The antioxidant myth

(Richard Morris) #1

Interesting article from Dr Georgia Ede … it turns out that we make one of the most powerful anti-oxidants, glutathione, right where the oxidation happens.

(Marie Dantoni) #2

Wow…Ok but I’m still eating my dark chocolate

(Michael ) #3

Interesting. I’ve maintained the idea that eliminating sugar was the best antioxidant. I remember reading that most of the antioxidants from diet are not effective but generally just agreed that the antioxidant rich foods were great. Glad i haven’t wasted a ton of money on them. Still love turmeric and cacao so they will remain in my diet regardless of antioxidant koolaid

(Abhishek Anand) #4

I am disappointed by the quality of articles in the medical field. Too often, in medical articles, I see an article X cited for the claim Y. When I read the article X, I see actually a much weaker claim, sometimes even ~Y (opposite of Y).
For example, in the PsychToday article, we see the claim.

Although antioxidants may work in test tubes, the vast majority don’t seem to work inside the human body.

For the claim, the following paper is cited:


The paper’s claims are actually (logically) much weaker. Here are some excerpts from the paper’s conclusion (in summary, there is evidence for the antioxidant effects of cocoa (dark chocolate) and the evidence is inconclusive for claiming that berries/nuts are beneficial because of their antioxidant effects (which is weaker than saying that berries are not effective antioxidants inside the human body)):

At present, the strongest evidence for the efficacy of (poly)phenols against chronic disease exists for flavan-3-ol-rich foods, in particular cocoa in respect to CVD risk. Many flavan-3-ol studies have used adequate controls in double-blind randomized studies, with well-characterized intervention foods/drinks. Additionally, they have strived to assess flavan-3-ol absorption and metabolism, a factor critical in building potential cause-and-effect relationships. Flavan-3-ol studies have been further strengthened by interventions, indicating that pure flavan-3-ols mimic the vascular effects exerted by flavan-3-ol-rich foods. As such, there is good evidence to suggest that the acute and/or regular consumption of flavan-3-ol rich cocoa or tea can have a positive effect on the vascular system, mainly through their effects on endothelial function, NO bioavailability, and BP. However, the long-term effects of flavan-3-ol interventions are presently unclear, and there are issues to resolve with respect to the efficacy of tea and caffeine.

Presently, the evidence for anthocyanins, flavonols and flavanones, stilbenes, hydroxycinnamates, and phenolic acids, based on studies with berries, pomegranate, red wine or citrus fruits, and coffee, is inconclusive, mainly due to the insufficiencies in the study design mentioned above. The diversity of (poly)phenols in berries and wine also makes it more difficult to assess putative health effects of individual (poly)phenols. Future studies will need to utilize other pure (poly)phenols in well-designed RCTs, before conclusions can be drawn regarding their specific biological function. Recent studies with flavanone-rich orange juice in parallel with pure flavanones are encouraging, in particular the positive effects exerted by pure flavanones on endothelial function and BP. Data with nuts are undoubtedly complicated by the presence of unsaturated fats, which are also known to be protective against various vascular risk factors. Future work with nuts will need to isolate specific (poly)phenol fractions for intervention to shed further light on the efficacy of nut (poly)phenols.

(Tim W) #5

Well said. I’ve had a similar “awakening” in that you can’t take much of this stuff on face value, you really have to drill down and “follow the claims”. Even then, the best thing is to simply do a self-experiment. If eating XXXX or YYYY leads to good health, even if only for one person, then it’s valid for that person.

I will say that Ede’s article mostly “beats up” on the hype that’s espoused to sell myths like "drink this sugar laden drink and it’s good for you because it’s loaded with added anti-oxidants. She does mention that eating real/whole foods, will most likely be beneficial.

I’m very lucky, I enjoy spinach/broccoli/cabbage/etc, the foods that are loaded with nutrition and phyto-nutrients, I’ll keep eating them, right along with my bacon/eggs/hamburger/steak etc.

I hope everyone has a great last day of 2017!

