Niagen Worth It Over Niacinamide?

[jb116]

isnt the only way to get rid of pufa, besides not eating more of them, is to burn them off? so wouldnt niacinamide discourage burning of pufa, and thus make you store pufa much longer than you should? I heard pufa burn quicker and before saturated fats are burned? someone else on here told me several people on here started gaining fat using larger doses of niacinamide and had to stop. I don't know if the ideal metabolism is achievable unless you totally remove PUFA? my point is it seems like niacinamide could be a negative for nearly everyone. if you consume extra sugar or extra calories simply to handle the increased niacinamide, wouldn't that cause more fat gain as well due to more calories.

do you know if nicotinamide riboside would also have the anti thyroid, anti fat burning effects of regular nicotinamide/niacinamide

Sorry you posted before I could get my edit in. Just in case you missed it, Edit: Just to answer the question about NR vs niacinamide, it's really a matter of methyl groups and glycine balance. If somebody needs to balance methylation (note: not simply decrease or increase, but balance properly) and/or keep glycine replete, heavy niacinamide use then might heavily deplete methyl groups while using glycine to buffer them. So it's something to keep in mind.

Not "burning fat" isn't necessarily a net gain of fat because with a well running glucose metabolism, glucuronidation and sulfation of fatty acids (as well as estrogen) works very effectively. That's why proper use of even niacinamide actually helps with fatty liver, obesity, and blood sugar issues in the long run.

 

[BigChad]

Sorry you posted before I could get my edit in. Just in case you missed it, Edit: Just to answer the question about NR vs niacinamide, it's really a matter of methyl groups and glycine balance. If somebody needs to balance methylation (note: not simply decrease or increase, but balance properly) and/or keep glycine replete, heavy niacinamide use then might heavily deplete methyl groups while using glycine to buffer them. So it's something to keep in mind.

Not "burning fat" isn't necessarily a net gain of fat because with a well running glucose metabolism, glucuronidation and sulfation of fatty acids (as well as estrogen) works very effectively. That's why proper use of even niacinamide actually helps with fatty liver, obesity, and blood sugar issues in the long run.

if you are eating a moderate fat, moderate carb or low carb, and high protein diet, anything that would inhibit FFA would mess with your fat burning right? Like wouldn't people who do a very high fat, high protein, low carb diet need to be burning fat since they aren't consuming many carbs? the more carbs you eat, the less ffa you want, while the more fat you eat, the more you want to be burning fat?

 

[jb116]

if you are eating a moderate fat, moderate carb or low carb, and high protein diet, anything that would inhibit FFA would mess with your fat burning right? Like wouldn't people who do a very high fat, high protein, low carb diet need to be burning fat since they aren't consuming many carbs? the more carbs you eat, the less ffa you want, while the more fat you eat, the more you want to be burning fat?

For the most part, it'll "mess" with fat burning as the main substrate overall. That comes with metabolic implications though. And as I mentioned earlier, it doesn't necessarily equate to a net gain of fat because the aforementioned liver processes. The biochemistry of burning glucose simply allows for better metabolism. Fat burning strictly speaking overall, over time, depletes these certain liver processes that maintain good health. it's why this forum and Peat's perspective is all about glucose, oxidative metabolism. Fat burning by the way is not entirely inhibited either. The old expression fat burning in the flame of carbohydrate is precisely built on the premise of carbs maintaining a level of oxaloacetate (I know some are against this intermediate). But avoiding a "normal, balanced" diet i.e. without carbs, you won't create enough of it to pair with acetyl CoA to metabolize fat while remaining a glucose burner.