• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Seems like a lot of hype for this supplement

hype reseveratol

  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 serp777

  • Guest
  • 622 posts
  • 11
  • Location:who cares

Posted 10 June 2014 - 05:49 AM


I'm wondering why an entire sub forum was made for this particular substance. There seems to be nothing extra ordinary about resveratol, and because of this study:

 

"A study of Italians who consume a diet rich in resveratrol -- the compound found in red wine, dark chocolate and berries -- finds they live no longer than and are just as likely to develop cardiovascular disease or cancer as those who eat or drink smaller amounts of the antioxidant."

 

And more to the point-

 

"Despite the negative results, Semba says, studies have shown that consumption of red wine, dark chocolate and berries does reduce inflammation in some people and still appears to protect the heart. "It's just that the benefits, if they are there, must come from other polyphenols or substances found in those foodstuffs,""

 

http://www.scienceda...40512214128.htm


Edited by serp777, 10 June 2014 - 05:50 AM.

  • dislike x 6
  • like x 3

#2 geo12the

  • Guest
  • 762 posts
  • -211

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:16 PM

Surprised this study hasn't been discussed here yet. The study measured resveratrol metabolites in their blood of an older Italian population who consumed wine. No correlation was found to health benefits (all-cause mortality) of the high resveratrol metabolite people. But can they be sure all people metabolize resveratrol in the same way and at the same rate? If two people consume the same amount of resveratrol will they have the same concentration of resveratrol metabolites? I don't know the answer but suspect there is variability? Not my field but I know there are cases where people who consume a lot of something can metabolize it faster. So would that muddy the interpretations?



Click HERE to rent this advertising spot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 serp777

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 622 posts
  • 11
  • Location:who cares

Posted 10 June 2014 - 11:10 PM

Surprised this study hasn't been discussed here yet. The study measured resveratrol metabolites in their blood of an older Italian population who consumed wine. No correlation was found to health benefits (all-cause mortality) of the high resveratrol metabolite people. But can they be sure all people metabolize resveratrol in the same way and at the same rate? If two people consume the same amount of resveratrol will they have the same concentration of resveratrol metabolites? I don't know the answer but suspect there is variability? Not my field but I know there are cases where people who consume a lot of something can metabolize it faster. So would that muddy the interpretations?

 

Yes I suppose they cannot be sure, since not all people are Italians. I think this is good evidence against resveratol, although not conclusive of course.

 

"If two people consume the same amount of resveratrol will they have the same concentration of resveratrol metabolites?"

 

No, probably not. That would depend entirely on your genetics and your diet.

 

Also why so many downvotes on my post? Are there really that many resveratol fanboys here? All I did was provide a study against it. 


Edited by serp777, 10 June 2014 - 11:12 PM.

  • dislike x 3

#4 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 11 June 2014 - 02:30 AM

The problem with this paper is that the measured levels of resveratrol metabolites are utterly miniscule.    The mean was 7nm/g creatinine; typical creatinine clearance is 0.5 to 2g/day.  Thus we're talking about 3.5 to 14 nm resveratrol metabolites, corresponding to a dietary intake of ~0.8 to 3.2 micrograms of resveratrol.  That's so low that it doesn't seem right, even for dietary resveratrol.  Whatever.  The point is that resveratrol at this level wouldn't be expected to do anything at all.  This is kind of like touching an aspirin tablet, licking your finger, and wondering why your headache doesn't go away.  That would not be good evidence against the value of aspirin as a headache remedy, and this paper isn't good evidence against anything, other than maybe a clue on the part of the authors.


  • like x 8
  • Good Point x 1
  • Informative x 1

#5 markymark

  • Guest
  • 188 posts
  • 18
  • Location:Europe
  • NO

Posted 11 June 2014 - 07:15 AM

Thx Niner for the clarification on dosage and concentrations of resv.-metabolites etc.!

 

I recommend everybody to read Bill Sardis comments on the study in question. Although he is a pro-resv. advocate, his analysis of the study looks correct to me.

 

You will discover that the infinite stupidity of medical-scientiffic journalism about nutraceutical supplements in the mainstream media has reached another "high" in my country and also wordlwide, if you take the time to go through the media coverage.

 

 

http://www.resveratr...impairment/927/

 

http://www.resveratr...oogle-news/957/

 

mm


  • like x 1

#6 serp777

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 622 posts
  • 11
  • Location:who cares

Posted 11 June 2014 - 07:54 AM

Huh, well I wouldn't have known about that without you mentioning it, so thanks. In conclusion, it's bad to take these articles at face value without thoroughly reading through the study.

 

A lot of these studies seem to be pretty poorly designed, what gives? isn't there a study standardization protocol, especially coming from Johns Hopkins Medicine?



