The Permanent Supplement Regime

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by MachineGhost » Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:56 am

To my spreadsheet of the 19 factors involved in aging and over 75 bio-agents, I've added eight new anti-cancerific factors for a grand total of 27 pathological factors involved in aging and as well as updating those bio-agents that now have anti-cancerific factors.  These eight new factors include abnormal growth, apoptosis, aromatase, vessel growth, cell cycle, differentiation, metastasis and receptor expression.

Fortunately, the 11-supplement regime originally referenced in this post: http://gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/ht ... 998#p36998

...does not need to radically change upon re-ranking the bio-agents to cover all 27 factors using the least amount of bio-agents.  What's new is the rise of melatonin to second place below Vitamin D3.  That's a pretty strong testament to both hormones being very powerful with a broad array of positive effects.  I recommend a sublingual or liquid version of melatonin for the same reasons I wrote about DHEA.

It would not be adverse to the regime to drop the DHEA (which now ranks 28th, but was originally a judgement call for the hormonal imbalance factor) in favor of melatonin which is a pretty nontoxic substance.  Drowsiness is easily identified as the upper intake limit.  However, to my way of thinking "hormonal imbalance" implies the age-onset decline of the sexual hormones, not D3 (lack of sunlight) or melatonin (calcification of the pineal gland).  But on the other hand, there is really no way someone can take just one bio-agent and expect to correct all of the various hormonal imbalances.  It is simply way too complex of an issue.  There is a thread by Gumby about hormone imbalances here: http://gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/ht ... ic.php?t=0

05/03/2014 UPDATE: I wrote a new post about the optimal salt intake. http://gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/ot ... /#msg95167

05/31/2014 UPDATE: I've posted my personal regime. http://gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/ot ... /#msg96771

02/10/2015 UPDATE: My latest personal regime: http://gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/ot ... #msg106821

I've tried to stay agnostic but some brands or analogues are just so superior to anything else out there, so here's some recommendations:

Optimal Vitamin D3 Dose: Optimal is still not clear.  You can either err on the side of caution with 2K-5K/day or go for the high side with 7K-10K/day.  I've done both but have settled on 7K/day.
Optimal BioPQQ Dose: 20mg.
Best Fish Oil: VivoMega
Best DHEA: Natural Radiance DHEA -- must be applied anorectally (men).
Best Magnesium: There's currently a class action lawsuit about undisclosed ingredients, including magnesium oxide, in certain brands of buffered Magnesium Glycinate.  While a study claimed to show a higher serum magnesium level combining glycinate with oxide, Doctor's Best sells an unbuffered 100% magnesium glycinate only version if you don't feel like getting ripped off (because glycinate costs more than oxide).  Of Swanson's version of 133mg elemental magnesium per capsule, 100mg is glycinate and 33mg is oxide.
Best Resveratrol: Pterostilbene has superior bioavailability to trans-resveratrol and 50mg of pterostilbene is more or less equivalent to 250mg of trans-resveratrol.
Last edited by MachineGhost on Tue Feb 10, 2015 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
WiseOne
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:08 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by WiseOne » Mon Oct 22, 2012 7:36 am

I had been skimping on this thread, so hadn't seen your supplement list before.  Most interesting, although there is reason to be concerned about a few of the recommendations.

First, be careful taking any hormone that you already produce, like melatonin (pineal gland) and DHEA (adrenals).  There are elaborate feedback mechanisms to control the levels of these hormones, which you'll throw off by taking them exogenously.  Melatonin, for example, is a great sleep aid when used rarely.  Over time (generally not more than 1-2 weeks), your body adjusts production to compensate for what you're taking, and it stops working.  If you continue to take it over a long period of time (months to years), you'll become dependent on the hormone and lose the ability to produce and regulate it - so stopping it will result in a rebound reaction.

Digestive enzymes won't accomplish anything unless you have a deficit, which is quite rare.  If you do, it'll show up as fatty stools (yellow, floating...sorry for the imagery).

Vitamin K is also a coagulation factor.  Hypercoagulable states are incredibly dangerous.  I don't know if taking too much vitamin K can cause this, but then there's not much literature out there because mostly it's taken to prevent bleeding problems, and never long term.

The B vitamins, calcium, vitamin D, and Mg are good recommendations for anyone.  We all need to take a multivitamin, which goes to show just how non-nutritious our food has become.
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1900
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Benko » Mon Oct 22, 2012 11:32 am

MG:  Care to list the "eight new anti-cancerific factors"?

