Peat Has No Understanding Of Glycolysis

Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
Directly quoted from a Peat article:

The Crabtree effect is usually thought of as just something that happens in tumors, and some tissues that are very active glycolytically, and some bacteria, when they are given large amounts of glucose. But when we consider lactate, which is produced by normal tissues when they are deprived of oxygen or are disturbed by a stress reaction, the Crabtree effect becomes a very general thing. The "respiratory defect" that we can see on the organismic level during hyperventilation, is very similar to the "systemic Crabtree effect" that happens during stress, in which respiration is shut down while glycolysis is activated. Since oxidative metabolism is many times more efficient for producing energy than glycolysis is, it is maladaptive to shut it down during stress.

Since the presence of lactate is so commonly considered to be a normal and adaptive response to stress, the shut-down of respiration in the presence of lactate is generally considered to be caused by something else, with lactate being seen as an effect rather than a cause. Nitric oxide and calcium excess have been identified as the main endogenous antirespiratory factors in stress, though free unsaturated fatty acids are clearly involved, too. However, glycolysis, and the products of glycolysis, lactate and pyruvate, have been found to have a causal role in the suppression of respiration; it is both a cause and a consequence of the respiratory shutdown, though nitric oxide, calcium, and fatty acids are closely involved,

Since lactic acid is produced by the breakdown of glucose, a high level of lactate in the blood means that a large amount of sugar is being consumed; in response, the body mobilizes free fatty acids as an additional source of energy. An increase of free fatty acids suppresses the oxidation of glucose. (This is called the Randle effect, glucose-fatty acid cycle, substrate-competition cycle, etc.)

It's really hard to read his lack of understanding of glycolysis. Oxidative metabolism is not separate from glycolysis, it is the next step (if oxygen is present). Lactate is not a direct product of glycolysis, pyruvate is. Lactate is formed in an anaerobic environment from the breakdown of pyruvate.

Glycolysis is oxygen independent, but you wouldn't know that throughout all of Peat's writings. Someone should point this out to him. So much of his writing is centered around lactic acid, yet the man can't communicate how and when it's formed. The breakdown of glucose should be separated into a flow chart. 1)Glycolysis , and 2a) pyruvate oxidation (in the mitochondria) that ends up as acetyl CoA entering the Kreb's cycle; and 2b) pyruvate fermentation (in the cytosol) that ends up as lactate, which will be cycle back to the liver in the Cori cycle.
 

DuggaDugga

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
204
Directly quoted from a Peat article:

The Crabtree effect is usually thought of as just something that happens in tumors, and some tissues that are very active glycolytically, and some bacteria, when they are given large amounts of glucose. But when we consider lactate, which is produced by normal tissues when they are deprived of oxygen or are disturbed by a stress reaction, the Crabtree effect becomes a very general thing. The "respiratory defect" that we can see on the organismic level during hyperventilation, is very similar to the "systemic Crabtree effect" that happens during stress, in which respiration is shut down while glycolysis is activated. Since oxidative metabolism is many times more efficient for producing energy than glycolysis is, it is maladaptive to shut it down during stress.

Since the presence of lactate is so commonly considered to be a normal and adaptive response to stress, the shut-down of respiration in the presence of lactate is generally considered to be caused by something else, with lactate being seen as an effect rather than a cause. Nitric oxide and calcium excess have been identified as the main endogenous antirespiratory factors in stress, though free unsaturated fatty acids are clearly involved, too. However, glycolysis, and the products of glycolysis, lactate and pyruvate, have been found to have a causal role in the suppression of respiration; it is both a cause and a consequence of the respiratory shutdown, though nitric oxide, calcium, and fatty acids are closely involved,

Since lactic acid is produced by the breakdown of glucose, a high level of lactate in the blood means that a large amount of sugar is being consumed; in response, the body mobilizes free fatty acids as an additional source of energy. An increase of free fatty acids suppresses the oxidation of glucose. (This is called the Randle effect, glucose-fatty acid cycle, substrate-competition cycle, etc.)

It's really hard to read his lack of understanding of glycolysis. Oxidative metabolism is not separate from glycolysis, it is the next step (if oxygen is present). Lactate is not a direct product of glycolysis, pyruvate is. Lactate is formed in an anaerobic environment from the breakdown of pyruvate.

Glycolysis is oxygen independent, but you wouldn't know that throughout all of Peat's writings. Someone should point this out to him. So much of his writing is centered around lactic acid, yet the man can't communicate how and when it's formed. The breakdown of glucose should be separated into a flow chart. 1)Glycolysis , and 2a) pyruvate oxidation (in the mitochondria) that ends up as acetyl CoA entering the Kreb's cycle; and 2b) pyruvate fermentation (in the cytosol) that ends up as lactate, which will be cycle back to the liver in the Cori cycle.

Oxidative metabolism occurs in the mitochondria while glycolysis occurs in the cytosol, so it is quite separate actually. Acetyl CoA can be produced by fat as well, another major point of distinction. If oxidative metabolism is not separate form glycolysis then why can cancerous cells with dysfunctional mitochondria still perform glycolysis and not oxidative phosphorylation?
Oxygen being present is not simply enough to lead to oxidative phosphorylation, depending on the perceived energy needs of the cell.

Do you actually think that he doesn't know glycolysis is oxygen independent??? You can't cite three short paragraphs, complain there's insufficient detail, and use that as evidence he doesn't know the minutia of respiration. (especially when you yourself apparently don't understand it very well)
 
OP
Colin Nordstrom
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
I just wrote everything you wrote man, what are you talking about? Actually, you just plagiarized me.
 