#7 hav

  • Guest
  • 1,089 posts
  • 219
  • Location:Cape Cod, MA
  • NO

Posted 19 June 2014 - 02:19 PM

It seems ironic to me that they attempt to examine the French paradox by studying a native Italian population.  Not only are the diets different, I'm sure that the wines are too.

 

Howard

 


  • like x 2

#8 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,949 posts
  • 1,625
  • Location:New York

Posted 19 June 2014 - 06:18 PM

To answer the OP's original question, the reason there is a separate section for resveratrol is that when resveratrol was 'new', back in 2007 and 2008, over half the posts in supplements were concerning resvertrol; so much so, that it swamped all other discussion.  By creating the sub-forum, we left some air for other topics.  Interest has died down.

 

I have sometimes thought changing the forum name to something like "small molecule life or health  extenders", or maybe better "The Next New Thing" would make sense.  We could include things like C-60 and Nicotinamide Riboside.... but it would be hard to regulate...

 

As it is, interest and posts have slowly decreased, and like a vermiform appendix it mostly doesn't hurt that the resveratrol section is there.  Thoughts. anyone?


Edited by maxwatt, 19 June 2014 - 08:26 PM.


#9 Kevnzworld

  • Guest
  • 885 posts
  • 306
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 20 June 2014 - 06:10 PM

Hey
For what it's worth, many of us still take resveratrol and I for one periodically check this forum for news, studies and updates.
David Sinclair et al has subsequently published more work on sirtuin activators and the link between NAD+ levels and the effectiveness of sirtuin activators like resveratrol. I've doubled my resveratrol intake to 200 mg after adding NR to my regimen ( 750 mg )
  • like x 3

#10 holdout

  • Guest
  • 37 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Canada

Posted 11 July 2014 - 04:54 AM

There are only small amounts of resveratrol in red wine.  Besides, ethanol-induced oxidative from drinking alcohol would offset any of the benefits from the resveratrol.  Ethanol accelerates ageing, causes cancers, and increases permeability of tight junction proteins of the blood-brain barrier.  Drinking alcohol = death wish.  It's chronic suicide.  Any study based on someone who drinks or smokes or takes recreational drugs of abuse, will always yield unreliable conjectures/results/conclusions/discussions.

 

And even if you do doubt resveratrol, based on the research of all the amazing effects would you really want to risk passing up on the opportunity that it really is something amazing, by not taking it?  (Because it really is profoundly remarkable as more and more emerging research is proving).


Edited by holdout, 11 July 2014 - 04:54 AM.

  • dislike x 1
  • Informative x 1
  • Disagree x 1
  • Agree x 1

#11 serp777

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 622 posts
  • 11
  • Location:who cares

Posted 12 July 2014 - 06:06 PM

There are only small amounts of resveratrol in red wine.  Besides, ethanol-induced oxidative from drinking alcohol would offset any of the benefits from the resveratrol.  Ethanol accelerates ageing, causes cancers, and increases permeability of tight junction proteins of the blood-brain barrier.  Drinking alcohol = death wish.  It's chronic suicide.  Any study based on someone who drinks or smokes or takes recreational drugs of abuse, will always yield unreliable conjectures/results/conclusions/discussions.

 

And even if you do doubt resveratrol, based on the research of all the amazing effects would you really want to risk passing up on the opportunity that it really is something amazing, by not taking it?  (Because it really is profoundly remarkable as more and more emerging research is proving).

 

Well that's pretty extreme. THat's like saying driving a car or flying in a plane is chronic suicide because it increases your risk. Sure, it's technically true, but the real damage from alcohol comes from binge drinking, or often drinking more than five drinks at one sitting. Most deaths from alcohol are actually caused by DUIs ironically enough. 

 

Furthermore oxidation is not inherently bad; in fact it's biologically necessary. It depends on the context on what is being oxidized. Like anything, it depends on how much oxidation occurs. 



#12 holdout

  • Guest
  • 37 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Canada

Posted 16 July 2014 - 04:51 PM

 

There are only small amounts of resveratrol in red wine.  Besides, ethanol-induced oxidative from drinking alcohol would offset any of the benefits from the resveratrol.  Ethanol accelerates ageing, causes cancers, and increases permeability of tight junction proteins of the blood-brain barrier.  Drinking alcohol = death wish.  It's chronic suicide.  Any study based on someone who drinks or smokes or takes recreational drugs of abuse, will always yield unreliable conjectures/results/conclusions/discussions.

 

And even if you do doubt resveratrol, based on the research of all the amazing effects would you really want to risk passing up on the opportunity that it really is something amazing, by not taking it?  (Because it really is profoundly remarkable as more and more emerging research is proving).

 

Well that's pretty extreme. THat's like saying driving a car or flying in a plane is chronic suicide because it increases your risk. Sure, it's technically true, but the real damage from alcohol comes from binge drinking, or often drinking more than five drinks at one sitting. Most deaths from alcohol are actually caused by DUIs ironically enough. 