WiseOne:  no offense meant, but you gave the typical physician positions. I suppose kinda like a general broker would give when asked about the PP (and I like that analogy, probably fairly accurate).  Briefly:

Digestive enzymes** are probably helpful for a fair number of people (myself most certainly included.  I'd have SEVERE constipation without them).  I don't know of any way to test for it (I certainly don't have the greasy stool thing).  best way is to just try them if you suspect they might be of help.  Many people don't notice anything WHILE taking them, but then they stop and realize what a difference they make.

Vitamin K has been studied in MILLIGRAM doses in japan for osteoporosis for many years (though probably different type than MG is taking).  In any case coagulopathy is not a problem.

Supplemental calcium There are a number of troubling studies of supplemental calcium and heart disease.  Perhaps this would not be the case if sufficeint VIt D and K were administered.

I'm not sure if there is a feedback loop for melatonin and DHEA has been studied and can help increase bone density, though probably of limited benefit for most.

**most effective are broad spectrum plant based e.g. similase.  no commercial interest.
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
Reub
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3158
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:44 pm

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Reub » Mon Oct 22, 2012 2:38 pm

I've heard that most doctors are trained to have a general disdain for supplemental vitamins. Is this true and why?
Gumby
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 8:54 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Gumby » Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:29 pm

Reub wrote: I've heard that most doctors are trained to have a general disdain for supplemental vitamins. Is this true and why?
Perhaps the reasons are because most doctors actually have very little training in nutrition and there isn't much money to be made from recommending supplemental vitamins.

I'm not suggesting that doctors are purposefully misleading patients. More likely most doctors are just trained by their professors, governing organizations, and mentors to treat patients in a way that makes money for their institutions. (i.e. take this treatment or test because the AMA or the CDC recommends it and get your insurance company to pay me for it).

Of course, I'm not a doctor, so I'm sure the answer is a bit more complicated than that. But, I'm pretty sure the answer has something to do with "money."
Last edited by Gumby on Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nothing I say should be construed as advice or expertise. I am only sharing opinions which may or may not be applicable in any given case.
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1900
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Benko » Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:52 pm

Gumby wrote: But, I'm pretty sure the answer has something to do with "money."
OMG you and MG (I'm assuming) actually agree on something ;-)

As I recall there was probably like 1 lecture in med school on vitamins.  Docs are trained to treat things with drugs (or if you're a surgeon , surgery e.g. as someone I knew put it e.g. "to cut is to cure").  In any case that is the mindset.  That anything could be cured/treated with anything other than drugs is mostly not part of the mindset.  Well that and anyone eating "adequate diet" gets sufficient vitamins.  So it is more the mindset/narrowmindedness than anything.

There are certainly some docs motivated by greed, but they are in the minority and there are certainly lots of better ways to make lots of money e.g. as a deadhead (as in greatful dead fan) In college I knew kept telling me, Orthodontia, that is where the money is.
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
Gumby
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 8:54 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Gumby » Mon Oct 22, 2012 8:13 pm

I'm not saying it's a passion for money that causes doctors to have the narrow minded approach you speak of. What I'm saying is that the system rewards the narrow minded approach. For instance, if — hypothetically — prescribing vitamins were somehow lucrative for doctors, you can bet that medical schools would offer more than 1 lecture on them and the AMA would be advancing ways to help doctors utilize those vitamins to screen and treat patients. And perhaps doctors would be asking for more ways to use vitamins to treat diseases. It's the incentives in the system that matters, not the greed per se.

Using drugs to treat symptoms is really the foundation of Western medicine. Ever notice that just about every disease in Western medicine is just a fancy name for a symptom? "Heartburn," "Irritable Bowel Syndrome", "Inflammatory Bowel Disease," "Dermatitis," "Rosacea," "Heart Disease", "Heart Attack", "Peptic Ulcers", "Insomnia", "Restless Leg Syndrome", etc...