OP
Colin Nordstrom
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
Do you want me to post article after article where he states that glycolysis is in an anaerobic environment? Apparently, he doesn't know. Hell, the Wikipedia article was just changed
 

Energizer

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
611
Write an email to him, maybe he might help you realize you have no idea what you're talking about.
 
OP
Colin Nordstrom
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
When I say you can't separate the two, I mean, you can't have oxidative metabolism without glycolysis. The same as you can't have pyruvate fermentation without glycolysis. Whether oxygen is present or not, sugar is going to be broken down into something (Acetyl CoA with oxygen, Lactic Acid without oxygen). So my statement is valid.
 
OP
Colin Nordstrom
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
@DuggaDugga, your quote: If oxidative metabolism is not separate form glycolysis then why can cancerous cells with dysfunctional mitochondria still perform glycolysis and not oxidative phosphorylation?

Cancer cells with dysfunctional mitochondria can perform glycolysis because glycolysis doesn't occur in the mitochondria. They can't perform oxidative phosphorylation because the mitochondria is defective. I'm really confused how this refutes my point.
 

DuggaDugga

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
204
When I say you can't separate the two, I mean, you can't have oxidative metabolism without glycolysis. The same as you can't have pyruvate fermentation without glycolysis. Whether oxygen is present or not, sugar is going to be broken down into something (Acetyl CoA with oxygen, Lactic Acid without oxygen). So my statement is valid.
Ohhh, so I can't assume you don't understand just because you didn't write out every detail? Basically exactly what you're doing with the three paragraph excerpt of Ray's article you're quoting? How's that work?

And by the way, aerobic glycolysis (the Warburg effect) is a well-documented phenomenon. It would benefit to educate yourself on the matter.
 

DuggaDugga

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
204
@DuggaDugga, your quote: If oxidative metabolism is not separate form glycolysis then why can cancerous cells with dysfunctional mitochondria still perform glycolysis and not oxidative phosphorylation?

Cancer cells with dysfunctional mitochondria can perform glycolysis because glycolysis doesn't occur in the mitochondria. They can't perform oxidative phosphorylation because the mitochondria is defective. I'm really confused how this refutes my point.

You said, and i quote, "Oxidative metabolism is not separate from glycolysis". They are. I provided examples.
If you're still confused, there's nothing else I can do to help you.
 
OP
Colin Nordstrom
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
Quote from Wikipedia: In oncology, the Warburg effect is the observation that most cancer cells predominantly produce energy by a high rate of glycolysis followed by lactic acid fermentation in the cytosol,[4][5] rather than by a comparatively low rate of glycolysis followed by oxidation of pyruvate in mitochondria as in most normal cells.

Again, DuggaDugga, where do you get aerobic glycolysis from this statement? You just redefined the Warburg Effect.
 
OP
Colin Nordstrom
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
You just made a complete false statement. The Warburg Effect does not involve oxygen. Cite an article where the Warburg Effect occurs in an aerobic environment.
 

DuggaDugga

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
204
Quote from Wikipedia: In oncology, the Warburg effect is the observation that most cancer cells predominantly produce energy by a high rate of glycolysis followed by lactic acid fermentation in the cytosol,[4][5] rather than by a comparatively low rate of glycolysis followed by oxidation of pyruvate in mitochondria as in most normal cells.

Again, DuggaDugga, where do you get aerobic glycolysis from this statement? You just redefined the Warburg Effect.
Aerobic Glycolysis: Beyond Proliferation
Would you like me to call and read it to you as well?
 
OP
Colin Nordstrom
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
You provided an example where oxygen wasn't present (pyruvate fermentation in cancer cells). You didn't provide an example where glycolysis is separated from oxidative metabolism (when oxygen is present). Thus when oxygen is present, glycolysis can't be separated from oxidative phosphorylation.
 
OP
Colin Nordstrom
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
Don't be condescending. Interesting article. Shows that Wikipedia is wrong again. Needs to be revised. But this doesn't change my opinion on what Ray writes consistently. Yes, you provided a legitimate example where oxygen can be involved in a generally anaerobic process (cancer). But Ray doesn't use glycolysis in consistent pathological terms. My original point still stands. Ray, across the board, in article after articles cites glycolysis as an anaerobic process when it is not. You just supported my argument. You showed that glycolysis is not just oxygen independent, but oxygen-DEPENDENT.
 
OP
Colin Nordstrom
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
240
@DuggaDugga, is there confusion about the Warburg Effect? There are a couple Wikipedia citations in that article stating just the opposite about oxygen's presence in cancer. Interesting. I feel lactic acid is messing with CO2 and oxygen binding in the cancer cell.
 

DuggaDugga

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
204
Don't be condescending. Interesting article. Shows that Wikipedia is wrong again. Needs to be revised. But this doesn't change my opinion on what Ray writes consistently. Yes, you provided a legitimate example where oxygen can be involved in a generally anaerobic process (cancer). But Ray doesn't use glycolysis in consistent pathological terms. My original point still stands. Ray, across the board, in article after articles cites glycolysis as an anaerobic process when it is not. You just supported my argument. You showed that glycolysis is not just oxygen independent, but oxygen-DEPENDENT.
I'm not going to argue with you over semantics of Ray's writing- that's what this is. You go ahead and interpret Ray's writing any way that pleases you, do the same with my comments as well. This discourse no longer interests me
 

Wagner83

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
3,295
I don't know about XYZ but Constantine and theLaw are ignorant ***** that's for sure.:buttsway:bluewhip

It's funny to see people trying to teach you health and diet when reading their posts one can have serious doubts about the state of their health.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom