34 replies to this topic

[Flávio Kjellin]

Despite being proposed to treat disorders such as erectile dysfunction, baldness, cancer and Alzheimer’s, scientists have concluded that there is no evidence to suggest that this tricksy molecule found in turmeric has any specific therapeutic benefits.

 

http://www.nature.co...=FBK_NatureNews

[Ark]

"Many researchers are still optimistic about curcumin. “There is evidence that the biological activity of curcumoids is real,” says Julie Ryan, a radiation oncologist at the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York. She says that it interacts with many different proteins and so works differently from many drugs. Ryan has tested curcumin in clinical trials for dermatitis on more than 600 people. Although she found no significant effect, she says there were trends that warrant further study. She thinks that chemically modified forms of curcumin might prove more effective at reaching tissues."

[Flávio Kjellin]

"Many researchers are still optimistic about curcumin. “There is evidence that the biological activity of curcumoids is real,” says Julie Ryan, a radiation oncologist at the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York. She says that it interacts with many different proteins and so works differently from many drugs. Ryan has tested curcumin in clinical trials for dermatitis on more than 600 people. Although she found no significant effect, she says there were trends that warrant further study. She thinks that chemically modified forms of curcumin might prove more effective at reaching tissues."

She found no significant effect, thats weird... 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...pubmed/23847105

In this paper a curcumin free tumeric show anti inflamatory effect...

[Darryl]

I suspect (as I do with most polyphenols), that the effects suggested by epidemiology are due primarily to modulating the gut microbiota. The absorbed amounts are simply too small to have marked effects.

 

[Skyguy2005]

No it is a spice

[joelcairo]

Hmm, in the abstract the authors claim that curcumin exhibits "false activity" not just in vitro (the fluorescence tests) but in vivo as well. I don't have access to the full text of their study, but I'd love to learn about the false activity causing all those successful in vivo tests.

[pamojja]

And this poor chap at greenmedinfo wasted all his time collecting 2389 abstracts with turmeric research all nothing than a hoax

 

http://www.greenmedi...stance/turmeric

 

Admittedly, no money to be made from a mere spice. Something to consider:

Don’t eat their cheesecake– Meta-experts judged by meta-meta-experts– Prostitutes, nonprostitutes, and amateurs –

[joelcairo]

He couldn't have, because according to the article there is "no evidence".

[Turnbuckle]

It's great for brushing your teeth.

[Oakman]

 

"Many researchers are still optimistic about curcumin. “There is evidence that the biological activity of curcumoids is real,” says Julie Ryan, a radiation oncologist at the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York. She says that it interacts with many different proteins and so works differently from many drugs. Ryan has tested curcumin in clinical trials for dermatitis on more than 600 people. Although she found no significant effect, she says there were trends that warrant further study. She thinks that chemically modified forms of curcumin might prove more effective at reaching tissues."

She found no significant effect, thats weird... 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...pubmed/23847105

In this paper a curcumin free tumeric show anti inflamatory effect...

 

 

Surprising they just looked at plain curcumin, given it is barely absorbed from the gut. Plus science has a hard time with molecule combinations in natural substances and proving cause and effect. They prefer to test one thing at a time, saying good or bad for this or that (plus those derivatives are often patentable)

 

Natural substances aren't often built that way, and trying to show efficacy by dissecting them to separate components first often fails or produce erroneous results. 

I imagine that's why whole foods are better than supplements in many ways.

 

I suspect (as I do with most polyphenols), that the effects suggested by epidemiology are due primarily to modulating the gut microbiota. The absorbed amounts are simply too small to have marked effects.

 

That's true and often the case. This new formulation. UltarCur, which is a whey protein/curcumin, seems to go well above and beyond ALL previous 'enhanced' versions with > "Up to 15,000 times the bioavailability of standard Curcumin and 10 times the bioavailability of nano-particle preparations."  The bottle label says one 600mg capsule has the bioavilability of 240 grams (not a misprint) of standard curcumin.

