6 replies to this topic

[Brainbox]

A question that is bugging me for some time is the following:

Looking at some of the research results regarding the efficacy of LE supplements, it seems that a meta-level conclusion could be that in general LE supplements are more effective in lower life-forms as compared to mammals. A good example of this is the current state of research on resveratrol.

It seems to me that lower life-forms are more susceptible to the benefits of supplementation due to the fact that they do not have complicated metabolic structures or pathways. This allows the supplements to be
- better bio available;
- more effective due to the lack of clever biological feed-back loops
in lower life forms.

Since all mammals do have a certain level of “infection” with parasites such as bacteria, protozoa, molds and other unpleasant members of our biological environment, there must exist some sort of delicate balance:
- parasites are more susceptible to LE supplements;
- defence mechanisms against parasites of mammal host are improved by supplement intake.

How do we know that this balance comes out favourable for the host individual taking the supplements? Another factor is that (I assume) research is carried out under extremely hygienic circumstances, so that the level of parasitic infection of the research subjects is low as compared to real-life circumstances.

Please share your thoughts and facts you are aware of.

[tintinet]

Not to mention individual variation in immune response, enzyme systems (e.g., slow vs. fast acetylators) , etc. add nearly infinitum.

As I stated in another thread, we're all engaged in semi-educated guessing, ISTM.

[niner]

Brainbox, you've mentioned the infection issue a couple of times. Humans certainly have bacteria in their gut, and any surfaces exposed to the outside are going to have all kinds of junk. There might be some mites or other insects lurking around hair, but I'm not sure they qualify as parasites. My question to you regards multicellular parasites living internally in humans. Is this a real problem in the Western world? My impression was that it was fairly obscure; am I off on this? I don't think that I harbor any parasites, and any bacteria that live longer due to my supplement use should remain equally antigenic and equally susceptible to antibiotics.

[maxwatt]

Brainbox, you've mentioned the infection issue a couple of times.  Humans certainly have bacteria in their gut, and any surfaces exposed to the outside are going to have all kinds of junk.  There might be some mites or other insects lurking around hair, but I'm not sure they qualify as parasites.  My question to you regards multicellular parasites living internally in humans.  Is this a real problem in the Western world?  My impression was that it was fairly obscure; am I off on this?  I don't think that I harbor any parasites, and any bacteria that live longer due to my supplement use should remain equally antigenic and equally susceptible to antibiotics.

We harbor microscopic lice that live in the roots of our eyelashes. They are thought to be the descendants of body lice who found a new niche when our primate ancestors shed their hair. I'm not an expert in this field, but I believe that most people also host. Whether this is a problem is not known, but prior to the 19th century a man without lice was considered unhealthy, on the theory that the parasites knwe he was about to die and had left for that reason.

Many parasitic and disease states are opportunistic conditions; the disease-causing organisms do not get out of control in a healthy host, so I would think strengthening the cost via resveratrol or other substances, would be of benefit; better able to resist even the healthier parasites.

Resveratrol is effective in vertebrates, worms and yeast; these are all eukarotes, sharing the Sirtuin genes. Oher metazoans and bacteria do not, apparently, possess this genetic mechanism; resveratrol would not prolong their life, and might kill them, as it does with fungi. (Fungi are eukarotes too, I think, so it's more complicated than that, but your get the drift.)

Why am I awake and posting at this hour? I saw Moore's "Sicko" last evening, and I woke up from bad dreams about it. Having had a similar experience to many described in the movie -- denial of a procedure after the fact -- I was especially affected. I was able to win on appeal, (not he insurance company's internal kangaroo court appeal, an outside state-board appeal) and the insurance company grudgingly paid, while claiming they believed they had been right anyway!!! But it does make me hesitant to seek further help in the future. The situation where insurance companies are forcing the medical system to deny care is something any organization promoting life extension should be concerned with. But that a topic for another thread.

[inawe]

Maxwatt,
Maybe the insurance companies are the parasites Brainbox is worried
about.

[health_nutty]

Insurance companies inherently suck. They calculate risk vs reward and charge premiums in such a way that they come out ahead. When they miscalculate, they throw their hands up and scream, "This will bankrupt us!" What have you morons been doing with the premiums?

Three scenarios:
1) You keep paying insurance but never use it.
2) You need it for something small so, but your rates increase to cover the cost.
3) Something big happens and the insurance company tries to get out of it.

[krillin]

Some people deliberately take parasites to combat autoimmune or allergic disorders.

http://www.ovamed.or.../home/home.html