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

Photo
- - - - -

Resveratrol Chem Tests (purity) update


  • Please log in to reply
113 replies to this topic
⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#31 Hedgehog

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 462 posts
  • 1

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:26 AM

The uniformity test was based on two external standards and the recovery was above 99%. The strengths where also based on the label claim.

So this test basically dissolves a pill (trans-max, bioforte, and R500), and it looks at how well each pill is made and helps to anwser teh question. Does this really contain the label claim of resveratrol. After the pill is dissolved it is compared to an external standard.

As you can see the results are all over the place. The two trans-max pills differ by 10%. However, only one pill was under the label claim. what is interesting is that the duplicates (2 pills tested per product) of trans-max and bioforte had values that had a wide range.

This is probably due to manufacturing issues. To get a good picture and a valid one, one would have to do about 30 pills per lot or batch.

#32 Hedgehog

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 462 posts
  • 1

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:29 AM

Dear Hh,

Since the Biotivia RES is black on GC can you read the HPLC signatures and their probable compounds that they add to their formula?

Thanx,

Bix


Hi Bix,

um not really, I would need a different detector attached to the HPLC like a MS detector.

Here is an example of a purity profile.
http://www.pathway2c...rol/Res_PDF.pdf

Like what maxwatt said there is probably nothing in there. Maybe it is micronized? Based on my HPLC results there was no difference between any of the vendors.

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

#33 Hedgehog

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 462 posts
  • 1

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:32 AM

In view of the fact that Biotivia advertises greater bioavailability but their label reflects no additional material it may be that they are also grinding finer. Can you check their particle size as well?

thanks,

Mike


Yes that is my last test to do on resveratrol and then I'm finished testing... :)

A SEM is a fun instrument to use. I will take very close pictures of resveratrol crystals. You can get an idea if one has micronized resveratrol based on the size of the crystals. plus the crystals are very cool to look at IMHO.

Edited by hedgehog_info, 07 February 2008 - 01:48 AM.


⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#34 ilanso

  • Guest
  • 153 posts
  • 0

Posted 07 February 2008 - 07:36 AM

I would need a different detector attached to the HPLC like a MS detector.


Got an old lie detector sitting around in the basement. Would that help? Comes with a set of questions to ask the compounds ;)

#35 docmaas

  • Member
  • 123 posts
  • 15
  • Location:Fort Bragg, CA USA

Posted 07 February 2008 - 08:53 AM

In view of the fact that Biotivia advertises greater bioavailability but their label reflects no additional material it may be that they are also grinding finer. Can you check their particle size as well?

thanks,

Mike


Yes that is my last test to do on resveratrol and then I'm finished testing... ;)

A SEM is a fun instrument to use. I will take very close pictures of resveratrol crystals. You can get an idea if one has micronized resveratrol based on the size of the crystals. plus the crystals are very cool to look at IMHO.


Great Hedge. I am looking forward to the results.

Best,

Mike

#36 Hedgehog

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 462 posts
  • 1

Posted 08 February 2008 - 01:53 AM

SEM IMAGES Resveratrol.

For high quality images vist http://www.pathway2c...eratrol/SEM/

Posted Image

Rev 99 50X

Posted Image

Trans-Max 50x

Posted Image

Rev99 100X

Posted Image

Trans-Max 100x

Posted Image

Rev 99 250X

Posted Image

Trans-Max 250X

Posted Image

Rev99 1000X

Posted Image

Trans-Max 1000X

As you can see Trans-Max has a smaller particle size. However, Rev99 to my surprise is still really good IMO. I was expecting larger crystals. Will the difference in particle size make a difference? Probably a little... There would be more surface area with trans-max.

How much? One would have to do a blood plasma test.

Has anybody noticed a difference in trying to dissolve the powder out of the trans-max capsule vs Rev99 powder? My guess is that the dissolution rate would be higher with the trans-max.

This concludes my testing of resveratrol.

Edited by niner, 08 February 2008 - 02:11 AM.


#37 Hedgehog

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 462 posts
  • 1

Posted 08 February 2008 - 01:58 AM

Conclusions:

There are many conclusions one could make with the data presented.

