Random, interesting studies

Mauritio

Anybody tried bees bread ?

In this study it did wonders for steroid health.
They gave mice on a HFD about 5-7g(HED) of bees bread and it completely rescued the levels of their steroidogenic enzymes.
Not only that, in many cases, giving them bees bread, increased the values above the normal control group.

Testosterone was increased by about 60% above control levels.
StaR mRNA levels doubled !
Unfortunately estrogen was increased as well, but only to the level of the control group not above that.

https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/ajpendo.00093.2021?rfr_dat=cr_pub++0pubmed&url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org

random

@Mauritio said in Random, interesting studies:

Anybody tried bees bread ?

I did, it Can taste much better than basic honey comb that has only wax and honey, basic honey comb is often to acidic and taste aint the best in most case compare to some honey in jar and some beesbread

lobotomize-me

@Mauritio honey /most bee products /chyrsin rich foods generally increase testosterone.

cs3000

@alfredoolivas said in Random, interesting studies:

Doesn’t the hot water cause hydrolysis ?

apparently too slow by itself so they do extra processing

@Mauritio said in Random, interesting studies:

Anybody tried bees bread ?
In this study it did wonders for steroid health.

nice , & a potent effect really fast in a diabetes model. normalised by 3 days. fastest effect ive seen
STZ model = destruction of pancreas cells so i guess its most relevant to type 1 , or if someone with type 2 has lacking pancreatic islet cells too as part of their problem. full damage was done initially so shows good effect

they used an extract ~30mg polyphenols 5mg flavanols per gram so maybe ~ 5g bee bread for 1g of extract
composition varies a lot by location if it was the polyphenols giving most of the effect even in same country by region,
theirs was high in ~~kaempferol-3-O-di-rhamnoside~~ Isorhamnetin-O-hexosyl-O-rutinoside

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8264221/#sec7

and if you believe the results,
they showed its acute effect (didnt lower blood sugar when not elevated)

Which is odd. because its not lowering glucose in non diabetic rats so its not acting like insulin right? unless things are effectively counteracting it in the normal group because it would be crashing otherwise from insulin secretion. (at 3hrs in the DW group they had lower blood sugar though 84 vs 92)
unlikely enough islet cells left from the damage to stimulate insulin secretion for such a drastic change in both of the groups, which is what GLB doe? idk maybe there is but they're clearly wrecked from such high glucose at 0hr. 3 hours isnt enough time to regenerate the islet cell damage

alfredoolivas

@cs3000 said in Random, interesting studies:

apparently too slow by itself so they do extra processing

Could I finely dice it up and put it in a pot of boiling water for 15 minutes, whilst it remains boiling for the entire 15 minutes? would that be effective?

cs3000

@alfredoolivas i'd guess it takes a lot longer still but not sure ,
if youre interested in it for the octacosanol sugarcane wax is better only need a little already in a good form https://bioenergetic.forum/post/47406 supplements are around tho

Mauritio

Again, TLR 4 /Endotoxin implicated inInfections, not just bacterial ones, but also viral.

"TLR4-dependent viral entry was further validated by an anti-TLR4 antibody-mediated blocking experiment. It was noticed that TLR4 is necessary for the early events of viral infection, especially during the attachment and entry stages."

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10157217/

Endotoxin might not just be implicated in viral entry, but long term consequences of viruses .
The drug larazotide is being researched for long covid symptoms. It basically works in a way that it prevents endotoxin from entering circulation .

https://ichgcp.net/de/clinical-trials-registry/NCT05747534

Mauritio

@cs3000 said in Random, interesting studies:

@Mauritio
one in dogs vs birds (fig 2 , its not policosanol tho general
fatty acid esters absorbed a little but the fatty alcohol ester didnt https://www.researchgate.net/publication/21739344_Comparative_aspects_of_lipid_digestion_and_absorption_Physiological_correlates_of_wax_ester_digestion

but looked a bit further for specific, rats can digest even more of it if its esterified specific to oleic acid
but thats synthetic esterification not bound with oleic acid normally https://grasasyaceites.revistas.csic.es/index.php/grasasyaceites/article/view/1388 , couldnt find if humans could absorb some but theres a case of a women with gastric blockage who ate a lot of honeycomb so at least a lot goes undigested
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2740191/#s02

was still worth posting your post now i know more about it & wouldnt have

@Mauritio said in Random, interesting studies:

for it beeing indigestible for us ?

study from that megathread showing good anti blood clotting property of policosanol https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9425618/

Seems right. For some reason birds seem to be good at it. Humans not. Such a shame.

And interesting studies you posted on Bee bread. Quite the strong effect indeed.

Mauritio

Im not convinced that low protein is dangerous and catabolic, mid - long term in people under 65.

I recently posted a study showing 5 weeks of 8% protein in the diet did not cause muscle loss. After which someone said that isnt long enough .

Now here's a study showing that 12 weeks of a very low 0.4g/kg/d, ~5%protein diet does not lower basal muscle protein synthesis!
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0137183

It seems to come down to age as well.
Here it gets interesting: if you're under 65 and eating a high protein diet, that is strongly associated with death, cancer and diabetes . Over 65 it seems to be protective !

"...aged 50–65 reporting high protein intake had a 75% increase in overall mortality and a 4-fold increase in cancer and diabetes mortality..."
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3988204/

Not sure why. Low protein diets can lead to lower thymus weight, as seen in this study (https://www.scielo.br/j/bjmbr/a/MGBdr7CsJTMQrf7Bhjbdv3z/?lang=en)
And older people are more susceptible to infections and chronic inflammation .So maybe after 65 the increase
in Protein and inflammatory amino acids is worth the trade off, for increased immunity and suppression of inflammation .
Maybe it's simply the lesser of 2 evils at that point .
What do you guys think?

LucH

@Mauritio said in Random, interesting studies:

What do you guys think?

After 60 yrs, 2 - 5% % loss is usual, according to activity.
Main causes to fight against (things happening in our bodies as we age that might contribute to sarcopenia):
Reduction in nerve cells responsible for sending signals from the brain to the muscles to start movement.
Lower concentrations of some hormones, including growth hormone, testosterone, and insulin-like growth factor
Increases in inflammation, partly due to disease
A decrease in the ability to turn protein into energy.

So, if we can slow down these processes, we could better manage ...
Law of nature: if not able to reproduce, if not able to transmit knowledge, we become a weight for society.
Note I don't feel it that way

DavidPS

@Mauritio - I am wary of drawing conclusions from studies that lump people into groups based solely on their protein intake. It is too broad-brush for me. For example, is it the high protein or the skewed calcium to phosphorous ratio in the high protein group? Is it the high protein or the change in the glycine to methionine ratio?

Aging is complex. For a more holistic approach, see Ray Peat's 2015 newsletter:

https://wiki.chadnet.org/files/imprinting-and-aging.pdf

alfredoolivas

@Mauritio
In the first study, the 5% protein diet, caused 0.32% loss in free fat mass.

Which is almost nothing right? very interesting.

Mauritio

@DavidPS It is speculative for sure . But the effect was strong. A 75% increase in overall mortality is pretty wild.

It hints at low protein being safe. That's what I'm getting at . If it was harmful, it would be unlikely to have such a drastic effect.

Mauritio

@alfredoolivas yeah that's negligible. Pretty wild . Thanks for sharing.

And Im not sure people realize how low 5% is .10% is doable .
8% is somewhat doable, but 5% is really hard . Especially for 12 weeks.

I remember posting the 8% study on reddit and some smartass was like : "Good luck loosing all your muscle" ...

Basically zero muscle loss after 12 weeks of 5% protein is pretty impressive.