example of science undercutting deeply held assumptions, several new experiments find that antioxidant supplements may actually reduce the benefits of training.
Antioxidants became popular dietary supplements largely because they were said to sop up free radicals, the highly reactive oxygen molecules that are generated during daily activities. Physical exertion, through its breakdown of oxygen, results in the creationof large numbers of these molecules, which, in excess, can lead to cell death and tissue damage. So it seems logical that reducing the number of free radicals produced by exercise would be desirable.
Enter antioxidants, which absorb and deactivate free radicals. While the body creates its own antioxidants, until recently many researchers believed that we produce too few natural antioxidants to counteract the depredations from free radicals created during exercise. So many people who exercise began downing large doses of antioxidants such as vitamins C and E, even though few experiments in people had actually examined the precise physiological impacts of antioxidant supplements in people who work out.
For a study published last week in The Journal of Physiology, researchers with the Norwegian School of Sport Sciences in Oslo and other institutions gathered 54 healthy adult men and women, most of them recreational runners or cyclists, and conducted a series of tests, including muscle biopsies, blood draws and treadmill runs, to establish their baseline endurance capacity and the cellular health of their muscles.
Then they divided the volunteers into two groups. Those in one group took four pills a day, delivering a total dose of 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C and 235 milligrams of vitamin E. Members of the second group got identical placebo pills.
Finally, they asked all of the participants to complete a vigorous 11-week training program, consisting of increasingly intense interval sessions once or twice per week, together with two weekly sessions of moderately paced hour-long runs. By the end, all of the volunteers were more fit than they had been at the start, with their maximum endurance capacity increasing by an average of about 8 percent.
But their bodies had responded quite differently to the training. The runners who had swallowed the placebo pills showed robust increases of biochemical markers that are known to goose the creation of mitochondria, the tiny structures within cells that generate energy, in cells in their bloodstream and muscles. More mitochondria, especially in muscle cells, means more energy and, by and large, better health and fitness. The creation of new mitochondria is, in fact, generally held to be one of the most important effects of exercise.
But the volunteers who had consumed the antioxidants had significantly lower levels of the markers related to mitochondrial creation. The researchers didn’t actually count the specific populations of mitochondria within their volunteers’ muscles cells, but presumably, over time, those taking the antioxidants would see a smaller uptick in mitochondrial density than among those not taking them.
end of quote clip

I didn't get to the comments on the article, so there may be some interesting takes found in those.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 3 • Views: 1,180 • Replies: 16
No top replies

 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 04:35 pm
Whatever good some free radicals may do, free radicals also cause inappropriate chemical reactions with every structure they touch.
Zarathustra
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 05:10 pm
@ossobuco,
In general you should not take vitamins unless you have some known deficiency, which only diagnostic test will show, or if you have specific medical reasons such as pregnancy. Taking more than needed of any whatever soluble vitamin just means you will have a high vitamin urine.

Taking mega-doses of fat soluble vitamins, such as vitamin A, can be dangerous and even life threatening. Some animal organs, such as polar bear liver or pancreas have been known to cause deaths because of high vitamin A content. One of many process is the one Brandon9000 noted: the formation of free radicals.

The problems you noted in your post are probably due to disturbance of normal physiology by high vitamin intake.

Vitamin companies NOT physicians are the ones who push vitamin usage.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 05:32 pm
@Brandon9000,
That's what I've always thought, Brandon, but I'm open to considering that article's points re some circumstances.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 05:45 pm
@Zarathustra,
I've known that about vitamin A for at least 45 years.

On the free radical thing, yes, they are indicted in many of our metabolic problems, but they also may exist in the first place with a metabolic action, as in the commentary about mitochondria.
Zarathustra
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 05:59 pm
@ossobuco,
Since I am only 13 that is not something to which I can relate.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 07:21 pm
From another recent post of mine, one example of something that a supplement might do beyond repairing deficiencies:

Resveratrol
Resveratrol can be purchased at any vitamin store. Resveratrol is a member of a group of plant compounds called polyphenols. These compounds are thought to have antioxidant properties, protecting the body against the kind of damage linked to increased risk for conditions such as cancer and heart disease. Resveratrol is found in the skin of red grapes, but other sources include peanuts and berries. Resveratrol works by acting on the SIRT1 gene, a gene that is believed to control the function and longevity of cells.

In 2003, Howitz and David Sinclair reported that resveratrol significantly extends the lifespan of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Sinclair later reported that resveratrol also prolongs the lifespan of the worm, Caenorhabditis elegans, and the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster. In 2007, a different group of researchers were able to reproduce Sinclair's results with C. elegans, but other groups could not achieve consistent increases in lifespan of D. melanogaster, other flies, or C. elegans. The first demonstration of life extension by resveratrol supplementation in a vertebrate was obtained in 2006. In a short-lived fish, Nothobranchius furzeri, with a median life span of nine weeks, a maximal dose of resveratrol increased the median lifespan by 56%.

From my post at:

http://able2know.org/topic/233277-1
Zarathustra
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 08:58 pm
@Brandon9000,
In the context of the post you pointed to, I would not accept that there is anything available currently that you drink or inject or whatever that can “slow aging.” It certainly possible that it could happen but I think you are talking about centuries if ever.

