Glucose loading cures everything?

S.Holmes

"A 2019 study from the University of Arizona found that increasing GLUCOSE DELIVERY to motor neurons affected by amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) may help patients live longer and function better. ALS is a progressive neurodegenerative disease that causes increased metabolic activity, known as hypermetabolism. When ALS-affected neurons are given more GLUCOSE, they can convert it into energy to meet their abnormally high energy demands. This may help improve mobility and increase survival rates.
Other research suggests that a higher GLUCOSE-based diet may also help slow ALS progression by preventing protein misfolding. Misfolded proteins can accumulate in the brains of ALS patients, which may contribute to disease progression."

Peatful

@S-Holmes mm-hmm

yerrag

@Peatful

I don't think sucrose turns into glucose. Half of sucrose is glucose. Half of it is fructose. Both are metabolized. There are other sugars out there like lactose. It is also metabolized. But there are some that aren't.

Ray has spoken highly n earlier articles of fructose. In the way that it is more easily absorbed and metabolized. So clearly, it does not turn into glucose as you would say it does.

S.Holmes

@yerrag
"Data from the present study show that ∼90% of dietary fructose is converted into glucose and other metabolites, such as lactate and glycerate, by the small intestine before it reaches the liver. Feb 23, 2018"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6032988/

Peatful

@yerrag said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

@Peatful

I don't think sucrose turns into glucose. Half of sucrose is glucose. Half of it is fructose. Both are metabolized. There are other sugars out there like lactose. It is also metabolized. But there are some that aren't.

Ray has spoken highly n earlier articles of fructose. In the way that it is more easily absorbed and metabolized. So clearly, it does not turn into glucose as you would say it does.

Yes

Im not talking about the processing

Fructose differs in structure etc from lactose obviously
Etc etc etc

Im saying
We drink fructose (once processed)
“Oh. Glucose to our brain.”
We drink lactose (once processed)
“Oh. Glucose to our brain”

But of course they have different properties
They are two different “foods”

Now
This differs from starch vs sugar
Although starchy carbs “turn to glucose”
Very different

Peatful

Just thought of something

Im saying mono and disaccharides are the same once turned to glucose….
Same energy per gram….

Lactose.
Fructose
Sucrose
Etc

I stand corrected if im wrong here

yerrag

@Insomniac said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

@yerrag said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

How is the digestive process bypassed? I fail to see the logic. One way the digestive process is bypassed is by IV feeding. But I don't know if this is what you mean.

This is my main issue with the whole concept. Stephens is claiming isolated dextrose has special properties however it raises glucose in the blood just like food does. So how can the glucose put there from corn sugar do something different from glucose put there from food or even an IV?
I hear you. I would have to say dextrose has the same properties as glucose and that there is no difference I'm how the body metabolizes it, both being simple sugars and in the form of 100% glucose. So another mechanism is at work that disposes the body to more quickly metabolize dextrose.
The only difference I can think of is the rate of glucose entry into the blood could be faster and have a greater concentration peak than could be achieved by food under ordinary conditions especially at higher doses of more than 200 grams people are spiking their glucose through the roof but at least it would be doing something different so you can consider a medicinal effect.

If you're familiar with a blood sugar test that was widely available until the 90s (the 5hr oral glucose tolerance test, since replaced by the much less useful hokey pokey HbA1c), a 75gr bolus of glucose is taken after an overnight fast and blood sugar readings are taken every hour. This test was done under supervision because some people (with blood sugar regulation problems) could faint halfway through it because their blood sugar would drop so low.

I ask myself how much more this fainting would happen if a 200g bolus were taken. Yet this risk in not even mentioned by Dr. Stephens. And I wonder why.

It is as if no such event has ever occurred in Dr. Stephen's trials. It's as if all people, with a wide range of blood sugar regulation issues from none to extremely tending to become hypoglycemic (I was one before I fixed myself), are not liable to faint from hypoglycemia.

So, I'm curious as to why. It's as if taking dextrose flips a switch that taking glucose wouldn't - that suddenly everything is hunky dory where very large dextrose intakes (akin to a flood of biblical proportions) would easily be absorbed and metabolized, with nary a problem.

The only answer I could think of is that the body is equipped to handle a sudden deluge of glucose through the polyol pathway, which converts glucose to fructose, and makes possible the large absorption and metabolism of a sugar glucose possible thru its conversion to fructose.

In addition, the body would be triggered to release insulin in large quantities which would inhibit lipolysis, which would clear the way for fatty acid oxidation to be suppressed (given fatty acids in blood would be depleted), paving the way for a high proportion of energy to be produced via mitochondrial oxidation.

At the same time, the pancreas' beta cells would become fully functional with its stem cell exposed to glucose as its stem cells turn into functional beta cells that produce insulin.

Altogether, this transforms the body from a moribund state of low or nonexistent sugar metabolism to a fully alive highly metabolic state over time during therapy. With the caveat that the body has enough stores of nutrients such as vitamin A, D, magnesium to accompany the higher metabolic state's use of more nutrients.

But it is hard to conceive that no such groundwork has been considered and nutrients made available in the therapy, to ensure this transformation happens. And yet people are reporting blood sugar improvements such as that of @evan-hinkle 's blood sugar values.

yerrag

@Peatful

But you're still insisting fructose and lactose turns into glucose before it reaches the brain. I don't know about lactose, but fructose does not have to turn intobglucose to be absorbed and metabolized.

Unless I'm reading wrongly in Peat's early articles on fructose.

Peatful

@yerrag said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

@Peatful

But you're still insisting fructose and lactose turns into glucose before it reaches the brain. I don't know about lactose, but fructose does not have to turn intobglucose to be absorbed and metabolized.