  • It appears that resveratrol is of high purity. (didn't test for heavy metals)
  • Pill manufacturing is pretty bad. However, the pills are over filled which could be looked at as a plus.
  • Trans-Max appears to be processed, and most likely only contains Trans-Resveratrol. If it did contain something else I would have gotten a low value based on the purity test.
Thoughts and ideas are greatly welcome. I did these test for personal reasons (I would like a high quality resveratrol supplier) and also to give ppl an idea how one would conduct purity tests and get an idea on particle size.

Edited by hedgehog_info, 08 February 2008 - 02:12 AM.


#38 PWAIN

  • Guest
  • 1,288 posts
  • 241
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 08 February 2008 - 02:28 AM

There is a space at the end of the link to the hi-res pics. try this

http://www.pathway2c...esveratrol/SEM/

Very intresting, given that max magnification is 1000x could this be done with a regular optical microscope? I seem to remember having one with 650x magnification but can't remember for sure. Would like to check out the power I got from China.

Thanks for your work HH. Are you still going to do serum levels with the various methods of take Resv (alcohol, milk, Lecithin, Miralax etc)?

#39 niner

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

Posted 08 February 2008 - 02:36 AM

Hedgehog, thanks for doing all of this! Is the Trans-Max the version that's supposed to have the secret bioavailability enhancement? If so, it would appear to be micronization. If not, well, it looks like it was micronized. Micronization really should result in better absorption for a solubility challenged compound like this. I think Biotivia is claiming a factor of two for the secret process. I've heard various versions of Sirtris' claim, some as high as a factor of ten, but after the recent human trials I heard a factor of five. But SRT-501 has more going on than micronization alone.

⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#40 stephen_b

  • Guest
  • 1,663 posts
  • 196

Posted 08 February 2008 - 02:43 AM

Looking at those particle sizes, it's would seem to be not only the average diameter, but also the fuzziness that contributes to the total surface area. I'd guess that there would be quite a difference in these two.

That said, what happens when these are mixed into ethanol? Are the particle sizes changed?

Stephen

#41 Hedgehog

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 462 posts
  • 1

Posted 08 February 2008 - 02:47 AM

Very intresting, given that max magnification is 1000x could this be done with a regular optical microscope? I seem to remember having one with 650x magnification but can't remember for sure. Would like to check out the power I got from China.

Thanks for your work HH. Are you still going to do serum levels with the various methods of take Resv (alcohol, milk, Lecithin, Miralax etc)?


I can go much higher magnifaction. I think 2000x is the max. however, it is really hard to get a good picture. The particles sorta jump around at that level when you put a beam of electrons on them. You can sorta see that in the 1000x. Notice a few lines were the image jumped. For our purposes 100-250x is good

Yes I have a formulation that I'm currently developing with a few PhD friends.

#42 Hedgehog

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 462 posts
  • 1

Posted 08 February 2008 - 02:59 AM

Hedgehog, thanks for doing all of this! Is the Trans-Max the version that's supposed to have the secret bioavailability enhancement? If so, it would appear to be micronization. If not, well, it looks like it was micronized. Micronization really should result in better absorption for a solubility challenged compound like this. I think Biotivia is claiming a factor of two for the secret process. I've heard various versions of Sirtris' claim, some as high as a factor of ten, but after the recent human trials I heard a factor of five. But SRT-501 has more going on than micronization alone.


Yes micronization does help in the bioavailability. How much? A lot of companies need micronization for manufacturing purposes. Lets say you have a 5mg tablet.... How the heck are you going to make a 5mg tablet if you have large particles or clumps. you need fine powder todo this.

To be honest both of these samples have small particle size. This is probably due to the extraction process. Many drugs have much larger particle size.

#43 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,944 posts
  • 1,616
  • Location:New York

Posted 08 February 2008 - 05:01 AM

Looking at those particle sizes, it's would seem to be not only the average diameter, but also the fuzziness that contributes to the total surface area. I'd guess that there would be quite a difference in these two.

That said, what happens when these are mixed into ethanol? Are the particle sizes changed?

Stephen


I have an 80 power scope, and I looked at my 98% (98.7 when tested) resveratrol. The particle size and uniformity more closely resembled the T-max sample than revgenetics material. Mine is not micronized, according to the vendor; they say they control the drying process to get the smaller particle size.

