Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16   ^
Old Sun, Jun-01-08, 16:30
Baerdric's Avatar
Baerdric Baerdric is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 2,229
 
Plan: Neocarnivore
Stats: 375/345/250 Male 74 inches
BF:
Progress: 24%
Location: Vermont
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LessLiz
Interesting statement. I would argue that the best thing for younger looking skin is to live in a place with a warm climate and don't worry about the sun.

I grew up on the Gulf Coast, where each summer we wondered why the beach tourists had such weathered looking skin.


That's one of the things I ws struck by when moving up north. People here look so weathered! It's like they get the road salt on their face and don't wash it off. My wife came to Florida about 20 years ago and in that short time her 10 year younger sister aged past her visibly. She looks fifty plus while my wife looks forty or so.

But then Vermont is not easy on it's women.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #17   ^
Old Sun, Jun-01-08, 20:37
futurederm futurederm is offline
New Member
Posts: 1
 
Plan: ...
Stats: 105/105/105 Female 64
BF:
Progress:
Default

Hi, I wrote the article. I saw a lot of people had linked to it from here, and I just wanted to say 3 quick things:

1.) I didn't misinterpret the study - methylglyoxal is the starting product in the Maillard pathway, which leads to AGE formation (and glucosepane, the AGE responsible for the hardened state of collagen). The more methylglyoxal in one's system, the more glucosepane that results. If you would like another interpretation of the study, please consult Dr. Aubrey deGrey's Ending Aging book - he comes to the same conclusion.

2.) I have nothing against a low-carb diet, except the methylglyoxal finding. Perhaps more research in the future will show differently!

3.) I didn't mean to endorse Joy Bauer's book either; it's just a favorite of mine.

With that said, thanks for reading the article, and I'm sorry if I offended anyone! I'll be more careful with my wording in the future.
Reply With Quote
  #18   ^
Old Sun, Jun-01-08, 21:04
pbowers's Avatar
pbowers pbowers is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 389
 
Plan: lc
Stats: 93/75/74 Male 181
BF:
Progress: 95%
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by futurederm
1.) I didn't misinterpret the study - methylglyoxal is the starting product in the Maillard pathway, which leads to AGE formation (and glucosepane, the AGE responsible for the hardened state of collagen). The more methylglyoxal in one's system, the more glucosepane that results. If you would like another interpretation of the study, please consult Dr. Aubrey deGrey's Ending Aging book - he comes to the same conclusion.
if you didn't misinterpret, you misreported. methylglyoxal is a precursor to AGEs, it doesn't necessarily follow that because methylglyoxal is present AGEs will form. you also took a leap from methylglyoxal formation to hardened collagen, which was not claimed by the study.

as far as de grey goes, he's missing some valuable perspective. from dr. eades' blog:

Quote:
I read de Grayís book in a prepublication version and found it to be quite stimulating. In fact, Iíve got the actual print version on order (it should be home when I arrive there in a couple of days) and I plan to review it on this site. Many of the SENS (Strategies for Negligible Senescence) that he writes about are in some way promoted by a carb-restricted diet. For example, a low-carb diet is typically a high-fat diet, and high-fat diets have been shown to increase the biosynthesis of mitochondria. The more mitochondria one has, the longer it will take de Grayís idea of the survival of the slowest to totally corrupt the cell.

I was surprised, however, with his one page attack on ketogenic diets as causing an increase in methylglycoxal as being a driving force in protein cross linking. I thought Aubrey was smarter than that. He first states that high blood sugar is a potent AGE-producing force (as are increased levels of blood fats) then says that if you follow a ketogenic diet to reduce blood sugar and triglycerides you will be increasing the levels of methylglycoxal, which is a more potent AGE promoter. He bases this supposition on the paper you link to above. Altough methylglcoxal is a more potent AGE promoter, its concentration - even when elevated - is so abysmally low compared to that of the less potent blood sugar that it makes very little difference. A reduction in blood sugar (even if accompanied by an increase in methylglycoxal) brings about a reduction of AGE formation that is orders of magnitude greater than the increase engendered by even a doubling of methylglycoxal levels (which is about what most papers report). In addition, most other papers demonstrate that methylglycoxal levels track WITH blood sugar levels and not in the opposite direction.

