This topic is locked
This quote is from page 16 of the study and seems speculative. It implies that NR supplementation somehow results in heathier mitochondria that is stress resistant.
Our data suggest downregulation of gene sets associated with glycolysis
382 and mitochondrial function, yet our measures of mitochondrial respiration, citrate synthase
383 activity, and mitochondrial copy number were unaltered. Again, expression levels of
384 glycolysis and mitochondrial protein were unchanged with NR in this study. The
385 downregulation of energy-generating processes may be reminiscent of mechanisms
386 associated with calorie restriction (Hagopian, Ramsey and Weindruch, 2003; Ingram and
387 Roth, 2011; Lin et al., 2015) or increased mitochondrial quality control as has been observed
388 in blood stem cells (Vannini et al., 2019), or suggest that NR can ‘tune’ the expression of
389 energy metabolism pathways to permit a more efficient and potentially stress resilient
390 mitochondrial environment.
But their original hypothesis and wanted outcome was that mitochondrial function would INCREASE with NR supplementation, not decrease as it turned out to do.
"Hypothesis: elevating skeletal muscle NAD+ bioavailability using NR supplementation will increase markers of mitochondrial function and that will manifest as a more favourable metabolic profile."
When it in fact DECREASED they had a convenient change of mind and tell us that is a good thing because that happens during calorie restriction too. I think this post hoc inventiveness is scientific dishonesty and it reeks of desperation to produce a paper that will sell more pills and increase share holders value in Chromadex.
Edited by Fredrik, 20 August 2019 - 09:50 AM.