 

Hopefully this will get into some further curcumin studies to see if it really has the effects so long marketed to the public, other than what it may do to our internal microflora. Meanwhile, I've just started taking it to see if I can tell the difference between it and a peperine version I had been taking.

[Ark]

"Many researchers are still optimistic about curcumin. “There is evidence that the biological activity of curcumoids is real,” says Julie Ryan, a radiation oncologist at the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York. She says that it interacts with many different proteins and so works differently from many drugs. Ryan has tested curcumin in clinical trials for dermatitis on more than 600 people. Although she found no significant effect, she says there were trends that warrant further study. She thinks that chemically modified forms of curcumin might prove more effective at reaching tissues."

She found no significant effect, thats weird...

https://www.ncbi.nlm...pubmed/23847105

In this paper a curcumin free tumeric show anti inflamatory effect...

Surprising they just looked at plain curcumin, given it is barely absorbed from the gut. Plus science has a hard time with molecule combinations in natural substances and proving cause and effect. They prefer to test one thing at a time, saying good or bad for this or that (plus those derivatives are often patentable)

Natural substances aren't often built that way, and trying to show efficacy by dissecting them to separate components first often fails or produce erroneous results.
I imagine that's why whole foods are better than supplements in many ways.

I suspect (as I do with most polyphenols), that the effects suggested by epidemiology are due primarily to modulating the gut microbiota. The absorbed amounts are simply too small to have marked effects.

That's true and often the case. This new formulation. UltarCur, which is a whey protein/curcumin, seems to go well above and beyond ALL previous 'enhanced' versions with > "Up to 15,000 times the bioavailability of standard Curcumin and 10 times the bioavailability of nano-particle preparations." The bottle label says one 600mg capsule has the bioavilability of 240 grams (not a misprint) of standard curcumin.

Hopefully this will get into some further curcumin studies to see if it really has the effects so long marketed to the public, other than what it may do to our internal microflora. Meanwhile, I've just started taking it to see if I can tell the difference between it and a peperine version I had been taking.

Has anyone else tried this formulation out?

[joelcairo]

That's why I thought it was bizarre that the original paper uses low bioavailability as one reason why curcumin is a poor target for being reformulated into a (patentable) drug. Low bioavailability is one of the main problems that remain to be solved, the exact reason a pharma company would invest resources in studying curcumin. We'll see whether UltraCur makes as big a difference as they suggest.

[Flávio Kjellin]

 

 

"Many researchers are still optimistic about curcumin. “There is evidence that the biological activity of curcumoids is real,” says Julie Ryan, a radiation oncologist at the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York. She says that it interacts with many different proteins and so works differently from many drugs. Ryan has tested curcumin in clinical trials for dermatitis on more than 600 people. Although she found no significant effect, she says there were trends that warrant further study. She thinks that chemically modified forms of curcumin might prove more effective at reaching tissues."

She found no significant effect, thats weird... 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...pubmed/23847105

In this paper a curcumin free tumeric show anti inflamatory effect...

 

 

Surprising they just looked at plain curcumin, given it is barely absorbed from the gut. Plus science has a hard time with molecule combinations in natural substances and proving cause and effect. They prefer to test one thing at a time, saying good or bad for this or that (plus those derivatives are often patentable)

 

Natural substances aren't often built that way, and trying to show efficacy by dissecting them to separate components first often fails or produce erroneous results. 

I imagine that's why whole foods are better than supplements in many ways.

 

I suspect (as I do with most polyphenols), that the effects suggested by epidemiology are due primarily to modulating the gut microbiota. The absorbed amounts are simply too small to have marked effects.

 

That's true and often the case. This new formulation. UltarCur, which is a whey protein/curcumin, seems to go well above and beyond ALL previous 'enhanced' versions with > "Up to 15,000 times the bioavailability of standard Curcumin and 10 times the bioavailability of nano-particle preparations."  The bottle label says one 600mg capsule has the bioavilability of 240 grams (not a misprint) of standard curcumin.

 

Hopefully this will get into some further curcumin studies to see if it really has the effects so long marketed to the public, other than what it may do to our internal microflora. Meanwhile, I've just started taking it to see if I can tell the difference between it and a peperine version I had been taking.

