Do you think that some supplement or nootropics are maybe causing a downregulation of normal physological/bichemical reactions.
This may sound like an obvious statement or to some people a stupid statement. Yes i agree in a compromised situation like alzheimers, deprenyl, as a monoamine oxidase-B selective inhibitor is minimising the breakdown of dopamine in the synaptic cleft, hence alleviating symptoms. This is not what I am refering to though. This is correcting deficencies.
I am refering to the possible situation of a supplement working in the place of a specific metabolic reaction instead of the bodys normal physiology acting for itself. Like in the case of taking steroid to increase muscle growth.
Could some supplements and/or nootropic result in the downregulation of cell membrane receptors or atrophy of the the cells involved.
We all get excited about hypertrophy and upregultion but I think that the opposite is possible. For example, I have done extensive research with creatine monhydrate. Creatine travels into the cell via creatine transports on the cell membrane. because creatine is a solute, it changes the osmolarity of the cell and more water flows into the cell causing it to swell. cellular swelling directly effects cellular kinetics. There is more space between organells and the communication between these organelles is modified.
I will use my research as an example. Please do not steal my hypothesis here people
(i'm not going to give you all the details though, hehehe)Possibility 1: Cell swelling as a result of creatine supplementation dilutes the cell and effects the cellular kinetics in a negative fashion. The distance between the mitochondria, contractile elements and sarcoplasmic reticulum are increased and hence ATP production and it utilisation are somewhat slowed down and the resulting metabolic pathways effected (muscle contraction, Ca2+ pumping in SR , and membrane potential homeostaisis). So creatine supplementation, even though it increases cell volume, would be detrimental. In fact anything that increases cell volume would be detrimental to the cell. Glutamine has also be shown to increase cell volume.
Possibility 2: Changes in cell volume trigger a postive-feedack mechanism to re-establish the normal cytoplasm-nuclear ratio of the cell. This would involve increasing protein synthesis to re-adjust the changes in cell volume. Where the changes in protein synthesis comes from , be it mitochondrial, contractile or from SR proteins, I am not sure. If there is an icrease in mitochondria protein synthesis then we would see an increase inmitochondrial density and possibly ATP production and and hence aerobic capacity (you would also need an increase in protein involved ATP production and not just the mitochondria). If the changes are in the form of contractile proteins then would would see an increase in strength.
Do you see where I am coming from?
Whilst most supplements are doing exactly that, supplementing in place of possibly difficencies. They could also be doing the opposite and downregulating the very process that they are supposedly benefiting.
I beleive that supplements and nootropics have the ability to effect the cell at the genetic level bu either upregulating or downregulating the transcription and translation of various proteins involved in various reactions.
What are peoples thoughts on this??
When I take melatonin is my pineal gland shrinking like the testicles of a bodybuilder taking steriods?