I think de Grayís mentioning of this one paper and making the issue of it that he does makes for a flaw in an otherwise great book. (Great, that is, after you get into part II)
that being said, thanks for dropping in to elaborate.
Reply With Quote
  #19   ^
Old Mon, Jun-02-08, 03:46
pbowers's Avatar
pbowers pbowers is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 389
 
Plan: lc
Stats: 93/75/74 Male 181
BF:
Progress: 95%
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Default

one more question that needs to be answered regarding the study: why didn't they attempt to directly measure AGEs in the subjects instead of the precursor methylglycoxal? i think the answer is that the researchers knew if net AGE formation (which is really what affects collagen hardening/yellowing) was the factor determining the outcome, a positive light may have been shed on ketogenic diets (btw, is not really fair to call the atkins diet a ketogenic diet after the initial month). i don't believe this is the result the researchers were looking for, hence the focus on methylglycoxal.
Reply With Quote
  #20   ^
Old Mon, Jun-02-08, 06:21
Josiemk's Avatar
Josiemk Josiemk is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,195
 
Plan: Mod Atkins
Stats: 170/162/110 Female 5 ft
BF:
Progress: 13%
Location: Marion, Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DietSka

So what is a body-conscious, skin-savvy patient to do? According to Łber nutritionist Joy Bauer, MS, RD, CDN and author of Food Cures, the best bet is to consume high-quality carbohydrates, such as vegetables, fruits, beans, peas, lentils, brown and wild rice, barley, oatmeal, whole grain cereals, whole grain breads, whole grain crackers, quinoa, amaranth, wheat berries, and millet, rather than eliminating carbohydrates. These carbohydrates allow blood sugars to rise gently, stay even over a longer period of time than their simple carb counterparts, and then fall off slowly.


http://www.futurederm.com/2008/05/2...diet-of-choice/



If I eat like this I won't be able to over come my addiction to carbs, my weight loss will be very slow, if I did lose any & I'll always be hungry & never satisfied. Plus I won't burn fat & lose more muscle.
I've been on this type of diet before & it did nothing for my skin that I've seen. But when I do Atkins my skin clears up.
Reply With Quote
  #21   ^
Old Sat, Jan-31-09, 14:57
BoBoGuy's Avatar
BoBoGuy BoBoGuy is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,178
 
Plan: Low Carb - High Nutrition
Stats: 213/175/175 Male 72 Inches
BF: Belly Fat? Yes!
Progress: 100%
Location: California
Default Atkins Diet - Potential Tissue and Vascular Damage?

Dartmouth Medical School, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, 1
Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA.

In the popular and widely used Atkins diet, the body burns fat as its
main fuel. This process produces ketosis and hence increased levels of
beta-hydroxybutyrate (BOB) acetoacetate (AcAc) and its by-products
acetone and acetol. These products are potential precursors of the
glycotoxin methylglyoxal. Since methylglyoxal and its byproducts are
recognized as a significant cause of blood vessel and tissue damage,
we measured methylglyoxal, acetone, and acetol in subjects on the
Atkins diet. We found that by 14-28 days, methylghyoxal levels rose
1.67-fold (P = 0.039) and acetol and acetone levels increased 2.7- and
6.12-fold, respectively (P = 0.012 and 0.028). Samples from subjects
with ketosis showed even greater increases in methylglyoxal (2.12-
fold), as well as acetol and acetone, which increased 4.19- and 7.9-
fold, respectively; while no changes were seen in samples from
noncompliant, nonketotic subjects. The increase in methylglyoxal
implies that potential tissue and vascular damage can occur on the
Atkins diet and should be considered when choosing a weight-loss
program.


PMID: 16037240 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


The above study was received e-mail from a friend.

They noted that Methylglyoxal is 40,000x more reactive than blood sugar.

Opinions?

Bo

Last edited by BoBoGuy : Sat, Jan-31-09 at 17:16.
Reply With Quote
  #22   ^
Old Sat, Jan-31-09, 18:28
mike_d's Avatar
mike_d mike_d is offline
Grease is the word!
Posts: 8,013
 
Plan: PSMF/IF
Stats: 236/174/175 Male 72 inches
BF:disappearing!
Progress: 102%
Location: Alamo city, Texas
Default

14 - 28 days is still during induction withdrawal from carbs, few researchers seem to know this.
Reply With Quote
  #23   ^
Old Sat, Jan-31-09, 18:36
Dodger's Avatar
Dodger Dodger is offline
Posts: 8,244
 
Plan: Paleoish
Stats: 225/181/175 Male 71.5 inches
BF:18%
Progress: 88%
Location: Longmont, Colorado
Default

The results are what I would expect. They are nothing to worry about. People in ketosis have not shown to have tissue or vascular damage.
Reply With Quote
  #24   ^
Old Sat, Jan-31-09, 20:23
Kisal's Avatar
Kisal Kisal is offline
Posts: 14,482
 
Plan: It's anybody's guess!
Stats: 350/250/160 Female 70 inches
BF:
Progress: 53%
Location: Oregon
Default

Doesn't send me into a state of panic.
Reply With Quote
  #25   ^
Old Sat, Jan-31-09, 20:43
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 991
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

Quote:
In the popular and widely used Atkins diet, the body burns fat as its
main fuel. This process produces ketosis

~snip~
implies that potential tissue and vascular damage can occur on the
Atkins diet and should be considered when choosing a weight-loss
program.


Other diets don't burn fat as fuel?