I mixed it into alcohol this evening, (80 proof vodka, actually, can't get Everclear in NY.) It does not dissolve completely with the amounts I use. If it all dissolves, as when I use a very small amount of resveratrol, the solution is clear. I overload it, and get a milky white suspension which eventually settles after maybe half an hour. Perhaps some of the particles are smaller from having been partially dissolved, but there does not seem to be a size change in the particles; not that I can see.

#44 docmaas

  • Member
  • 123 posts
  • 15
  • Location:Fort Bragg, CA USA

Posted 08 February 2008 - 05:55 AM

Hedge,

Thanks for your efforts.

My guess is that Biotivia's claims are reasonable based on the particle size difference if the material is taken directly in a capsule without further preparation.

Other kinds of preparation could even the different sources out, particularly if they are completely dissolved then consumed. A test that might indicate this to be the case would be to completely dissolve the same amount of both sources then slowly cook off the solvent forcing the resv to precipitate out and then look at the resulting structures. My guess is that they would be the same if they had truly gone into solution.

The bioavailability probably has more to do with the preparation by the user if they use appropriate methods of preparation. If OTOH they simply take the tablets/capsules the bioavailability will depend on how they were prepared by the vendor. Right now it looks like biotivia has the upper hand between these two products as they come from the vendor and I would not be at all surprised if the claims made by Biotivia are justified for consumption as packaged.

Mike

ps. I did get my biotivia completely dissolved in Yogurt but it did take some time. I mixed it in a glass and let it sit and came back several times and mixed it some more. I then poured it back into the bottle and took it over several days 1 oz at a time in a shot glass. I never saw any particulate residue and the yogurt always had the faintly bitter taste of the resv.

SEM IMAGES Resveratrol.

For high quality images vist http://www.pathway2c...ratrol/SEM/

Posted Image

Rev 99 50X

Posted Image

Trans-Max 50x

Posted Image

Rev99 100X

Posted Image

Trans-Max 100x

Posted Image

Rev 99 250X

Posted Image

Trans-Max 250X

Posted Image

Rev99 1000X

Posted Image

Trans-Max 1000X

As you can see Trans-Max has a smaller particle size. However, Rev99 to my surprise is still really good IMO. I was expecting larger crystals. Will the difference in particle size make a difference? Probably a little... There would be more surface area with trans-max.

How much? One would have to do a blood plasma test.

Has anybody noticed a difference in trying to dissolve the powder out of the trans-max capsule vs Rev99 powder? My guess is that the dissolution rate would be higher with the trans-max.


This concludes my testing of resveratrol.



#45 niner

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

Posted 08 February 2008 - 06:28 AM

I looked again at the SEM images. The Revgenetics material consists mostly of prisms, typically on the order of 10 x 10 x 30 microns. These appear to be crystals as grown from solution. The TransMax appears to be mostly plates, on the order of 10 x 10 x 2 microns, with some particles as small as a few cubic microns. The edges of the TransMax are jagged and irregular indicating that it has been milled. The chromatography shows us that the TransMax didn't suffer chemically from this process. If these are in fact the same as what anyone could buy from them, then I think at the moment they probably have the most bioavailable pill on the market. If you are dissolving your resveratrol before consuming it, then you might be doing better. I'd like to see a micrograph of resveratrol particles precipitated from ethanolic solution into water/stabilizer. It would be interesting to know exactly how big they are.

#46 Anthony_Loera

  • Life Member
  • 3,130 posts
  • 714
  • Location:Miami Florida

Posted 08 February 2008 - 03:04 PM

Hedge,

your work has really helped the forum, and I thank you for the results.

We have changed the way we do business in the past because of posts, and suggestions regarding independent testing. Now we will move to create a small particle product, as we have mentioned in posts in the past. For now it looks like Biotivia has a good product, we only wish their pricing was more reasonable, they used an independent lab more often, and their marketing was more on the level.

For those preparing powder, I believe docmass's comments fair well. I also presume this is the TransMax 98% capsule powder we are looking at, and not the bioforte product correct?

I suppose the next step would be dissolution tests and absorption. Having said that, I believe we already know where to get the same 98% powder transmax uses. If this is something we need to put out there before our small particle product is out, we will do so in addition to our other products.