While this kind of stuff is fun to contemplate and discuss (although not necessarily in the on line forum) it really points out how far we have to go rather than how far we have come. My background is not in bio-science but having consulted to Big Pharma for a few years I learned close-up how difficult a task you have laid out.

Chemicals that they have created and then studied for 5 or 10 years before they can go into animal studies and those studies failing, doing nothing more than moving from vitro to vivo. Even many of those that move through animal (dogs almost exclusively) studies cannot get past FIH studies on the clinical side because the effect is so markedly different in humans than in dogs.

In your other post you have single acting compounds that (might) have been shown to work in vivo, or in yeasts, or fish. I don’t see that supporting any current supplement being able to show real age expansion or a short road to such a product.

Finally, yes we should be doing research in this area and are doing that so you may need to talk in terms of increasing funding if that is what you want.

Wrapping back to the OP’s interesting article snippet, the most amazing thing to me is the strength of the body-brain connections. The people who got nothing but a placebo had this positive increase. It cannot be said to be “psychological” as the change was at the cellular level of which they could have no direct knowledge. You would not believe the problems the placebo effect has on Pharma. Remember the placebo effect is the enemy of new drugs.

So it might be better to concentrating on “thinking” your processes to slow down than turn to a chemical malted.
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 09:11 pm
@Zarathustra,
Zarathustra wrote:

Since I am only 13 that is not something to which I can relate.

Is that sarcasm or a typo because if in fact you are merely 13 then you opened this a2k account when you were 3 years old.

Quote:
Member since September 30, 2003

URL: http://able2know.org/user/zarathustra/
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 09:24 pm
@Zarathustra,
Then why are you instructing me or others who have experience in these issues?

I admit I don't know on this one, but it interests me, and I have some background for that interest.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 09:28 pm
@Brandon9000,
Ahem, what about the original article?

I take my reservatrol with a glass of red, but you can take pills if you prefer.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 10:05 pm
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:

Ahem, what about the original article?

I take my reservatrol with a glass of red, but you can take pills if you prefer.

That post was my attempt to make an easy palatable summary for A2K and I appear to have failed, since the post was mostly ignored. Google resveratrol and you'll get a million hits.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Feb, 2014 10:12 pm
@Zarathustra,
Zarathustra wrote:

...It certainly possible that it could happen but I think you are talking about centuries if ever.

While this kind of stuff is fun to contemplate and discuss (although not necessarily in the on line forum) it really points out how far we have to go rather than how far we have come...

So, what you're saying is that even if something to slow down aging were invented today, it would take awhile to be approved by the FDA. First of all, I doubt that a discovery must be studied for 5-10 years before animal testing can begin. Secondly, it's irrelevant to my point that there may be some benefit in taking supplements to people who don't have a deficiency disease or my secondary point that there are theories of aging which may have some truth to them.

I get that aging is a complex process that's caused by multiple factors, but you're talking as though, unlike other medical questions, it virtually defies analysis to the point that it's almost unworthy of scholarly discussion. What is there about this phenomenon which makes you think it virtually defies study?
Zarathustra
 
  2  
Reply Mon 24 Feb, 2014 01:01 pm
@ossobuco,
I wasn't instructing I was replying, how am I to know what knowledge you have.

The second was a nonsense answer as, after looking at your posting history, you are just another A2K "expert" who is never wrong about anything. You might want to just skip responding to me if you feel I have nothing to say. I am not impressed by internet tough guys.
0 Replies
 
Zarathustra
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Feb, 2014 01:07 pm
@Brandon9000,
First that was a response to the original OP. Second if you believe it or not doesn't change what I know and have experienced first hand. Nowhere did I say it isn't worthy of study, it is being studied. On the positive side you are well on your way to being an A2K "expert" not wanting to be challenged in any way. That is hardly the mark of someone studying to be a physicist but perfect for this site.

So here is the reply you wanted. Of course there is a supplement on the market that extends life and you have found it. Is that better?
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Feb, 2014 01:34 pm
@Brandon9000,
I didn't mean to be caustic, Brandon - I tend to be interested in what you post about science matters. I know about reservatrol - but I'm interested in takes on the original article, which is why I said that.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Feb, 2014 05:03 pm
@Zarathustra,
Zarathustra wrote:

First that was a response to the original OP. Second if you believe it or not doesn't change what I know and have experienced first hand. Nowhere did I say it isn't worthy of study, it is being studied. On the positive side you are well on your way to being an A2K "expert" not wanting to be challenged in any way. That is hardly the mark of someone studying to be a physicist but perfect for this site....

Fitting, then, since I'm not studying to be a physicist.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Immortality and Doctor Volkov - Discussion by edgarblythe
Sleep Paralysis - Discussion by Nick Ashley
On the edge and toppling off.... - Discussion by Izzie
Surgery--Again - Discussion by Roberta
PTSD, is it caused by a blow to the head? - Question by Rickoshay75
THE GIRL IS ILL - Discussion by Setanta
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Workouts and vitamins, pros and cons
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/07/2020 at 05:37:58