There's no real monetary incentive to figure out what's causing the disease. So, the solution to fixing the symptom tends to be pharmaceuticals that only target symptoms. The names of the various diseases reflect this symptomatic-treatment approach. If you have "Heartburn," the fix is to use a drug to stop the burning sensation and the drug tends to cost a lot because it's patented to just do a better job at treating the symptom than the previous drug that was used. Fixing the cause of the disease would end that cycle of lucrative pharmaceutical symptom-treating, but drug companies have little incentive to solve what's causing a disease. (There are practitioners who attempt to fix the cause of things like heartburn, and the treatments tend to be very inexpensive.)
Last edited by Gumby on Mon Oct 22, 2012 8:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nothing I say should be construed as advice or expertise. I am only sharing opinions which may or may not be applicable in any given case.
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1900
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Benko » Mon Oct 22, 2012 8:46 pm

Gumby wrote: There's no real monetary incentive to figure out what's causing the disease.
It would not matter.  The Paradigm of  western medicine is grossly inadequate (the other docs on the board must love that). Western medicine is about as capable of explaining the real causes of illness as modern portfolio theory is capable of telling you if the market will go up or down.  Clearly car accidents or pneumonia wesern medicine does pretty well, whereas many illnesses have emotional components which TCM (chinese medicine) at least recognizes and addresses to some extent. 
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by MachineGhost » Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:40 am

WiseOne wrote: First, be careful taking any hormone that you already produce, like melatonin (pineal gland) and DHEA (adrenals).  There are elaborate feedback mechanisms to control the levels of these hormones, which you'll throw off by taking them exogenously.  Melatonin, for example, is a great sleep aid when used rarely.  Over time (generally not more than 1-2 weeks), your body adjusts production to compensate for what you're taking, and it stops working.  If you continue to take it over a long period of time (months to years), you'll become dependent on the hormone and lose the ability to produce and regulate it - so stopping it will result in a rebound reaction.
I don't recall if the negative feedback loop exists or not for DHEA and melatonin as with the other hormones and I really don't feel like looking it up right now to check, but I do take a 250mcg dose of melatonin which is below what the pineal gland releases every night (I believe its 300mcg) to be on the safe side.  I find that a larger dose will result in drowsiness the next morning anyway.  But on the other hand, someone a lot older than me will likely have drastically reduced output of melatonin compared to a 25-year old's benchmark.

As for Vitamin K, it normalizes blood clotting.  I'm sure you're familiar with the blood thinner warfarin (rat poison).  It actually depletes Vitamin K which is why it has such a nasty guaranteed side effect of ostoreoporosis or worse.  Yet, mainstream medical dogma is still that it is dangerous to supplement with the depleted vitamin when on warfarin!  Old myths die hard.  A similar situation exists with replacing testosterone and prostate cancer.  All it takes is just one [flawed] interpretation of a [flawed] study making the rounds for 50 years and everyone will believe it as true.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by MachineGhost » Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:41 am

Benko wrote: MG:  Care to list the "eight new anti-cancerific factors"?
They are listed in my original post.  Maybe you need to eat more spinach, eh?  :D
Digestive enzymes** are probably helpful for a fair number of people (myself most certainly included.  I'd have SEVERE constipation without them).  I don't know of any way to test for it (I certainly don't have the greasy stool thing).  best way is to just try them if you suspect they might be of help.  Many people don't notice anything WHILE taking them, but then they stop and realize what a difference they make.
I can't help but wonder if theres any kind of link between a distressed pancreas/Diabetes Type II and a lack of digestive enzymes.   But on the other hand, WiseOne could be right and its really a leaky gut that allows undigested food particles to pass through, not a lack of digestive enzymes.
Vitamin K has been studied in MILLIGRAM doses in japan for osteoporosis for many years (though probably different type than MG is taking).  In any case coagulopathy is not a problem.
Did I not recommend MK2 and MK7 which is what is used in Japan?  They are derived from fermented soy (natto).  Speaking of which, soy isoflavones have quite a bit of anti-cancerific factors but I think I'll leave it to the women to be eating that.
Last edited by MachineGhost on Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by MachineGhost » Tue Oct 23, 2012 7:19 pm

The media is waxing poetic all over this study: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.asp ... id=1380451

At first glance it appears favorable, but it turns out the synthetic junk multivitamin (Centrum) used was produced by Pfizer, a Big Pharma nemesis of dietary supplements.  While they didn't overtly fund the study, they supplied the multivitamins and allowed its company name and explicit product title to be used which is normally a big no-no in any objective research.

So after years of negative media exposure about the "worthlessness" of supplements, here we have positive exposure only because Big Pharma's financial interests are at stake -- in the other direction.  

Needless to say, I'm disgusted.
Last edited by MachineGhost on Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
WiseOne
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:08 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by WiseOne » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:26 pm

Benko wrote: WiseOne:  no offense meant, but you gave the typical physician positions.
For someone who was paying attention in endocrinology, you mean?

To each his own I guess.
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by MachineGhost » Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:51 am

Correlation or causation?

A meta-genomic study, conducted as part of the EU-based MetaHIT (Metagenomics of the Human Intestinal Tract) project involving eight countries, reveals a prominent association between the gut bacteria environment and type-2 diabetes.  Oluf Borbye Pedersen, from the University of Copenhagen (Denmark), and colleagues identified that patients with type-2 diabetes have an imbalance in gut bacteria, specifically an excess of harmful strains and a deficit of beneficial strains.  The study authors submit that their findings: “demonstrate that these gut microbial markers might be useful for classifying type 2 diabetes.”?

http://www.nutraingredients-usa.com/Res ... -diabetes/
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1900
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Benko » Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:26 am

MEDIA: there is about as much chance of getting an unbiased article on supplements as getting an unbiased article in the NY times on a conservative i.e. slim.

WiseOne:  Your concern about caogulation problems is reasonable given what vit K does, but is not born out.

Here is a review of vit K including the toxicity (coagulation problems are not listed)
http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/v ... /vitaminK/

To each his own opinion, but not medical facts. 
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
Gumby
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 8:54 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Gumby » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:16 pm

MangoMan wrote:
Gumby wrote: There's no real monetary incentive to figure out what's causing the disease. So, the solution to fixing the symptom tends to be pharmaceuticals that only target symptoms. The names of the various diseases reflect this symptomatic-treatment approach. If you have "Heartburn," the fix is to use a drug to stop the burning sensation and the drug tends to cost a lot because it's patented to just do a better job at treating the symptom than the previous drug that was used. Fixing the cause of the disease would end that cycle of lucrative pharmaceutical symptom-treating, but drug companies have little incentive to solve what's causing a disease. (There are practitioners who attempt to fix the cause of things like heartburn, and the treatments tend to be very inexpensive.)
Could you perhaps supply some specific info on that, or direct me where to find it? I have suffered from from brutal heartburn/reflux for years, and I am concerned about the effects of long term use of H2 blockers and proton-pump inhibitors.
You bet..  The solution tends to work with most people in your situation.

I was listening to a Chris Kresser podcast about two weeks ago. He practices acupuncture and "functional medicine" out in San Francisco. Functional medicine attempts to solve symptoms by addressing the underlying problem. I've never been to a functional medicine practitioner, but I've got to say that it is a very interesting approach to dealing with chronic health issues. I might try it as a second opinion if I ever need one. Anyway...

Most doctors will treat digestion issues by recommending you avoid certain foods (such as meat, acidic foods, or FODMAPs) and by prescribing medications to lower the acid in your stomach to prevent indigestion symptoms. The problem with that approach is just treating a symptom — not the cause of the problem.

It turns out that the most people (perhaps as much as 90%) who have GERD or heartburn actually don't have enough acid — since stomach acid and pepsin is required to dissolve and break down meat. If you've ever watched an episode of a TV show or movie where the bad guys dissolve a dead body in acid, you'll know what I mean. Well, your stomach is the same way. If you have low stomach acid, your stomach doesn't break down the food properly and that's when bad things start to happen in your gut. The symptom, in some people, is often a burning sensation in your esophagus as undigested food is backed up in the stomach. So, it's easy to think this means you have too much acid in your stomach, but for most people that isn't the case.

In fact, humans produce less stomach acid as they age. If too much stomach acid was always the cause of heartburn/GERD, there'd be a lot more children with heartburn/GERD. So, having too little stomach acid is the real reason why people tend to get heartburn/GERD as they age.

Unfortunately, doctors will put heartburn/GERD patients on medications to lower stomach acid — making the problem worse since food isn't digested properly on PPIs. Of course, this treatment does lessen the symptoms of acid reflux, but it ends up being a problem because individuals with low stomach acid and poor digestion become Vitamin B12 deficient (and deficient in other nutrients) if they don't treat the cause of the problem (you need stomach acid to absorb B12, which is usually obtained from digesting meat).

