Aspirin

[Gumby]

No, but I would like not to get it!

Then your absolute risk of getting cancer is likely too small to warrant the risks of aspirin. Isn't your dad a centenarian? Seems like cancer isn't something you need to worry about too much.

Again, the absolute risk of getting melanoma for the average person is 1 in 50, or 2%. So, about 300 people need to take aspirin in order for one person to avoid melanoma. Unfortunately, a small group of those people will have some very bad side effects to aspirin. So, we would see a small group of people with nasty side effects in exchange for a one less melanoma.

[Gumby]

Now scientists have found the strongest evidence yet that aspirin - taken by millions to ward off heart attacks, strokes and cancer - appears to greatly increase the chance of developing wet AMD, which is irreversible.

Australian academics drew their conclusions after following almost 2,400 middle-aged and elderly people for 15 years.

Of the participants, who were all at least 49 years old at the start of the study, 257 were deemed “regular”? users of aspirin, who took it at least once a week. The rest only took it occasionally.

After the 15 year study period, one in 27 of the ‘occasional’ users (3.7 per cent) had developed wet AMD.
But almost one in 10 of the ‘regular’ users (9.4 per cent) had developed it

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healt ... sease.html

Yikes!

[MachineGhost]

Your study doesn't mention Vitamin D, only sun exposure. And it only covers 260 people. I believe in taking Vitamin D and I have paused my usage of aspirin because I value the opinions of those on this site. But it sure seems to have so many benefits. Possibly there is a way to get the maximum benefit of aspirin with the least downside, like limiting intake to only 2X per week and using an enteric version?

EPA has the same spectrum of effects as aspirin.  I think if aspirin had a lower risk profile, I would feel comfortable throwing it in my regime.  Enteric makes no difference.

You could take a full dose once a week.  That will irreversibly knock out the COX enzymes as much as taking a baby aspirin every day.  But the problem is knocking on those COX-1 enzymes which protects your gut lining.  COX-2 is where the benefits are.

I suggest compromising and taking a white willow bark capsule once a week and make sure the salicinin content is equivalent to a full dose aspirin.  Or better yet, use a COX-2 only herbal inhibitor.

I am sensitive to aspirin (headaches) but I don't recall if I had the same sensitivity to white willow bark, so that may be be good sign its less toxic.

[MachineGhost]

It is speculated that Vitamin D, from the sun, is what is protective of cancer. I'm not aware of any other benefits from the sun, are you? UVB — which is what our skin uses to make Vitamin D — is only available at high sun angles. UVA from the sun — which is always visible — is generally considered to be damaging to the skin. The trick is to get sun exposure when the sun is high enough in the sky when the benefits of UVB greatly outweigh the risks of UVA.

UVC is mutagenic too, it goes deeper into the dermis.  But the mainstream advice to avoid the sun between 10am and 3pm is exactly when UVB is highest and UVA/UVC lowest.  Typical.

I'll stick to being a vampire, thanks!

[MachineGhost]

No, but I would like not to get it!

Me either, so Vitamin D, Curcumin and Cruciferous Extract, my man!

[MachineGhost]

Yikes!

My Gma only has one good eye left because the other one bleed internally and blinded it.  She's been taking a baby aspirin for 20 years or so.   I took her off it before her pneumonia hospitalization (to not conflict with the krill) but they just promptly put her back on her 30-drug or so regime, including the aspirin.  The people in hospitals don't seem to know jack shit about anything, about drug interactions or simply don't care, but she considers them more "authoritative" and won't take her supplements anymore.  I gave up.  It's not worth the stress, but it is worth the resentment.

[Reub]

I already do the D, EPA, and the curcumin. What dosage of curcumin is effective? I will add the cruciferous extract as I have heard good things about it for a long time. Could you please elaborate about the COX-2 only herbal inhibitors?

[MachineGhost]

I already do the D, EPA, and the curcumin. What dosage of curcumin is effective? I will add the cruciferous extract as I have heard good things about it for a long time. Could you please elaborate about the COX-2 only herbal inhibitors?

One capsule of Meriva curcumin should be enough as its highly bioavailable.

This is what I take for cruciferous: http://www.vitacost.com/vitacost-crucif ... tract  It is very potent in terms of broccoli extract unlike other similar products (don't confuse it with VitaCost's other DIM) and comparable to the standalone broccoli extract from Jarrow used in medical studies.  If cost is no objective, then I would go with Life Extension's Triple Action Cruciferous Vegetable Extract instead.

