LONGECITY

I would love to hear some contrary evidence to the angle this article is taking... especially as I've just bought a big bunch of Metacurcumin

Perhaps Anthony Loera can comment?

"There is, however, an even bigger reason why curcumin has not cured dozens of diseases. There are compounds which researchers call pan-assay interference compounds, or PAINS. These are compounds that seem to have a lot of activity against specific proteins, but it turns out they are false positives. The assays used to test for such protein activity show artifacts of non-specific activity which mimics specific protein activity.

Curcumin is apparently one of the worst offenders. In a commentary for Science Translational Medicine, Derek Lowe details why curcumin is so bad:

The paper cites a long list of references demonstrating that curcumin participates in pretty much every undesirable behavior possible in an assay: it reacts with proteins, it’s a redox cycler, it coordinates metal ions, it aggregates, it disrupts membranes nonspecifically, it interferes with fluorescent readouts, and it decomposes. Other than that, it’s a perfectly good hit.

Other reviewers call curcumin an “invalid metabolic panacea,” which is a term used to describe compounds, mostly natural compounds like curcumin, which seem to have all sorts of biological activity but nothing that amounts to a useful clinical effect."

https://sciencebased...om-iv-turmeric/

Right, every researcher in the field has made egregious mistakes invalidating their work except for Derek Lowe. Anyway this would only apply to in vitro testing, ignoring the enormous amount of in vivo evidence. Not to mention some clinical evidence, but not a huge amount yet.

Hi bitstorm, I think I already replied to you by email

Here it is once more:

======================================