(Sjur Gjøstein Karevoll) #6

A couple points about glutathione. First, it’s made from glucose, second it’s production is increased by insulin and decreased by counter-regulatory hormones like cortisol and adrenaline, i.e eating carbs increase glutathione production while ketosis and fasting decrease it.

Finally, many “anti-oxidants” in vegetables are actually oxidants that produce a hormetic effect strengthening the body’s natural anti-oxidant defense system (of which glutathione is a key component), the end result being increased resilience against oxidants. This is similar to how exercise works.

(Bunny) #7

I believe anti-oxidants will not work because of too much sugar intake in the diet and that is why results are so variable!

This is because it is blocked (high glucose acts as an inhibitor) and is depleted out of the body having no chance to do anything no matter what the levels are in the blood stream of whatever substance is in it and the result expected!

I wrote this before I even looked at the article and decided to take a peek at it! (I was right)

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) #8

If you like them, then by all means eat them. Just don’t expect results that you’re not going to get.

The more I learn about nutrition because of eating keto, the more it seems that our grandparents knew the right things to eat. Now, if only Grandma had known not to overcook the liver and the broccoli!

(Richard Morris) #9

Yes, that is the argument that Chris Masterjohn makes against being permanently ketogenic.

The argument can be made that you are going to be dealing with a lot more ROSes when eating glucose and secreting insulin … so in context it makes sense that the body can increase it’s antioxidant defenses at the same time it is undergoing more oxidation. The cure comes with the poison.

If that exposure to glucose were rare and seasonal in context, then it makes sense how we evolved the way we did. If that exposure is daily and overwhelming, then that would be an entirely different context that we appear to be poorly evolved to cope with.

For someone who has lost the ability to flexibly fuel partition, a mostly ketogenic diet may result is less net unhandled oxidation.

Interesting, I didn’t know that. I guess that would make a good argument for carnivory, since vegetable eating ketogenic dieters have necessarily less glucose + less insulin => less glutathione yet more hormesis expecting a greater glutathione response for the vegetable intake to show a benefit.

(Sjur Gjøstein Karevoll) #10

Certainly, and it’s similar to the argument about vitamin C requirements dropping when you don’t eat any plants. Plants usually contain more toxins than meat as well (we are, after all, composed entirely of meat ourselves) so it makes sense that we’d need more anti-oxidants when eating them. We need to be careful about taking this hypothesis too far, however, it’s still just speculation as far as I know. Another hypothesis that fits is that the body is simply “okay” with an impaired anti-oxidant defense in the context of glucose shortage, that the cost of running it at full efficiency is simply not worth the benefits in that scenario. A short-term lapse in the anti-oxidant defense system is unlikely to have adverse effects so it also makes sense that it would be deprioritized when there are more pressing concerns like acute energy shortage or lions bearing down on you.

I hadn’t really thought about it that way, but there certainly is some logic to it. On one hand a keto diet may blunt the hormetic response because of the decreased glucose and insulin, but on the other hand you might also want to increase the hormetic signaling to make sure your anti-oxidant defenses don’t slack off too much. It would also be quite interesting to find out if there are any foods that produce a hormetic effect on a high-carb diet but who actually become net toxic on keto because of a decreased response.

(Richard Morris) #11

Most vegetables will contain sugar or starch even small amounts and transiently raise glucose, even modestly, so you’d have to try to measure 3 moving targets in a very fragile context - the hormetic effect of the plants toxins in that subject, the available glucose from that plant for that subject, and the subjects production of antioxidents from available glucose - oh and the effectiveness of those against the toxin.

But it’s an interesting thought experiment.

Sometimes I miss being a programmer where I can put variables in a watch window and see how context changes everything.

(Solomom A) #12

Why more anti-oxidants in the presence of glucose plus insulin? Do they promote the formation of more oxidants and therefore increase the need for anti-oxidants? Any info?

Seen comments from Richard Morris, thanks.

(Richard Morris) #13

Glutathione is an antioxidant that we make from Glucose when insulin is high. Unlike these “superfood” antioxidants it doesn’t have to pass absorption and uptake hurdles, and it is produced insitu, and probably in context of the oxidation.