 

In the original paper its write that when it refers to curcumin its also all the other curcuminoids included in tumeric, also cite curry as a not effective supplement for cognition.

[joelcairo]

I just got hold of the full paper through sci-hub. What I thought was going to be some kind of meta-analysis is nothing of the kind. It's merely an extended diatribe, full of unsupported assertions and predictions. (Spoiler alert: all the ongoing clinical trials are going to be unsuccessful.)

 

The promise of evaluating 120+ clinical studies evaporated when the vast majority have not been completed or published their results. Analyzing the results of the rest was "beyond the scope" of this paper, so 4 (four) studies were summarized instead, with the promise that these are typical of all the rest. All of these studies were underpowered, both in terms of participants and dosage, so it's not surprising not much was proven.

 

The greatest single complain the authors have about curcumin is the lack of bioavailability. In fact almost the entire basis of their skepticism seems to be that the apparent bioavailability of curcumin is so low that it cannot have any significant effect, and therefore the health claims can be dismissed out of hand. I think this reasoning is false for several reasons...

 

1. It's extremely difficult to measure the plasma levels of all the different types of curcumin and their metabolites. My personal belief is that curcumin's true bioavailability is higher than believed. Anecdotally, when I began taking a couple of grams of plain curcumin a day, after exercising I found that my socks had a slight yellow tinge to them. It took me some time to realize that I was probably sweating out small amounts of curcumin, which is an intense yellow dye. I looked this up online and found other reports of the same thing happening. I'm open to other explanations, but something like this was definitely happening.

 

2. The authors are ignoring the effect of small amounts of curcumin on the system over the long term. One of the studies discussed lasted only 30 days. I feel that expecting precancerous lesions of smokers to be reversed by curcumin over 30 days is asking unreasonably much.

 

3. Enhanced bioavailability formulations of curcumin are already cheap and widely available, yet with all the complaints about low absorption and rapid breakdown, virtually the only discussion of them is this: "Delivery systems such as lipid vesicles, nanoparticles, and nanofibers might be able to boost the bioavailability of [curcumin], but this could also conceivably narrow its therapeutic window and lead to off-target toxicity by aforementioned processes." [Note the word "conceivably".]

 

Finally, I expected them to fail to back up their claim of "false activity:  of curcumin in vivo, and I was not disappointed. In fact, in vivo research is hardly mentioned. The only "false activity" I could imagine they are referring to is if the result of the test is successful, but the immediate cause was slightly different (for example, a combination of curcuminoids, or a metabolite of curcuminoids) or the mechanism is different from what is expected. This sort of thing seems completely beside the point. A successful study is a successful study, then you can work backwards to figure out why it works.

[mrkosh1]

All I can say is that I really liked the feeling I got from one pill of LEF brand Super Bio-Curcumin. It provided anxiety relief (helping me sleep) and reduced the inflammation/pain in my knees after strenuous exercise.

[nightmare]

So what about decreasing the inflammation?

 

You can see a review of this study

https://www.ncbi.nlm...pubmed/23378457 in video.

 

Anybody tried using turmeric and other spices for reducing inflammation? Any successful results?

Edited by nightmare, 21 January 2017 - 05:44 PM.

[Kalliste]

Please look at the traditional Ayurvedic delivery of Curcumin in Curry mixes where it arrives with ten other herbal compounds that all have hundreds of articles on Pubmed. Synergies?

 

Nobody ever tries Curry powder instead of Curcumin because research always zooms in on testing 1 compound at a time...

[normalizing]

so should the conclusion be just mix curcumin with other spices and consume this way regularly or just buy easily no problem, one of the dozen brand name high absorption POSITIVE study based formulas out there? it will be interesting to choose at this point.

[Benko]

To OP: please check examine.com and look at their references before posting things like this as double blind studies in humans* are more relevant. 

 

*a quick google search turned up a double blind study in humans with positive results in improving inflammation. If that is not in the examine bibliography you can find it easy enough.