It should take us a few weeks.

thanks again Hedge!
Anthony Loera

#47 inawe

  • Guest
  • 653 posts
  • 3

Posted 09 February 2008 - 12:50 AM

I'm not a member but I took a look at the Yahoo group. WOH! The fight
between Revgeneric and Biotrivia is getting real nasty. On top of
that, the name of Sinclair was being taken in vain.

#48 Hedgehog

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 462 posts
  • 1

Posted 09 February 2008 - 02:00 AM

we would need hedgehog to volunteer to spend a day getting his blood drawn, then spend some number of hours in the lab. I wouldn't want to ask anyone to do that, although If I'm not mistaken, Biotivia claims that such a study has been done, though they have not publicised the data. But then Biotivia claims a lot of things.


Interesting idea. hummm... Well we pretty much know what the pure resveratrol plasma level are in published papers. Maybe I will use my formulation with a Rev99 sample (bigger particle size), and use T-99 as a control?

This would answer a number of questions. Does the formulation work better than resveratrol (micronized and unmicronized) and might help us to understand if T-99 is better than what has been published in the liturature? Comments suggestions?

#49 niner

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

Posted 09 February 2008 - 02:27 AM

we would need hedgehog to volunteer to spend a day getting his blood drawn, then spend some number of hours in the lab. I wouldn't want to ask anyone to do that, although If I'm not mistaken, Biotivia claims that such a study has been done, though they have not publicised the data. But then Biotivia claims a lot of things.


Interesting idea. hummm... Well we pretty much know what the pure resveratrol plasma level are in published papers. Maybe I will use my formulation with a Rev99 sample (bigger particle size), and use T-99 as a control?

This would answer a number of questions. Does the formulation work better than resveratrol (micronized and unmicronized) and might help us to understand if T-99 is better than what has been published in the liturature? Comments suggestions?

If your new formulation involves any sort of solubilizing of the resveratrol, or does anything that modifies the particle size, then an experiment like this wouldn't really tell you the effect of the particle size alone. It's true that Transmax could be compared to data from the Boocock paper. If Transmax was more bioavailable than Boocock's resveratrol, then that would suggest that it was an improvement, but if it was the same, we wouldn't know if Boocock's res was micronized, or if micronization didn't make a difference.

#50 Anthony_Loera

  • Life Member
  • 3,130 posts
  • 714
  • Location:Miami Florida

Posted 09 February 2008 - 03:37 AM

But Anthony, although we don't have clinical data on Transmax or any other commercial resveratrol product, smaller particle size can be expected to improve bioavailability for a barely soluble compound like resveratrol. That's just physics. As far as how much better, we would need hedgehog to volunteer to spend a day getting his blood drawn, then spend some number of hours in the lab. I wouldn't want to ask anyone to do that, although If I'm not mistaken, Biotivia claims that such a study has been done, though they have not publicised the data. But then Biotivia claims a lot of things.


I agree niner,

but because of sulfation, we may not know for sure until someone impartial like ... oh... Hedge?
Would try out a blood test to confirm.

This would actually do 2 things which would be helpful for all of us:

1- Sure, is Biotivias res able to produce 2x bioavailability (without anything else, just smaller partical size)
2- Is a formulation really necessary at all, if the partical size is small enough?

I personally have issues with #2 because of sulfation and solubility. I find it hard to believe that smaller particle size alone may be the only thing that may be needed to make resveratrol 2x better, without something else to inhibit sulfation.

Up until this point, I have been lead to believe an adequate formulation is needed. Who knows, maybe it's not needed after all?

All I can really say, is that I would be really (REALLY) happy if all we needed to do is micronize the rsv, without anything else, to make it as powerful as SRT501 as more would be available in the plasma.

Somehow I doubt it, though.

A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 09 February 2008 - 03:52 AM.


#51 niner

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

Posted 09 February 2008 - 04:10 AM

But Anthony, although we don't have clinical data on Transmax or any other commercial resveratrol product, smaller particle size can be expected to improve bioavailability for a barely soluble compound like resveratrol. That's just physics. As far as how much better, we would need hedgehog to volunteer to spend a day getting his blood drawn, then spend some number of hours in the lab. I wouldn't want to ask anyone to do that, although If I'm not mistaken, Biotivia claims that such a study has been done, though they have not publicised the data. But then Biotivia claims a lot of things.