There's actually quite a bit of herbs that suppress COX-2, including curcumin and white willow bark, but I am talking about it being the mainline action here.  So I would recommend Nexrutine and see how it goes.

Do note that if you suppress COX-2, you also need to suppress 5-LOX which then receives the pro-inflammatory arachidonic acid (AA) backflow.  If you do not suppress 5-LOX, you will increase your cardiovascular mortality as infamously happened with VIOXX patients.  According to the Perfect Health Diet ecology, AA should comprise only .5% of calories; good luck with that one!  The best herb to suppress 5-LOX is Boswellia and the best Boswellia extract is ApresFlex, but 5-LOXIN is probably more widely available/cheaper.

[Reub]

I thought that I read that curcumin suppresses 5-Lox and Cox-2 simultaneously. So is curcumin enough? BTW, the inexpensive brand of turmeric that I have been using contains 725mgs of curcumin for every 2 capsules. I also just read that 3.6 gms of curcumin are required as a minimum. So that means 10 capsules a day!

[Gumby]

For what it's worth, Kresser — who regularly uses curcumin in his practice — discussed the use of curcumin for treating rheumatoid arthritis in a recent podcast:

...There's a growing body of evidence suggesting that curcumin and particularly certain forms of curcumin, which is found in turmeric in food, can be helpful for inflammatory conditions, including both osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.  But eating turmeric is not a good way of boosting your serum curcuminoid level because the curcuminoids in turmeric are not very well absorbed.  And even oral curcumin supplements are often not very well absorbed, and the amount of time they spend in the blood when they are absorbed is pretty short.  So there are a couple of newer forms of curcumin.  There's the Meriva form that I think a lot of manufacturers use.  Thorne is one of them.  And that's better absorbed than regular curcumin.  And then there's the BCM-95 form, which as far as I can tell from the studies I've seen is even better absorbed than the Meriva form.  So taking some BCM-95 curcumin might be a good way of dealing with not only the symptoms of inflammation because it has similar kind of anti-inflammatory effects to things like Advil, but also to dealing with the systemic autoimmune dysregulation.  Curcumin may have an immunoregulatory effect and do some other things that are more than just managing symptoms; they're actually addressing the underlying problem.

One thing to be aware of with curcumin is that we don't have any really long-term studies of the safety profile of curcumin.  The longest-term human randomized clinical trial I've been able to identify was an eight-month-long trial where people with prediabetes, they split them into two groups, and one group was control and the other group took this BCM-95 form or actually, I think, even a regular form of curcumin.  And there was a significant difference in the number of people that went on to develop type 2 diabetes in the control group versus the curcumin group, which had a much lower rate of progression to diabetes.  And that lasted for eight months.  There were really no adverse effects at all, and there were no issues with safety.

So it's probably safe to take over the long term, but we don't really know that for sure.  And one reason to think that there's some cause for concern is that Stephan Guyenet has written about curcumin and other flavonols on his blog extensively.  And we originally thought that they had an antioxidant effect, but actually what a lot of research suggests is that the way they work is they're pro-oxidants and they have more of a hormetic effect, meaning they engage the body's healthy, natural defense systems because they have a mildly toxic effect.  And when you get a small amount of these things in foods like in turmeric spice, for example, or if you're getting resveratrol in wine, you know, in naturally occurring amounts in foods, that hormetic effect is beneficial, but if you're taking isolated high doses of things like resveratrol or curcumin, that may not be beneficial over the long term.

It's tricky, though, because none of this is happening in a vacuum, and there are risks to not treating things like rheumatoid arthritis.  It's a systemic inflammatory disease, and it's associated with all kinds of other diseases like cardiovascular problems and, I think, diabetes and some other issues.  So not treating is dangerous.  And then, of course, there are drugs that are used to treat rheumatoid arthritis, like prednisone and steroids and immunosuppressive drugs that have a lot of adverse effects and can cause some really nasty problems over the long term.  So for me, if I had rheumatoid arthritis, and I'm evaluating:  OK, do I do nothing, you know, in terms of supplementation or medicine?  Do I take systemic anti-inflammatory drugs like prednisone?  Or do I use an anti-inflammatory paleo type of diet, some bone broth, and some maybe whey protein to boost glutathione, some low-dose naltrexone, and then possibly some curcumin extract?  I know what I would choose, but that comes down to the patient and your own risk tolerance and understanding.  But for me, I think the least risky choice of those three would be to use curcumin even though we don't know for sure what the long-term safety profile is.
Source: http://chriskresser.com/adrenal-fatigue ... -arthritis

As Kresser points out, Guyenet wrote a two-part series highlighting a good amount of evidence that suggests that polyphenols, at high concentrations, may have a pro-oxidant effect in the body. See...