Now, I think it's safe to say that not all Heartburn/GERD cases are caused by low stomach acid. Some people do have too much stomach acid or entirely different digestive issues. So, it's important to realize that everyone is different and the following articles will set you in the right direction to discovering the underlying cause of your digestion problems. Keep in mind that this practitioner recommends ancestral diets (high fat, meats, low carbs, etc) so if you've been missing those foods, you may be able to enjoy them. Be sure to comb through the comments as Kresser provides answers to most questions there.

So, how do you attempt to cure Heartburn/GERD?

First, start by reading the series of articles listed here: Heartburn/GERD

The first article in the series on that page is especially interesting: What Everyone Ought to Know About Heartburn and GERD

If it turns out you have low stomach acid (as most people with GERD/heartburn do), it's easily treatable with over-the-counter HCI/pepsin tablets — to generate stomach acid — and a few simple rules explained here…

See: Get rid of heartburn and GERD forever in three simple step

If it's true that most heartburn/GERD sufferers just have low stomach acid, it really makes me wonder if most doctors just get all their solutions directly from pharmaceutical companies who want us to buy drugs for the rest of our lives.

It is possible to transition from PPIs to over-the-counter acid pills over a short period of time, but the longer you've been on PPIs, the more likely you may need to be on acid pills indefinitely. But, for most people, the ability to eat high quality/pastured fatty foods is worth it.

Good luck!
Last edited by Gumby on Wed Oct 24, 2012 7:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nothing I say should be construed as advice or expertise. I am only sharing opinions which may or may not be applicable in any given case.
User avatar
l82start
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:51 pm

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by l82start » Wed Oct 24, 2012 6:24 pm

it might also be worth looking through the forum's saturated fat, paleo diet, nutrition threads, a number of low carb followers here (myself included) found low carb diets made a significant  improvement in the frequency and severity of acid reflux problems.
-Government 2020+ - a BANANA REPUBLIC - if you can keep it

-Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence
Gumby
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 8:54 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Gumby » Wed Oct 24, 2012 7:38 pm

MangoMan wrote: Gumby,

Thanks for that tremendous post. I will start looking into this immediately, and post results in the future.
You're welcome!

For the most part, you should be able to determine if you have low stomach acid by following the advice in the articles. But, if you run into any difficulties, you may want to consider seeing a functional medical practitioner near you — at least for a second opinion — since their primary goal is to find the real underlying cause of your health issues.

You can search for a practitioner near you here: http://www.functionalmedicine.org

But, you should be fine with those articles, and some simple experimentation, if you have typical heartburn/GERD.
Nothing I say should be construed as advice or expertise. I am only sharing opinions which may or may not be applicable in any given case.
Gumby
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 8:54 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Gumby » Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:16 pm

Benko wrote:Here is a review of vit K including the toxicity (coagulation problems are not listed)
http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/v ... /vitaminK/
You gotta love the Linus Pauling Institute's review of Vitamin K. It briefly explains the difference between Vitamin K1 and Vitamin K2 and then proceeds to just recommend sources of Vitamin K1, implying that some K2 is synthesized by bacteria in a healthy large intestine.

But, then they acknowledge the human body's inability to convert much Vitamin K1 into Vitamin K2...
Linus Pauling Institute at Oregon State University wrote:"Bacteria that normally colonize the large intestine synthesize menaquinones (vitamin K2), which are an active form of vitamin K. Until recently it was thought that up to 50% of the human vitamin K requirement might be met by bacterial synthesis. However, research indicates that the contribution of bacterial synthesis is much less than previously thought, although the exact contribution remains unclear"
Source: http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/v ... /vitaminK/
And then they make the following recommendation...
Linus Pauling Institute at Oregon State University wrote:"Although the AI for vitamin K was recently increased, it is not clear if it will be enough to optimize the gamma-carboxylation of vitamin K-dependent proteins in bone (see Osteoporosis). Multivitamins generally contain 10 to 25 mcg of vitamin K, while vitamin K or "bone" supplements may contain 100 to 120 mcg of vitamin K. To consume the amount of vitamin K associated with a decreased risk of hip fracture in the Framingham Heart Study (about 250 mcg/day), an individual would need to eat a little more than 1/2 cup of chopped broccoli or a large salad of mixed greens every day. Though the dietary intake of vitamin K required for optimal function of all vitamin K dependent proteins is not yet known, the Linus Pauling Institute recommends taking a multivitamin-mineral supplement and eating at least 1 cup of dark green leafy vegetables daily. Replacing dietary saturated fats like butter and cheese with monounsaturated fats found in olive oil and canola oil will also increase dietary vitamin K intake and may also decrease the risk of cardiovascular diseases."
Source: http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/v ... /vitaminK/
They really do a terrible job of explaining the difference between Vitamin K1 and Vitamin K2. Their roles are so different that many believe they should be considered completely different vitamins.

