Slashdot Mirror
New Way to Stimulate Brain to Release Antioxidants
Neopallium writes "A joint research effort between researchers at the Burnham Institute for Medical Research in La Jolla, CA, and a team from Japan (Iwate University, Osaka City University, Gifu University, Iwate Medical University) has discovered a novel way to treat stroke and neurodegenerative disorders. This approach works by inducing nerve cells in the brain and the spine to release natural antioxidants that protect nerve cells from stress and free radicals that lead to neurodegenerative diseases."
You have to ask yourself, at what point is it time to just let it go? Is there a point to let it go? Maybe the point exists, maybe it doesn't, I expect its a relative outlook of moral perspective, but it seems that if there is a line somewhere, it can't be far away from where we are.
-Da3vid-
"Protandim" does not exist, at all, in MEDLINE (www.pubmed.gov), which means that there is essentially zero peer reviewed medical research on the drug, at least under its brand name.
I had actually never seen the error message before:
> The following term was not found and ignored: protandim.
This work presently under discussion, at least, seems to involve a published line of investigation.
Not necessarily. If you have an ischemic stroke, some of the tissue will be lost beyond saving and undergo necrosis. There will however be a much larger region, called "the penumbra" (shadow) that will be subjected to a certain degree of ischemic damage. Much of this region will be damaged not by the ischemia itself, but by oxidative stress at reperfusion when blood with oxygen and nutriets starts flowing back into the tissue.
Much as been tried to limit this reperfusion damage, including calcium channel blockers (e.g. nimodipine) and different antioxidants, but to no great success. You could argue that enhancing your antioxidative capacity before the reperfusion damage appears could limit the extend of damage to your brain. I remain carefully optimistic.
One really has to wait for the study to be published before making any judgements.
However, there have been quite a few promising studies (in both rats and people) showing that antioxidants dramatically reduce the extent of damage to the brain in both diseases of the brain and traumatic brain injury.
Some of the studies I have read indicate that it should be possible to dramatically boost levels of brain antioxidants simply by ingesting antioxidants that are capable of crossing the blood-brain barrier. Compounds such as alpha-lipoic acid (which is both fat- and water-soluble) and curcumin (a component of the popular curry spice turmeric) are cheap, safe, and very powerful antioxidants that have been studied.
From the press release, it sounds like the methods used in the study are pretty invasive expensive. I would like to see more long-term research using widely available antioxidant supplements. Unfortunately, since most medical research is funded by drug companies these days, we aren't likely to see lots of grants going to scientists who want to study non-patentable things like turmeric or vitamin C.
But do you really want it as a preventative measure? FTFA:
"At normal concentrations, glutamate acts as a neurotransmitter that nerves use to communicate. However, at excessive levels glutamate is toxic, resulting in over stimulation of nerve cells, known as excitotoxicity, and causing excessive stress on the nerve cells eventually ending in cell death."
So if you counteract this, your nerves communicate less. Sounds like a tradeoff between higher mental capacity resulting in increased likelihood of nerve damage -vs- lower mental capacity but you get to use your brain longer. I know my brain works in rather strange ways at times -- I believe it's my quirks that give rise to periods of intense creativity -- and I wouldn't trade that for having a "normal" brain if that means also being more stupid and losing the benefits I experience.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
More likely is that years of smoking pot would make this less necessary. The most current research indicates that cannabanoids (delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol being chief among them) stimulate processes in the brain that protect against both damage from chronic causes (i.e. Alzheimer's) and acute trauma. A Google search for "Alzheimer's" and "Marijuana" should yield some good starting points. And, pot has the added bonus of probably being much cheaper than any new drug or treatment that the pharmecutical companies are likely to come out with anytime soon. Just remember to fight terrorism and buy domestic.
Fight psychopharmacological mccarthyism. http://www.norml.org/
Off topic, but reminds me of the recent research showing that those who smoke nothing but pot have lower lung cancer incidence than those who smoke nothing at all. Although the smoke does do some damage to the lungs, chemicals in it actually are protective - the opposite of the chemical effects from tobacco smoke.
It would be appropriately weird if something that has added so much particularly to the musical culture of the last century has also been the preventer of both brain damage and lung cancer for many thousands of people, just as a side effect.
I know if my back's out badly - which in the theory of many osteopaths restricts the flow of cerebro-spinal fluid and thus puts some pressure on the brain - pot is a great help in thinking more clearly (including thinking about how to get my back better). This would fit with the recent finding that people with recurrent back trouble evidence some brain shrinkage. The question would be: Would people with recurrent back trouble who are regular smokers exhibit less?
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton