3 replies to this topic

[osris]

Bioavailabity of Non-R-lipoic Acid

 

 

by 

 

ChatGPT

 

 

Non-R-lipoic acid, also known as alpha-lipoic acid (ALA), is a widely studied compound known for its antioxidant properties and potential health benefits. While it's true that the bioavailability of non-R-lipoic acid may be lower compared to its R-form counterpart, there are several factors that mitigate the significance of this limitation:

 

1. Conversion Efficiency: Despite being less bioavailable, non-R-lipoic acid can still be converted into its active R-form within the body. The conversion process involves enzymatic reactions that occur in various tissues, ensuring that a substantial portion of non-R-lipoic acid still contributes to the overall availability of the active form.

 

2. Sufficient Dosage Compensation: By adjusting the dosage of non-R-lipoic acid, the desired therapeutic effects can still be achieved. While higher doses may be necessary compared to R-lipoic acid to compensate for lower bioavailability, this adjustment can effectively overcome any shortcomings.

 

3. Cumulative Benefits: ALA exhibits cumulative effects in the body, meaning that regular supplementation can lead to the accumulation of active metabolites over time. Even if the bioavailability of a single dose is lower, the sustained intake of non-R-lipoic acid can still result in meaningful health improvements.

 

4. Synergistic Effects: Non-R-lipoic acid can act synergistically with other antioxidants and compounds within the body. Its ability to regenerate other antioxidants such as vitamin C and vitamin E enhances their effectiveness, thereby amplifying the overall antioxidant capacity of the body despite its lower bioavailability.

 

7. Clinical Evidence: Numerous studies have demonstrated the efficacy of non-R-lipoic acid in various health conditions, including diabetic neuropathy, antioxidant support, and cognitive function. While bioavailability is an important consideration, clinical outcomes ultimately reflect the compound's effectiveness in real-world settings.

 

In conclusion, while the bioavailability shortcomings of non-R-lipoic acid should not be disregarded, they are often outweighed by its conversion efficiency, dosage compensation, cumulative benefits, synergistic effects, alternative administration routes, cost-effectiveness, and supported clinical evidence. As such, non-R-lipoic acid remains a valuable supplement for promoting overall health and well-being.

 

[pamojja]

Common knowledge, for anyone participating in health forums and informing oneself (without KI).

[Daniel Cooper]

I notice you are making a lot of posts using ChatGPT as a source.
 
I really want to caution you about doing that.
 
ChatGPT is a LLM (Large Language Model) AI. Such an AI is trained to mimic example of human conversation. You "say" something to the AI, and it returns a plausible response that sounds like the sort of response a human would make.
 
Unfortunately, a response from a LLM like ChatGPT isn't guaranteed to be factually correct. It will only sound like a reasonable response. I tried to use ChartGPT to research health issues at one point. Seemed to be a great tool. I started asking for research on various topics. It dutifully gave me apparently relevant research. I asked for links to pubmed sources and PMIDs. It gave me those as well.
 
The only problem was - the pubmed link were completely bogus. The links were to papers that had totally different titles and topics than what ChatGPT said they were. The PMIDs either did not exist or were also to completely different papers.
 
The titles of the papers it had made up were entirely plausible. Eminently believable. And completely fictitious.  
 
This has become a widespread problem with people using these LLMs to do research without understanding what these things are. As some lazy lawyers recently found out.

 

If ChatGPT gives you references you can always check that out. It will sometimes find valid papers. But unless you know the subject matter well and can verify it yourself, you have to accept the essay response that ChatGPT generates on faith, and I can promise you that it will not infrequently be wrong. Of course, if you knew the subject matter in depth you'd probably write your own summary rather than throw it over to ChatGPT.

 

If it were up to me I'd probably ban the use of ChatGPT essays on a site like this.

[osris]

Thanks, but I always cross-check what ChatGPT tells me using Pubmed. It has been very helpful in translating science abstracts into plain English for me, which I then get it to write articles about. So the articles I get it to write are not based on its inherent knowledge base but on information from Pubmed and other such databases. The same applies for when I use Google Gemini. 

 

I don’t use ChatGPT to provide accurate links,  I use Google Gemini to find links and citations because it's better at that than ChatGPT (or rather better than the free version of ChatGPT that I use), so I use that for such, and use ChatGPT to organize the information from Google Gemini, and my own Pubmed research, into coherent articles.

 

Most of the articles I post here that say "by ChatGPT" are comprised of amalgamated information and research taken from Pubmed etc. that both ChatGPT and Google Gemini parse for me. And I filter this using my own research as a "factual check". 

 

I think if used sensibly, such AI programs can add clarity to a range of topics discussed here. So banning it just for being an AI program is perhaps a bit extreme. I understand, though, that many people are negative about AI due to media hysteria. 

 

 

Edited by osris, 10 April 2024 - 11:57 PM.