Edited by Benko, 03 July 2017 - 12:08 AM.

[Kalliste]

 

"In the spiced meal, we used rosemary, oregano, cinnamon, turmeric, black pepper, cloves, garlic powder and paprika," said Ann Skulas-Ray, postdoctoral fellow. "We selected these spices because they had potent antioxidant activity previously under controlled conditions in the lab."

When the meal contained a blend of antioxidant spices, antioxidant activity in the blood was increased by 13 percent and insulin response decreased by about 20 percent.

According to West, many scientists think that oxidative stress contributes to heart disease, arthritis and diabetes. "Antioxidants, like spices, may be important in reducing oxidative stress and thus reducing the risk of chronic disease," she said, adding that the spice dose they used provided the equivalent amount of antioxidants contained in 5 ounces of red wine or 1.4 ounces of dark chocolate.

http://news.psu.edu/...-high-fat-meals

 

 

Each of the five ingredients of Protandim shows anti-cancer effects and other activities. Bacosides, a traditional Ayurvedic medicine, has been used in India for centuries as a memory enhancing, anti-inflammatory, analgesic, antipyretic, sedative and antiepileptic agent [44]. Silymarin is known as a hepatoprotectant, but also shows anti-cancer and cytoprotective activities on organs including the prostate, lungs, CNS, kidneys, pancreas and skin [45]. W. somnifera has shown anti-angiogenesis and anti-cancer activities [46]–[47]. Green tea (EGCG) shows promising results in cancer prevention and treatment in a large number of studies [48]–[52]. Curcumin is another rising star as a cancer prevention agent [53]–[56]. However, the benefits of forming this combination include: 1) existing a synergistic effect; and 2) lowering the concentration of each ingredient to reduce the potential side effects.

In summary, tumor promoter TPA incites cutaneous proliferation and inflammation mediated at least in part, by oxidative stress. Protandim prevents skin tumor formation via the induction of several primary antioxidant enzymes. As the induction of antioxidant enzymes is a much more potent approach than supplementation with conventional stoichiometric antioxidants, Protandim may be suitable for translational research and may serve as a therapeutic approach for cancer prevention.

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC2668769/

 

Note that Protandim seems to be shrouded in some confusion, in this case it refers to a standardized mix of polyphenols that are probably cheaper to buy separately.

Edited by Kalliste, 03 July 2017 - 08:12 PM.

[MightyMouse]

Once again I'm baffled by how supposedly smart and educated people can come up with nonsense such as this. And it gets published by Nature... The problem of biavailability has been long solved. The market is saturated with variants of curcumin products with increased bioavailability. Also there have been numerous studies that confirm this. And now these guys show up, cherry pick some weak studies and conclued curcumin doesn't work. If these were scientists from University of Bwhakalaka, Zimbabwe and the article was published in Elbonian Journal of Science and Motosport, it would be understandable. But Nature... Lame.

[normalizing]

mightymouse, but this is science and science is ever changing just because a big publisher puts articles out with their reputation at hand, doesnt mean the science behind it wont change next year and the same magazine publish something different. nature had many positive studies on various things in the past only to have very good studies contradicting them years later. thats not the best reference as it is very difficult for me to pull out articles over the decade to compare, but i have read many contradictory articles in high quality journals, including nature. not because they are liars or stupid, but because science changes facts. you cant have one solid proof everlasting truth in science ever. that is why, articles like this might continue for a long time, i am sure

[joelcairo]

The problem as usual is that rather run of the mill results are being overblown. In this case, the authors make valid points, so far as I can understand the science, but they seem to think the possible confounding factors they cite justify them in dismissing all previous in vitro work on the subject.

 

They even explicitly claim "false activity" of curcumin in vivo, even though there is no support for this idea in their paper, and in fact the whole concept makes no sense. If it has a provable effect, then it has an effect, not much ambiguity about that. They do spend some time quibbling that curcumin is not very bioavailable and you can't separate its effects from those of its metabolic breakdown products, but so what? That just means the subject is complicated, not that it's a hoax.

