juanitacarlos
Member
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2012
- Messages
- 417
Interesting article - this what haidut has been talking about recently.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
Peata said:Niacinamide is supposed to form this in the body, isn't it?
haidut said:Niacinamide raises NAD and consequently the NAD/NADH ratio, which is one of the primary ways to measure if the body is in oxidized or reduced state. The higher the NAD/NADH ratio, the more oxidized (oxygenated) your body is, which I think is what Ray Peat says the goal is. High NADH indicates reduced state and is usually found in stress-related conditions like mental "disease" and alcoholism. I would not take supplemental NADH, you want NAD and for that niacinamide is best. The other substances that raise NAD are niacin, nicotinamide riboside (sold as NiaGen), and NMN described in the Telegraph article. One thing to keep in mind is that in addition to NMN and NiaGen being expensive and possibly patented substances, the studies with them claim that both substances activate the sirtuin genes like SIRT-1, SIRT-2, etc. Ray says this probably promotes tumor growth, and niacinamide is a known sirtuin inhibitor, so another reason for taking plain old niacinamide.
Even on the basis of raising NAD alone, niacinamide still wins and in equal doses with NiaGen and NMN raises NAD by about 30%-40% more.
So, I think this is another point for Ray.
haidut said:One thing to keep in mind is that in addition to NMN and NiaGen being expensive and possibly patented substances, the studies with them claim that both substances activate the sirtuin genes like SIRT-1, SIRT-2, etc. Ray says this probably promotes tumor growth, and niacinamide is a known sirtuin inhibitor, so another reason for taking plain old niacinamide.
pone said:haidut said:One thing to keep in mind is that in addition to NMN and NiaGen being expensive and possibly patented substances, the studies with them claim that both substances activate the sirtuin genes like SIRT-1, SIRT-2, etc. Ray says this probably promotes tumor growth, and niacinamide is a known sirtuin inhibitor, so another reason for taking plain old niacinamide.
Do you have any references to studies about SIRT-1 activation causing cancer?
I thought that SIRT-1 is NAD+ dependent? See reference:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3527007/
If yes, then how would niacinamide avoid activation of SIRT-1 since it is creating more NAD+ from NADH? Is there a reference for that?
There are so many articles now with resveratrol, claiming that it also activates SIRT-1, and that there are all kinds of health benefits from activating SIRT-1 and - in some species - extended lifespan as well.
haidut said:Niacinamide raises NAD and consequently the NAD/NADH ratio, which is one of the primary ways to measure if the body is in oxidized or reduced state. The higher the NAD/NADH ratio, the more oxidized (oxygenated) your body is, which I think is what Ray Peat says the goal is. High NADH indicates reduced state and is usually found in stress-related conditions like mental "disease" and alcoholism. I would not take supplemental NADH, you want NAD and for that niacinamide is best. The other substances that raise NAD are niacin, nicotinamide riboside (sold as NiaGen), and NMN described in the Telegraph article. One thing to keep in mind is that in addition to NMN and NiaGen being expensive and possibly patented substances, the studies with them claim that both substances activate the sirtuin genes like SIRT-1, SIRT-2, etc. Ray says this probably promotes tumor growth, and niacinamide is a known sirtuin inhibitor, so another reason for taking plain old niacinamide.
Even on the basis of raising NAD alone, niacinamide still wins and in equal doses with NiaGen and NMN raises NAD by about 30%-40% more.
So, I think this is another point for Ray.
Such_Saturation said:Yes, everything to do with SIRT requires euphemisms for "scam".
The carbon is antisceptic, among other things. Similar results are achieved with charcoal/activated charcoal (i.e. carbon) or by raising mice in a germ-free environment (i.e. 2x lifespan improvement). Peat's written about both. You could make charcoal in your backyard.The one study from 2012 that I still cannot wrap my mind around is where they gave carbon 60 (C60) emulsified in olive oil to rats, and the lifespans of the rats doubled. That's the kind of discovery that will take decades to understand (if the result duplicates in other studies) but will be easy and cheap to implement for a human. You will be able to get benefit from these discoveries before they fully understand the mechanisms.
I may have missed this somewhere in the forum, but on Danny Roddy's podcast there was mention of getting the NAD/NADH ratio tested. Is that the formal name of the test? I currently talked to my doctor's office and they have not heard of this test and its not on the Quest labs list of tests. They do have lactate dehydrogenase; would this be considered just as good or close? Any and all thoughts would be great.
My apologies if this has already been answered.
If you think about the types of stimuli that activate SIRT1, it seems rather clear that SIRT1 serves to translate stress (e.g., hunger, heat, cold, etc.) into body's adaptive response. Since chronic stress leads to bad things, it seems likely that chronic activation of sirt1 should lead to problems.
However, we know that mortality rate increases among those who are "stress-free" (this is one reason that I wonder if Ray's concept of making all cellular energy utilization as optimal as possible is what is best for the human body - as this would minimize stress at cellular level). For example, lowering cortisol is desirable, but its complete suppression can shunt the feedback loop necessary for adaptation. Following this reasoning, some SIRT1 activation is probably necessary.
It is interesting that mitochondrial biogenesis also appears to involve stress (and therefore SIRT1). So, how does stress lead to mitochondrial biogenesis? Apparently, SIRT1 activation leads to the expression of PGC-1alpha protein. For this translation to occur efficiently, however, it appears we need high NAD level. That is, high NAD/NADH ratio is not only desirable for efficient energy utilization, but also for optimal adaptive response to stress.