Isn't the whole point behind the calories in/calories out method of weight loss supposed to be to create enough of a calorie deficit to burn body fat as fuel?
Reply With Quote
  #26   ^
Old Sun, Feb-01-09, 06:17
pbowers's Avatar
pbowers pbowers is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 389
 
Plan: lc
Stats: 93/75/74 Male 181
BF:
Progress: 95%
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Default

this article is from 2005. the full text is available here.

opinions? here's dr. eades':
Quote:
The study Dr. de Grey refers to was published a few years ago in a paper in the Annals of the New York Academy of Science. Aside from the fact that this is the only such paper in the literature showing this phenomenon, you must realize that the papers published in this journal are the print versions of talks given at NY Academy of Science meetings. These meetings are organized around specific topics and dozens of researchers present their work. These presentations are then written up and published in the Annals. As such, they really donít go through the peer-review process that other such studies must before they appear in print in standard scientific journals. In fact, most papers that appear in the Annals of the NY Academy have been published elsewhere first because the published papers are what led the organizers of the particular meeting to seek out these researchers and ask them to speak. The fact that this paper has never been published elsewhere either before or after the publication in this journal makes me suspect that the work couldnít pass the peer-review process. If you think about how slight the evidence needs to be in the mainstream medical press to publish negative data about low-carb diets, especially the Atkins version, it makes you wonder why this wasnít published elsewhere if the data were even semi-worthwhile.

Virtually all of the other papers Iíve seen point to elevated glucose as the driving force behind the elevated levels of methylglyoxal in patients with diabetes. And the glucose levels are in such greater quantity wreaking their havoc than even a doubling (the increase implied by the Ann NY Acad article) of methygloxal would cause. Itís kind of the same situation we find with melanoma and colon, breast and prostate cancers. It has been shown that vitamin D is protective against colon, breast and prostate cancers so going out in the sun and getting vitamin D helps you avoid a host of common cancers. But, supposedly (I donít believe it, but letís accept it for this argumentís sake) sunlight causes melanoma. What no one ever tells you is that there is one melanoma for every 200 of these other cancers, so by avoiding the sun you increase your risk for common cancers to prevent an extremely uncommon one. Same goes for the glucose/methylglyoxal situation. If you worry about methylglyoxal, but let your glucose and triglycerides go up as a consequence, youíll suffer much more damage than if you keep glucose and triglycerides down and let methylgloxal double simply because there is so vastly much more glucose and triglyceride. And thatís even if the methlygloxal levels double, which I seriously doubt. (If you want to read a little more on my thoughts on this subject, go to this post and scroll down to the comments (there are several) by Tim Lundeen and my responses.)
Reply With Quote
  #27   ^
Old Sun, Feb-01-09, 06:22
pbowers's Avatar
pbowers pbowers is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 389
 
Plan: lc
Stats: 93/75/74 Male 181
BF:
Progress: 95%
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Default

btw, this study was discussed fairly extensively last summer on this thread .
Reply With Quote
  #28   ^
Old Sun, Feb-01-09, 07:50
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 10,750
 
Plan: ketosis/IF
Stats: 190/158/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 89%
Location: Ontario
Default

This metformin study references some diabetic methylglyoxal numbers versus non diabetic.

metformin study

" MG levels were significantly reduced by high-dosage (1,500-2,500 mg/day) metformin (158.4 +/- 44.2 nmol/l) compared with nonmetformin (189.3 +/- 38.7 nmol/l, P = 0.03) or low-dosage (< or = 1,000 mg/day) metformin (210.98 +/- 51.0 nmol/l, P = 0.001), even though the groups had similar glycemic control."

Methylglyoxal is measured in nanomoles (billionths of a mole.) Blood glucose, in contrast, is measured in millimoles (thousandths).

40000 x 210/1 000 000 000=8.4/1000

I just wanted to see what forty thousand times as reactive as glucose would mean. I don't really know from moles, but I understand that 8.4 is rather a high blood sugar. I guess if a person's MG level went this high because of a very very very low carb diet, but their blood sugar normalized, you'd have to balance the damage from the MG with the lessened damage from the change in blood glucose.
Reply With Quote
  #29   ^
Old Sun, Feb-01-09, 10:37
kathleen24 kathleen24 is offline
Monday came.
Posts: 3,981
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 275/185/155 Female 5'4"
BF:yep
Progress: 75%
Default

oops, my bad. Please excuse me while I go regain 50 pounds and feel like crap all day long every day; none of that matters as long as my beta-hydroxybutyrate, acetoacetate, and
glycotoxin methylglyoxal are looking good, right?
Reply With Quote
  #30   ^
Old Sun, Feb-01-09, 17:13
64dodger 64dodger is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 287
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 251/218.2/200 Male 76 inches
BF:
Progress: 64%
Default

When are so called "scientist" really going to grow up and act like one.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:54.


Copyright © 2000-2017 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.