Polyphenols, Hormesis and Disease: Part I
Polyphenols, Hormesis and Disease: Part II

...The body does not seem to "want" polyphenols in the circulation at any appreciable level, and therefore it gets rid of them pronto. Why? I think it's because the diversity and chemical structure of polyphenols makes them potentially bioactive-- they have a high probability of altering signaling pathways and enzyme activity, in the same manner as pharmaceutical drugs. It would not be a very smart evolutionary strategy to let plants (that often don't want you eating them) take the reins on your biochemistry. Also, at high enough concentrations polyphenols can be pro-oxidants, promoting excess production of free radicals, although the biological relevance of that may be questionable due to the concentrations required.
Soure: Polyphenols, Hormesis and Disease: Part I

At the end of Part II, Guyenet concludes:

There is a place in the body where polyphenols are concentrated enough to be direct antioxidants: in the digestive tract after consuming polyphenol-rich foods. Digestion is a chemically harsh process that readily oxidizes ingested substances such as polyunsaturated fats (22). Oxidized fat is neither healthy when it's formed in the deep fryer, nor when it's formed in the digestive tract (23, 24). Eating polyphenol-rich foods effectively prevents these fats from being oxidized during digestion (25). One consequence of this appears to be better absorption and assimilation of the exceptionally fragile omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (26).

I think that overall, the evidence suggests that polyphenol-rich foods are healthy in moderation, and eating them on a regular basis is generally a good idea. Certain other plant chemicals, such as suforaphane found in cruciferous vegetables, and allicin found in garlic, exhibit similar effects and may also act by hormesis (27). Some of the best-studied polyphenol-rich foods are tea (particularly green tea), blueberries, extra-virgin olive oil, red wine, citrus fruits, hibiscus tea, soy, dark chocolate, coffee, turmeric and other herbs and spices, and a number of traditional medicinal herbs. A good rule of thumb is to "eat the rainbow", choosing foods with a variety of colors.

Supplementing with polyphenols and other plant chemicals in amounts that would not be achievable by eating food is probably not a good idea.

Source: Polyphenols, Hormesis and Disease: Part II

And finally, in a comment on his blog, Guyenet summed it all up by saying:

All these plant compounds that were thought to have beneficial effects from being antioxidants are turning out to basically be drugs. Resveratrol is another one. The antioxidant effect is somewhere between nonexistent and irrelevant in the body. It's no wonder the body gets rid of polyphenols ASAP; it doesn't want them hijacking control of its enzymes and signaling pathways.
Source: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2 ... 2241057463

This is not to say that curcumin isn't useful or safe. It certainly appears to be both over the short term. He's just pointing out that it acts a bit like a pharmaceutical and we don't really fully know the long term consequences of using it.

[MachineGhost]

This is not to say that curcumin isn't useful or safe. It certainly appears to be both over the short term. He's just pointing out that it acts a bit like a pharmaceutical and we don't really fully know the long term consequences of using it.

I took BCM-95 (which is more expensive) before Meriva (which users report is more powerful), and honestly, I haven't noticed a difference between the both of them in regards to anti-inflammation.  Indeed, aspirin and NSAID's are more powerful than any herbal active I've ever tried (I can't remember what white willow was like).  I think of all the herbs I've ever taken (aside from stimulating/adaptogenic), only DGL has had any noticeable effect that I could detect, and that has worn off after a couple of months.

The only advantage of herbal actives is a better safety profile vs synthetic, isolated pharmaceuticals.  I generally try to avoid herbal extractives because they do seem to act more like drugs than vitamins.  Then again, where do you draw the line?  I'm sure vitamins effect genomic behavior just as well as herbal actives.  The science on hormetic effects from nutraceuticals really needs to be elucidated better.  And we need enlightened tests to detect if they're doing the job.  We're so far from Star Trek-style medicine, its a joke.

BTW, good find on how digestion oxidizes PUFA's.  That could explain a lot, esp vs topical vs oral.

[Gumby]

BTW, good find on how digestion oxidizes PUFA's.  That could explain a lot, esp vs topical vs oral.

I too was excited to see a study that explained internal PUFA oxidation, but I didn't even think about how that could be a significant difference between the oral/topical route. Topical PUFA seems to be quite beneficial for the skin, but clearly it oxidizes during digestion. Good catch.