 

Furthermore oxidation is not inherently bad; in fact it's biologically necessary. It depends on the context on what is being oxidized. Like anything, it depends on how much oxidation occurs. 

 

 

Yes but it's recently been found that most people binge drink without realizing it (they go out once a week and have enough alcohol to equal the amount of 4 or 5 beers, yielding an instant reduction in new brain cells in the hypothalamus by 40%).  Have you noticed throughout your life, that all the people you encounter, and friends and family, have significant forehead wrinkles by the time they're around 25, and are "social drinkers"?  Have you met the odd-one-out person who NEEEEVER ever drank for their entire life, and at age 30 they barely have any forehead wrinkles?  I have.  I've noticed this time and time again.  It's a highly consistent pattern.  Did you know that each year alcohol is the cause of over 12,500 new cases of cancer in the UK, including breast cancer?  How much of a financial burden do these new alcohol-caused cancer cases, cause our governments, our healthcare systems, or tax dollars?

 

I think therefore that your analogy is not so accurate ("driving a car or flying a plane is chronic suicide"), because with consumption of alcohol there is a definitive outcome of damage, whereas with your analogy there are only accidents, which pretty much limits your analogy to people who die of alcohol intoxication from drinking their faces off in one sitting.

 

Just because alcohol is freely available in public, like tobacco products, it doesn't mean it's safe.

 

And yes oxidation is indeed beneficial for things such as destroying bacteria/fungi/parasites, and even in mitochondrial signalling pathways.  The body does this well enough on its own.  Alcohol's addition of oxidative stress is unwelcome and is no different from a meth addict who causes the very same damage to tight junction proteins of the blood-brain barrier and before they know it they look 20 years older after 5 years of meth abuse.

 

Let's not forget here that there's strong evidence finding excessive oxidative stress to be the primordial cause of nearly ALL human diseases known to man.

 

Of course there's a benefits:risk ratio when it comes to drinking alcohol, but I think for a normal healthy person, it should never be included in their prophylaxis strategy.


Edited by holdout, 16 July 2014 - 04:55 PM.

  • like x 2
  • Good Point x 2
  • Disagree x 1
  • Agree x 1

#13 hamishm00

  • Guest
  • 1,053 posts
  • 94
  • Location:United Arab Emirates

Posted 06 August 2014 - 02:04 PM

There's a large body of science to show that a couple of glasses of wine a day will lower the risk of a range of adverse outcomes, including total mortality and dementia, with a U-shaped dose-response curve for alcohol consumption and heart disease. So a lot of your statements above are not only naive in their generality and extreme, they're wrong.

 

Your sweeping statement that: "there's strong evidence finding excessive oxidative stress to be the primordial cause of nearly ALL human diseases known to man", also is incorrect.

 

 

 

 

 


  • like x 1
  • Disagree x 1

#14 geo12the

  • Guest
  • 762 posts
  • -211

Posted 06 August 2014 - 06:14 PM

There is an over-generalization in our society that alcohol consumption is a terrible thing. You often hear the broad statement that alcohol is the most dangerous and harmful drug. It certainly is for alcoholics. But there needs to be a distinction between the effects of over-consumption of alcohol and alcoholism and moderate use of alcohol by non-alcoholics.  But for the rest of us a glass of wine or beer or cocktail or two a day is not harmful and lots of studies suggest it is probably beneficial. Fact is humans evolved on booze. Before potable water was freely available humans got their water drinking fermented beverages which were safer than drinking water because the alcohol killed harmful bacteria.  And its probably a great solvent and vehicle for things like resveratrol and other polyphenols. 


  • Agree x 2
  • like x 1
  • Disagree x 1

Click HERE to rent this advertising spot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#15 winona_strider

  • Guest
  • 2 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Somerville

Posted 31 August 2014 - 06:47 PM

There is an over-generalization in our society that alcohol consumption is a terrible thing. You often hear the broad statement that alcohol is the most dangerous and harmful drug. It certainly is for alcoholics. But there needs to be a distinction between the effects of over-consumption of alcohol and alcoholism and moderate use of alcohol by non-alcoholics.  But for the rest of us a glass of wine or beer or cocktail or two a day is not harmful and lots of studies suggest it is probably beneficial. Fact is humans evolved on booze. Before potable water was freely available humans got their water drinking fermented beverages which were safer than drinking water because the alcohol killed harmful bacteria.  And its probably a great solvent and vehicle for things like resveratrol and other polyphenols. 

 

totally agree with what you wrote.  don't have link priveleges yet, but "Moderate alcohol intake and cancer: the role of underreporting" (Cancer Causes & Control Vol. 25 I. 6 p. 693) covers some of the confounding human variables when studying alcohol.  Its frustrating and bizarre that the stigma surrounding alcohol overshadows the beneficial aspects of it you mentioned.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: hype, reseveratol

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users