Here's a different perspective on Vitamin K1 and K2:
Chris Kresser wrote:New evidence, however, has confirmed that vitamin K2's role in the body extends far beyond blood clotting to include protecting us from heart disease, ensuring healthy skin, forming strong bones, promoting brain function, supporting growth and development and helping to prevent cancer – to name a few. In fact, vitamin K2 has so many functions not associated with vitamin K1 that many researchers insist that K1 and K2 are best seen as two different vitamins entirely.

A large epidemiological study from the Netherlands illustrates this point well. The researchers collected data on the vitamin K intakes of the subjects between 1990 and 1993 and measured the extent of heart disease in each subject, who had died from it and how this related to vitamin K2 intake and arterial calcification. They found that calcification of the arteries was the best predictor of heart disease. Those in the highest third of vitamin K2 intakes were 52 percent less likely to develop severe calcification of the arteries, 41 percent less likely to develop heart disease, and 57 percent less likely to die from it. (Geleijnse et al., 2004, pp. 3100-3105) However, intake of vitamin K1 had no effect on cardiovascular disease outcomes.

While K1 is preferentially used by the liver to activate blood clotting proteins, K2 is preferentially used by other tissues to deposit calcium in appropriate locations, such as in the bones and teeth, and prevent it from depositing in locations where it does not belong, such as the soft tissues.(Spronk et al., 2003, pp. 531-537) In an acknowledgment of the different roles played by vitamins K1 and K2, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) finally determined the vitamin K2 contents of foods in the U.S. diet for the first time in 2006. (Elder, Haytowitz, Howe, Peterson, & Booth, 2006, pp. 436-467)

Another common misconception is that human beings do not need vitamin K2 in their diet, since they have the capacity to convert vitamin K1 to vitamin K2. The amount of vitamin K1 in typical diets is ten times greater than that of vitamin K2, and researchers and physicians have largely dismissed the contribution of K2 to nutritional status as insignificant.

However, although animals can convert vitamin K1 to vitamin K2, a significant amount of evidence suggests that humans require preformed K2 in the diet to obtain and maintain optimal health. The strongest indication that humans require preformed vitamin K2 in the diet is that epidemiological and intervention studies both show its superiority over K1. Intake of K2 is inversely associated with heart disease in humans while intake of K1 is not (Geleijnse et al., 2004, pp. 3100-3105), and vitamin K2 is at least three times more effective than vitamin K1 at activating proteins related to skeletal metabolism. (Schurgers et al., 2007) And remember that in the study on vitamin K2's role in treating prostate cancer, which I mentioned at the beginning of this article, vitamin K1 had no effect.

All of this evidence points to the possibility that vitamin K2 may be an essential nutrient in the human diet. So where does one find vitamin K2 in foods? The following is a list of the foods highest in vitamin K2, as measured by the USDA:

Foods high in vitamin K2

- Natto
- Hard cheese
- Soft cheese
- Egg yolk
- Butter
- Chicken liver
- Salami
- Chicken breast
- Ground beef

Unfortunately, precise values for some foods that are likely to be high in K2 (such as organ meats) are not available at this time. The pancreas and salivary glands would be richest; reproductive organs, brains, cartilage and possibly kidneys would also be very rich; finally, bone would be richer than muscle meat. Fish eggs are also likely to be rich in K2.

It was once erroneously believed that intestinal bacteria are a major contributor to vitamin K status. However, the majority of evidence contradicts this view. Most of the vitamin K2 produced in the intestine are embedded within bacterial membranes and not available for absorption. Thus, intestinal production of K2 likely makes only a small contribution to vitamin K status. (Unden & Bongaerts, 1997, pp. 217-234)

On the other hand, fermented foods, however, such as sauerkraut, cheese and natto (a [fermented] soy dish popular in Japan), contain substantial amounts of vitamin K2. Natto contains the highest concentration of K2 of any food measured; nearly all of it is present as MK-7, which research has shown to be a highly effective form. A recent study demonstrated that MK-7 increased the percentage of osteocalcin in humans three times more powerfully than did vitamin K1. (Schurgers & Vermeer, 2000, pp. 298-307)