I agree niner,

but because of sulfation, we may not know for sure until someone impartial like ... oh... Hedge?
Would try out a blood test to confirm.

This would actually do 2 things which would be helpful for all of us:

1- Sure, is Biotivias res able to produce 2x bioavailability (without anything else, just smaller partical size)
2- Is a formulation really necessary at all, if the partical size is small enough?

I personally have issues with #2 because of sulfation and solubility. I find it hard to believe that smaller particle size alone may be the only thing that may be needed to make resveratrol 2x better, without something else to inhibit sulfation.

Up until this point, I have been lead to believe an adequate formulation is needed. Who knows, maybe it's not needed after all?

All I can really say, is that I would be really (REALLY) happy if all we needed to do is micronize the rsv, without anything else, to make it as powerful as SRT501 as more would be available in the plasma.

Somehow I doubt it, though.

A

Hi Anthony,
In this post, I analyze data from Boocock's high dose human resveratrol study. As the dose is increased beyond a gram, they see the AUC per gram fall off. This is consistent with the process being limited by solubility in the gut. The rate of dissolution of resveratrol is proportional to its surface area, which increases as the particle size gets smaller. If you can get the resveratrol in fast enough, you can actually swamp the gut enzymes that are responsible for a significant fraction of the sulfation and glucuronidation of resveratrol. We've seen this in model systems and we also see it in Boocock's data at the lower dose ranges, before the solubility limit kicks in. So particle size could really have an effect on sulfation. SRT-501 uses a second chemical to essentially stabilize an infinitely small particle size. Without a stabilizing agent, I don't think that we can ever match its bioavailability, but we don't need to match it, we just need to be better than current products. I think that 501 doesn't have anything in it that inhibits conjugative enzymes; it's all done by improving the absorption rate.

#52 sUper GeNius

  • Guest
  • 1,501 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Phila PA USA Earth

Posted 09 February 2008 - 04:22 AM

But Anthony, although we don't have clinical data on Transmax or any other commercial resveratrol product, smaller particle size can be expected to improve bioavailability for a barely soluble compound like resveratrol. That's just physics. As far as how much better, we would need hedgehog to volunteer to spend a day getting his blood drawn, then spend some number of hours in the lab. I wouldn't want to ask anyone to do that, although If I'm not mistaken, Biotivia claims that such a study has been done, though they have not publicised the data. But then Biotivia claims a lot of things.


I agree niner,

but because of sulfation, we may not know for sure until someone impartial like ... oh... Hedge?
Would try out a blood test to confirm.

This would actually do 2 things which would be helpful for all of us:

1- Sure, is Biotivias res able to produce 2x bioavailability (without anything else, just smaller partical size)
2- Is a formulation really necessary at all, if the partical size is small enough?

I personally have issues with #2 because of sulfation and solubility. I find it hard to believe that smaller particle size alone may be the only thing that may be needed to make resveratrol 2x better, without something else to inhibit sulfation.

Up until this point, I have been lead to believe an adequate formulation is needed. Who knows, maybe it's not needed after all?

All I can really say, is that I would be really (REALLY) happy if all we needed to do is micronize the rsv, without anything else, to make it as powerful as SRT501 as more would be available in the plasma.

Somehow I doubt it, though.

A

Hi Anthony,
In this post, I analyze data from Boocock's high dose human resveratrol study. As the dose is increased beyond a gram, they see the AUC per gram fall off. This is consistent with the process being limited by solubility in the gut. The rate of dissolution of resveratrol is proportional to its surface area, which increases as the particle size gets smaller. If you can get the resveratrol in fast enough, you can actually swamp the gut enzymes that are responsible for a significant fraction of the sulfation and glucuronidation of resveratrol. We've seen this in model systems and we also see it in Boocock's data at the lower dose ranges, before the solubility limit kicks in. So particle size could really have an effect on sulfation. SRT-501 uses a second chemical to essentially stabilize an infinitely small particle size. Without a stabilizing agent, I don't think that we can ever match its bioavailability, but we don't need to match it, we just need to be better than current products. I think that 501 doesn't have anything in it that inhibits conjugative enzymes; it's all done by improving the absorption rate.


