I can see how it may sound alarmist to you, but in some cases the pain reportedly associated with resveratrol on this and other threads has been severe and debilitating. What does it matter that it is a weaker AI if the end result is the same? At least a couple of people have had long term tendon problems after stopping resveratrol. If someone has joint or tendon pain, and you tell them not to be alarmed because it is probably nothing serious, they are likely to continue and may do themselves further harm. So without a definitive understanding of the mechanism being available yet, I consider that bad advice. Neither you nor I know for sure if this pain is indicative of damage or toxicity to those individuals. Pain more often than not means damage, and we all know that tendons are a bitch to heal once damaged. Until we know, I think it is irresponsible not to advise, indeed alarm, those individuals into stopping. Someone has to do it.
I have never tried to alarm you or anybody else who does not have pain into stopping.
There's a probability we'll get hit by an asteroid tomorrow that'll wipe out all life. There's a higher probability that you'll die in a plane crash, and an even higher probability that you'll be struck dead by lightning. Yet, all these probabilities are extremely low. Being alarmist does /not/ help a situation, mostly because not everyone who reads it will take the time to qualify the situation, although you did do a slight qualification. Never the less, it was consistant with your pattern of behavior from the very first post I've seen you give on this matter to now. Basically, I was trying to temper you down, to keep things logical and rational, and remove pathos from discussion. I am not, and never was, trying to be offensive or anything.
On the other hand, if you've noticed, I've adviced people with such pain to cut back or stop and see what happens. Continuing with something that causes pain is not wise, and should be stopped if a solution is not known. Ideally, we'll find that solution that doesn't require those people to give up resveratrol; and that's the point of this thread, not to be alarmist in any way, shape, nor form.
Aromatase inhibition is plausible but not definite. But I don't think pain onset with aromatase inhibitors is necessarily rapid. See for example the Arimidex case study I posted where things started happening after five months.
No, several claim gradual onset the first time (sometimes with rapid onset on subsequent times after stopping). So no, a two-day study on 40 people is probably not nearly good enough to show this up.
You missed the point. I said /common/ phenomenon. If aromatase inhibition is the method, then acute dosing, which rapidly inhibits aromatase, if it was high enough and severe enough, would have a good probability of causing joint pain, as illustrated with dedicated aromatase inhibitors. This does not mean, in any way, that the pain won't manifest over the long term only, indicative of resveratrol being a weak AI. That is also consistent with the mouse date. However, the point was, that fact /drops/ the probability of it happening at all, especially since almost everyone takes much lower doses than the highest does in that safety study.
Some people get crippling pain from resveratrol, and some from Cipro, just like some do from AIs. This does not imply that the mechanism is the same, even if it could be. At least for Cipro we know it is not. But assuming for the sake of argument that the mechanism is aromatase inhibition, it does not really matter that resveratrol is a weaker AI. Maybe it makes up for that by being a stronger SERM. Whatever the case may be, if it causes the same amount of pain as a dedicated AI, there is quite possibly the same amount of damage.
That brings up another point. Cipro causes pain by
being directly toxic to and killing tenocytes. We know for a fact resveratrol isn't doing that, and in fact, has been shown to directly protect and help, even heal,
muscle, tendon, and joint cells, as I've already said on this very page and elsewhere. So, it cannot share a mechanism with Cipro. This means, its pain must be through another method. Do you have a more reasonable suggestion that fits the facts?
I agree that AI is a plausible. I don't think it is yet heavily supported by evidence, though.
Oh? What evidence is out of line with it, and what hypothesis do you have that is better supported? I'm a scientist, this is how I think. There isn't a single scrap of evidence inconsistent with this theory. All molecular studies on resveratrol, all in vitro and in vivo studies, and the anecdotal evidence here, all point to the exact same thing. We know resveratrol is an AI inhibitor, and could be inhibiting it at the dosages people commonly take. We know that even low doses can under certain conditions lower estrogen levels. We know that lowered estrogen levels cause joint pain, although the mechanism that happens through is unknown. We know that joint pain caused by lower estrogen is quite different per person and people vary wildly in their sensitivity to this, and the breadth of pain that can be caused covers all anecdotal accounts completely. We know that people who have resveratrol associated joint pain, and who have tested this, are more sensitive to and have greater pain caused by stronger aromatase inhibitors like quercetin and pomegranate juice, including yourself. And we know that this is not caused by tissue damage. We also know that resveratrol protects joint and muscle tissue. We know that all animal studies have never see, even over the life span of the animal, any joint problems caused by resveratrol, again making it similar to aromatase inhibitors who manifested this pain primarily in humans rather than animals.
So then, were does /all/ of this point? To the mysterious, and sometimes incredibly severe though rare pain from aromatase inhibition. Many factors can compound aromatase inhibitor pain, such as low testosterone production, low vitamin D, and too much melatonin; this allows for the huge range of pain in different individuals through slight variations in multiple faucets of their biochemistry. This hypothesis of aromatase inhibition leaves nothing out, is extremely robust, and allows for directly testable experiments to be conducted, thus making it worthy of the moniker "hypothesis".
Is it conclusively proven? No, as I said it isn't. But /all/ evidence, ever last scrap, points to it without any outliers. That's some serious support in science for this hypothesis. Sure, it could turn out wrong, but the probability of that is very low, and we can do direct tests to find out!
If you can come up with a better idea that actually fits the fact, then please share it. I've already shown you how slowing angiogenesis isn't and cannot be the reason for joint pain in any way, shape, nor form, and is used to treat and prevent it; so there goes that hypothesis.
Edited by geddarkstorm, 30 May 2009 - 04:30 PM.