It is important to note that commercial butter is not a significantly high source of vitamin K2. Dr. Weston A. Price, who was the first to elucidate the role of vitamin K2 in human health (though he called it “Activator X”? at the time) analyzed over 20,000 samples of butter sent to him from various parts of the world. As mentioned previously in this paper, he found that the Activator X concentration varied 50-fold. Animals grazing on vitamin K-rich cereal grasses, especially wheat grass, and alfalfa in a lush green state of growth produced fat with the highest amounts of Activator X, but the soil in which the pasture was grown also influenced the quality of the butter. It was only the vitamin-rich butter grown in three feet or more of healthy top soil that had such dramatic curing properties when combined with cod liver oil in Dr. Price’s experiments and clinical practice.

Therefore, vitamin K2 levels will not be high in butter from grain-fed cows raised in confinement feedlots. Since the overwhelming majority of butter sold in the U.S. comes from such feedlots, butter is not a significant source of K2 in the diet for most people. This is yet another argument for obtaining raw butter from cows raised on green pasture.

Source: Vitamin K2: The Missing Nutrient
So, if you were to follow the Linus Pauling Institute's recommendations, you might be led to believe that Vitamin K1 and K2 were generally the same thing and you'd basically be avoiding all of the important natural sources of the vital Vitamin K2 that are typically found in pastured animal products, like grassfed butter.

Clearly the Linus Pauling Institute wants to give 'politically correct' advice for avoiding saturated fats — unfortunately few people seem to realize that saturated fat is actually only a fraction of most animal fats. (I'm guessing if they didn't make politically correct recommendations, they probably wouldn't receive much funding from the food industry.) But, it really is something to see as each year more and more evidence mounts to support the health benefits of grassfed/pastured animal food and all they can do is steer people towards plants that are difficult to digest and tend to lack the bioavailable nutrients found in animal foods. Then again, I suppose few people really have access to grassfed/pastured animal foods these days.
Last edited by Gumby on Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Nothing I say should be construed as advice or expertise. I am only sharing opinions which may or may not be applicable in any given case.
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by MachineGhost » Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:45 pm

This has some really interesting and referenced background on bone broth and its components.

http://www.townsendletter.com/FebMarch2 ... th0205.htm
Last edited by MachineGhost on Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
Gumby
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 8:54 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Gumby » Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:07 am

MachineGhost wrote: This has some really interesting and referenced background on bone broth and its components.

http://www.townsendletter.com/FebMarch2 ... th0205.htm
Quite an in-depth overview of bone broth. Who knew it had so many nutrients in it? Speaking of glycine...

What's also fascinating is that our ancestors made a real effort to consume foods made from from all parts of the animals: skin, bones, liver, etc. They probably didn't realize how important it was to consume those nutrients — most people were just trying to make sure food never went to waste.

But, it turns out that if you only ate muscle meat — and avoided beans, bones, skin and offal — you'd really wreak havoc on your body over time by not getting the right balance of nutrients...
Chris Masterjohn wrote:Muscle meats and eggs are very rich in methionine, which increases our need for homocysteine-neutralizing nutrients (vitamins B6, B12, folate, betaine, and choline), and also increases our need for the amino acid glycine, found most abundantly in skin and bones.

[...]

While the metabolism of methionine uses up glycine, betaine and folate can generate glycine in addition to neutralizing homocysteine, although the effect of betaine is restricted primarily to certain tissues such as the liver and kidney.

But where's all the folate?  Liver and beans.  You can get lots of folate if you eat liver, and you can get lots by eating lentil soup, but if you're eating a bean-free diet and you can't stand the taste of liver, you're going to have to eat the quantities of green vegetables that Joel Fuhrman recommends in order to obtain a comparable amount of folate.

And where's the betaine?  We can make betaine from the choline obtained from egg yolks and liver, but the best source is spinach and the most common source is wheat.  Again, the utility of choline and betaine in neutralizing homocysteine and generating glycine is limited to the liver and kidney, so folate is more important.

Glycine itself is most abundant in skin and bones.

Source: http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/ ... bones.html
It's actually pretty amazing to think about, but our ancestors were supplementing themselves pretty well if they were just eating typical ancestral foods: grass fed butter, cheese, liver, beans, bone broths, marrow, etc.