How about some piperine to help with those gut enzymes?

⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#53 niner

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

Posted 09 February 2008 - 04:29 AM

How about some piperine to help with those gut enzymes?

It wouldn't hurt, (unless you have something else in your system that you'd really like to glucuronidate) but I don't know how much it will help. Sulfation is a bigger factor in taking resveratrol out, but glucuruonidation is also pretty significant. I don't know if piperine affects the gut in the same way as the liver or not.

#54 sUper GeNius

  • Guest
  • 1,501 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Phila PA USA Earth

Posted 09 February 2008 - 04:41 AM

How about some piperine to help with those gut enzymes?

It wouldn't hurt, (unless you have something else in your system that you'd really like to glucuronidate) but I don't know how much it will help. Sulfation is a bigger factor in taking resveratrol out, but glucuruonidation is also pretty significant. I don't know if piperine affects the gut in the same way as the liver or not.


By what method is piperine increasing curcumin blood levels?

edit. I think piperine does work in the gut.

What about swamping the gut with other substances that are sulphated, like curcumin.

http://jn.nutrition....full/134/8/1948

Edited by FuLL meMbeR, 09 February 2008 - 04:53 AM.


#55 niner

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

Posted 09 February 2008 - 05:56 AM

How about some piperine to help with those gut enzymes?

It wouldn't hurt, (unless you have something else in your system that you'd really like to glucuronidate) but I don't know how much it will help. Sulfation is a bigger factor in taking resveratrol out, but glucuruonidation is also pretty significant. I don't know if piperine affects the gut in the same way as the liver or not.


By what method is piperine increasing curcumin blood levels?

edit. I think piperine does work in the gut.

What about swamping the gut with other substances that are sulphated, like curcumin.

http://jn.nutrition....full/134/8/1948

Piperine inhibits glucuronidation, generally speaking. From the paper you cite, it looks like for EGCG, it's effective in the gut in mice. In that model, it inhibits glucuronidation in the gut 40%, but it doesn't inhibit glucuronidation of EGCG in vitro with liver microsomes, which is pretty suggestive that it's not working in vivo in the liver, for EGCG in mice. Different substrates may have different behaviors, so even though it inhibits glucuronidation by 40% in mouse gut for EGCG, it might be 80%, or 20%, for curcumin. It might be different in humans, too. Nevertheless, when you see something like this in one species, you look for it in another; it increases the likelihood that you will see it. I know that piperine has been used in humans for a number of compounds, and it increases their bioavailability. I don't know the split between gut and liver, or how much variation there is with substrates, but it clearly works. I think in all cases, the mechanism is inhibition of glucuronidation. In the mouse paper above, they also noted that it slowed intestinal transit time. I don't know if that's general behavior or not.

Swamping the gut with a second compound is an interesting idea. It's sort of the same as throwing an inhibitor in, as the second compound would be inhibiting the sulfation of the other by virtue of taking up space in the active site while it was being sulfated. It would be competing for sulfation capacity. Resveratrol is actually inhibiting its own sulfation when you get a high enough concentration. That's all that swamping is; just competitive self-inhibition, if you will.

#56 docmaas

  • Member
  • 123 posts
  • 15
  • Location:Fort Bragg, CA USA

Posted 09 February 2008 - 08:10 AM

How about some piperine to help with those gut enzymes?

It wouldn't hurt, (unless you have something else in your system that you'd really like to glucuronidate) but I don't know how much it will help. Sulfation is a bigger factor in taking resveratrol out, but glucuruonidation is also pretty significant. I don't know if piperine affects the gut in the same way as the liver or not.


By what method is piperine increasing curcumin blood levels?

edit. I think piperine does work in the gut.

What about swamping the gut with other substances that are sulphated, like curcumin.

http://jn.nutrition....full/134/8/1948

Piperine inhibits glucuronidation, generally speaking. From the paper you cite, it looks like for EGCG, it's effective in the gut in mice. In that model, it inhibits glucuronidation in the gut 40%, but it doesn't inhibit glucuronidation of EGCG in vitro with liver microsomes, which is pretty suggestive that it's not working in vivo in the liver, for EGCG in mice. Different substrates may have different behaviors, so even though it inhibits glucuronidation by 40% in mouse gut for EGCG, it might be 80%, or 20%, for curcumin. It might be different in humans, too. Nevertheless, when you see something like this in one species, you look for it in another; it increases the likelihood that you will see it. I know that piperine has been used in humans for a number of compounds, and it increases their bioavailability. I don't know the split between gut and liver, or how much variation there is with substrates, but it clearly works. I think in all cases, the mechanism is inhibition of glucuronidation. In the mouse paper above, they also noted that it slowed intestinal transit time. I don't know if that's general behavior or not.

Swamping the gut with a second compound is an interesting idea. It's sort of the same as throwing an inhibitor in, as the second compound would be inhibiting the sulfation of the other by virtue of taking up space in the active site while it was being sulfated. It would be competing for sulfation capacity. Resveratrol is actually inhibiting its own sulfation when you get a high enough concentration. That's all that swamping is; just competitive self-inhibition, if you will.


The only problem I see with this and the train of thought it is following is the assumption that we don't want the sulfation and glucouronidation to occur. It seems that there are at least some who are familiar with these issues that indicate that the glucouoronidated form may be in that form specifically for transport to other organs who will in turn convert it back. If that is the case then swamping the gut may actually be obstructing a useful pathway rather than aiding it. Note I'm not familiar with this whole process this is just a summary of what I think I have read here.

Mike

Edited by docmaas, 09 February 2008 - 08:11 AM.


#57 bixbyte

  • Guest
  • 552 posts
  • 45
  • Location:End of the Galaxy
  • NO

Posted 09 February 2008 - 05:13 PM

REV 99 looks more like Recorcinol, needle like crystals that are colourless.
TransMax appears to look more like the real RES

Are you testing us?

#58 Hedgehog

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 462 posts
  • 1

Posted 09 February 2008 - 06:55 PM

The only problem I see with this and the train of thought it is following is the assumption that we don't want the sulfation and glucouronidation to occur. It seems that there are at least some who are familiar with these issues that indicate that the glucouoronidated form may be in that form specifically for transport to other organs who will in turn convert it back. If that is the case then swamping the gut may actually be obstructing a useful pathway rather than aiding it. Note I'm not familiar with this whole process this is just a summary of what I think I have read here.

Mike


Yes I have been wondering about this. I have tried to find some articles but can't find anything. It is a very important question that needs to be answered. Do similar chemical structures to glucouoronidated resveratrol or sulfanated resveratrol get converted back to thier active form in cells?

#59 steelheader

  • Guest
  • 106 posts
  • 0

Posted 09 February 2008 - 07:23 PM

The only problem I see with this and the train of thought it is following is the assumption that we don't want the sulfation and glucouronidation to occur. It seems that there are at least some who are familiar with these issues that indicate that the glucouoronidated form may be in that form specifically for transport to other organs who will in turn convert it back. If that is the case then swamping the gut may actually be obstructing a useful pathway rather than aiding it. Note I'm not familiar with this whole process this is just a summary of what I think I have read here.

Mike


Yes I have been wondering about this. I have tried to find some articles but can't find anything. It is a very important question that needs to be answered. Do similar chemical structures to glucouoronidated resveratrol or sulfanated resveratrol get converted back to thier active form in cells?


Isn't sulfation and glucouronidation merely delayed by "swamping the gut"?

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

#60 niner

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

Posted 09 February 2008 - 09:59 PM

The only problem I see with this and the train of thought it is following is the assumption that we don't want the sulfation and glucouronidation to occur. It seems that there are at least some who are familiar with these issues that indicate that the glucouoronidated form may be in that form specifically for transport to other organs who will in turn convert it back. If that is the case then swamping the gut may actually be obstructing a useful pathway rather than aiding it. Note I'm not familiar with this whole process this is just a summary of what I think I have read here.

Mike


Yes I have been wondering about this. I have tried to find some articles but can't find anything. It is a very important question that needs to be answered. Do similar chemical structures to glucouoronidated resveratrol or sulfanated resveratrol get converted back to thier active form in cells?


Isn't sulfation and glucouronidation merely delayed by "swamping the gut"?

Yes, but it's that delay that results in higher plasma levels of native resveratrol, which is what you want. Eventually, it will all be conjugated and eliminated.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users