Unless I'm reading wrongly in Peat's early articles on fructose.

From my understanding
Mono (ie: fructose) and di (ie: lactose)
Both are converted into glucose before reaching the brain

Starches different story of course

If dextrose is mono
And it does differ from di
Maybe that’s why it’s recommended by this guy?

Insomniac

This post is deleted!

ThinPicking

@ThinPicking said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

But there's some sort of concert going on.

@ThinPicking said in Are Polls a Good Idea?:
Is it actually possible to substitute in either direction. Maybe just a temporary lack of control and engagement in some. Many ways a person can delude themselves. Misappropriate their condition and capability.

I don't know. So this isn't an objection. I'll be creating some posts on the subject at some point.

https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/22/23/9115
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7075501/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10002343/
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/STROKEAHA.123.040499
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306987719307145
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1568163721002865
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00278/full

For the liver fixation of the Vitamin A toxicity crowd.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7981187/

For their aversion to fructose.

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2021.695486/full

yerrag

@evan-hinkle said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

@Insomniac fructose converts to glucose in an oxidative metabolism. This is what I think is the missing piece for everyone here and at the RPF.

No. Fructose does not need conversion to glucose to be metabolized. Actually, fructose is more easily absorbed and metabolized than glucose. You can find many articles in his website (or used to be, if his website is gone) www. raypeat.com about fructose

So, you need oxidative phosphorylation, (thyroid supplementation) or glucose. 2 options, same outcome.

Not 'or' but 'and' glucose ( and oxygen, and more).

yerrag

@ThinPicking said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

@yerrag said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

When tissues cannot absorb and metabolize glucose, why does glucose loading work nonetheless. Perhaps it's because when blood glucose gets high, it triggers the polyol pathway, where glucose is converted to fructose. Unlike glucose, fructose is more easily absorbed and metabolized by tissues.

Evan also mentions hydration of his eyes and better sleep some way up. Along with the teeth thing. My best bet remains that it's resolving a kind of edema. Drawing in structure, raising metabolism, which also produces structured water inherently. I would say filling in edema with structural components, but he also reported some welcome weight loss.

I just wonder at what cost. If this isn't created by or refined from nature. Why not the fructose. Or why would there be a preference for this.

The edema angle is spot on, although the mechanism I can't really explain and remains vague. But a lot has to do with having good metabolism that plays a big role in making the cell acidic internally and alkaline externally in the ECF. This keeps the cell structure stable and distinct and free from being contaminated, so to speak, from the extracellular milieu. The cell won't be bloated with water, for example. A lot of this has to do with the energy in the cell creating structured water to enable a strong barrier that conventional biology calls the cell membrane. In such a state, you can create an osmotic balance that keeps the eye fluids from getting to feel dry. Sleep is better the brain isn't under stress as energy flows well with the mitochondria producing the energy adequately to power restful sleep. As for the teeth, it may go as far as the cell being in optimal metabolic state, augurs well for the continued osteooblast activity in building structure in bones, with the abundance of CO2, and sufficient dietary calcium to strengthen teeth - as teeth isn't being leached due to osteoclast activity being turned off.

All this has to be associated with enabling oxidative phosphorylation, as glucose is being used heavily optimally.

ThinPicking

@ThinPicking said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

@ThinPicking said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

But there's some sort of concert going on.

@ThinPicking said in Are Polls a Good Idea?:
Is it actually possible to substitute in either direction. Maybe just a temporary lack of control and engagement in some. Many ways a person can delude themselves. Misappropriate their condition and capability.

I don't know. So this isn't an objection. I'll be creating some posts on the subject at some point.

https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/22/23/9115
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7075501/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10002343/
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/STROKEAHA.123.040499
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306987719307145
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1568163721002865
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00278/full

For the liver fixation of the Vitamin A toxicity crowd.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7981187/

For their aversion to fructose.

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2021.695486/full

To add to the thought. This whole thing may be conditionally true for their camp. If they're carrying a kind of (resolvable, always resolvable) cardiac injury. So this alternative "protocol" may slow to a crawl, what would be a demise of "natural causes". And retain incomplete but good neurological function.

I'm out on a limb here. This is quite fringe. Anyone willing, please muse on it and critique.

ThinPicking

Thank you. I'll be back Yerrag. I need to rest a bit, my metaphorical feet are bleeding.

evan.hinkle

Just for the sake of clarity, I’m not in the low A camp. I eat a normal “Peating” diet to which I’ve added dextrose, (in case anyone thought this was a factor).

S.Holmes

Here's a really good podcast without the solo artist performance in the first one I posted.

https://youtu.be/eup7FAzsZQI?si=G_pBc4Q6Lx_bfOd5

Razvan

Caution to this. It's very dangerous to indulge in big amounts of dextrose. I have seen people getting 200 blood sugar from 15 grams of it.

Insomniac

This post is deleted!

ThinPicking

@Razvan said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

Caution to this. It's very dangerous to indulge in big amounts of dextrose. I have seen people getting 200 blood sugar from 15 grams of it.

@Insomniac said in Glucose loading cures everything?:

I played around with about 200 grams but I ran out of glucose test strips. It brought up my heart rate but I didn't notice anything else.

I'm shocked 15 grams can do that much. Maybe they have a medical issue.

It probably depends gents, a lot on sodium (and chloride). And everything else thereafter.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10232203/

I'm still getting used to walking with the idea there's legitimacy in what's going on here, for a certain kind of person with a certain kind of comorbidity. The question for me is whether they want to stay in that state, and how to get them out of it if they don't.