I've been doing my best to eat liver once or twice a week when I can. And, though I never thought it was possible, I actually discovered a few recipes that actually make liver taste good!
Last edited by Gumby on Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Nothing I say should be construed as advice or expertise. I am only sharing opinions which may or may not be applicable in any given case.
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by MachineGhost » Fri Nov 30, 2012 11:21 pm

In trying to explain the difference in results regarding lifespan extension between the NIA and WNPRC studies, the NIA scientists noted that the diets fed to the two groups of monkeys differed significantly. The WNPRC monkeys received a diet containing 28% sucrose, compared to only 4% in the diet given to the monkeys at NIA. The NIA diet, which has a natural ingredient base, also contains fish oil and phytochemicals, including flavonoids, and protein derived from wheat, corn, soybean, fish, and alfalfa. In contrast, the WNPRC diet is a “purified”? diet with no added fish oil or phytochemicals, and protein from a single source called lactalbumin. Hence, the authors suggested that the WNPRC monkeys on caloric restriction lived longer than their non-restricted counterparts because they got less of a bad diet that caused the ad libitum-fed (without restraint) control monkeys to die prematurely. In contrast, the NIA monkeys got a healthier diet and lived longer, and under these circumstances, caloric restriction did not extend lifespan.

...


Q. What do you think about the recently published study by scientists at the NIA that reported that long-term caloric restriction for about 25 years in monkeys did not affect lifespan?

A. It doesn’t surprise me! Dietary restriction works in organisms ranging from yeast to mice. The question is whether it will work in our closest biological relatives, the primates. A previous study done in monkeys in Wisconsin had published results different from those we observed in this study from NIA. Why? Well, I think there are several possible reasons. For example, the diet used in the Wisconsin study was high in sucrose, which can be considered a metabolic stress. Also, the genetic background of the monkeys used in the NIA study is diverse compared to the homogenous genetic background of monkeys used in the Wisconsin study, and we know from previous studies done in mice that the benefits of dietary restriction depend on the genetic background of the animal. For example, it was observed that dietary restriction had a deleterious effect in some animals. The “ad libitum”? control monkeys in the NIA study were not really fed without restraint; there were some restrictions. So there are differences, including diet, genetic background, and other factors, between these two studies—and, therefore, they produced different results.


Source: Linus Pauling Institute, Research Newsletter-Fall/Winter 2012
Last edited by MachineGhost on Fri Nov 30, 2012 11:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by MachineGhost » Tue Dec 04, 2012 5:55 pm

I finally got my EPA/DHA test results in.  Apparantely, the first blood sample was invalid so I had to send in another (not like they contacted me or anything!).  Unfortunately, I intentionally started taking fish oil right after the first sample (I've already been taking flaxseed meal and krill oil for 5+ years), so who knows how much worse the values were originally.  I eat a low-carb, balanced fat diet restricted in inflammatory AA so its rather interesting that AA is bad as I was suspecting, but I can't see how or why it would be so high unless it is genetic?  The thing is I've experimented with different fish oil capsules or liquids over the years and have never seen a reduction in inflammation sensitivity.

Here's how to interpret the scores: https://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2010/ma ... tus_01.htm

Image

Image
Last edited by MachineGhost on Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
Gumby
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 8:54 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Gumby » Wed Dec 05, 2012 12:55 pm

Pugchief, I was just thinking about your quest the other day. That's amazing. Chalk one up for functional medicine, I guess!

Wow. Truly amazing. Congrats!
Nothing I say should be construed as advice or expertise. I am only sharing opinions which may or may not be applicable in any given case.
Gumby
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 8:54 am

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Gumby » Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:05 pm

MachineGhost wrote:I eat a low-carb, balanced fat diet restricted in inflammatory AA so its rather interesting that AA is bad as I was suspecting, but I can't see how or why it would be so high unless it is genetic?  The thing is I've experimented with different fish oil capsules or liquids over the years and have never seen a reduction in inflammation sensitivity.
Just curious, but which edible oils are you using in food preparation and how much of them would you say you use on a typical day?
Nothing I say should be construed as advice or expertise. I am only sharing opinions which may or may not be applicable in any given case.
Reub
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3158
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:44 pm

Re: The Permanent Supplement Regime

Post by Reub » Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:47 pm

Gumby, I wanted to thank you as well for recommending Crowdtilt to me.
Post Reply