[MightyMouse]

mightymouse, but this is science and science is ever changing just because a big publisher puts articles out with their reputation at hand, doesnt mean the science behind it wont change next year and the same magazine publish something different. nature had many positive studies on various things in the past only to have very good studies contradicting them years later. thats not the best reference as it is very difficult for me to pull out articles over the decade to compare, but i have read many contradictory articles in high quality journals, including nature. not because they are liars or stupid, but because science changes facts. you cant have one solid proof everlasting truth in science ever. that is why, articles like this might continue for a long time, i am sure

 

Well, the problem in my mind is not that it contradicts previous findings. The problem is, the study contradicts logic, common sense and is weak structurally. They dismiss widely known facts and their criteria for choosing data to work with has no sound basis. I'm not critizising the results, I'm critizising the way they conducted the study.

[MightyMouse]

This thread sparked my interest in whether there are any reliable sources of criticism for curcumine, and unfortunately found one. I say unfortunately because I just bought a batch of this stuff and I really hope that it does everything that advocates claim. This guy however has a completely different view. Now, this puzzles me, since I always try to assess value of information based on authority of its source. This guy is a Duke University PhD and sounds like he really knows his stuff. On the other hand he is essentially claiming that huge number of existing positive trials on curcumine are wrong or flawed. I'm sure many of those trials were conducted by competent scientists as well. I'm not savvy enough to tell who's right here. 

 

http://blogs.science...waste-your-time

Edited by MightyMouse, 20 July 2017 - 03:01 PM.

[chris85]

OK firstly I do not think her claim 'no double blind placebo controlled clinical trial has been successful' is correct. There are at least 3 to my knowledge, the largest and most convincing of these (which was published in a journal with impact factor >10 compared to impact factor of the review journal of 5, minor comment) featured in an American journal called diabetes care (Chuengsamarn et al., 2012). They concluded the following:

 

A 9-month curcumin intervention in a prediabetic population significantly lowered the number of prediabetic individuals who eventually developed T2DM. In addition, the curcumin treatment appeared to improve overall function of β-cells, with very minor adverse effects. Therefore, this study demonstrated that the curcumin intervention in a prediabetic population may be beneficial.

 

This was about preventing the progression of prediabetes into diabetes, but it was a successful double blind placebo controlled clinical trial.

 

I think her main gripes about it in her article revolve around it's in vitro false positive binding to proteins, which is hardly something that warrents it being medicinally useless. There are also a wide array of animal studies suggesting it does have a variety of protective and health enhancing effects that I don't have the energy to go into.....

 

Chuengsamarn, Somlak, et al. “Curcumin extract for prevention of type 2 diabetes.” Diabetes care 35.11 (2012): 2121-2127.

[mccoy]

Re. bioavailability: This is a classic paper on curcumin bioavailability and how it's increased by piperine in black pepper.

 

On my side, without getting insane consulting the huge literature on curcumine compounds and bioavailability, my strategy is currently the following:

1. Eat lots of fresh turmeric root, either raw and cooked
2. Often use oil together with turmeric
3. Eat turmeric powder, both raw and cooked, with and without oil
4. Eat turmeric in the above combinations usually together with abundant black pepper

I do not use supplements, only natural turmeric. I base my strategy on the reasoned belief that curcumin is a powerful xenohormetic and that if frequently ingested in significant amounts and with other synergistic compounds like piperine and oil phytochemicals it cannot but be adsorbed in the system and trigger its beneficial effects related to genes expressions and other mechanisms. 

 

A possible drawback of the above strategy is overdosing. Body intelligence, in the guise of attunement to possible negative reaction (repulsion) to turmeric, is an empirical way to calibrate the dosage.

Edited by mccoy, 24 July 2017 - 11:43 AM.

[normalizing]

black pepper also allows absorption of many other things too, like vitamins but also toxins as well. it inhibits some liver enzymes too and i dont think regular consumption above a tiny speck on a dish is really recommended

[mccoy]

Hazy, thanks for reminding the issue of glucuronidation inhibition by piperine. That's a fact, although the issue here becomes probably far too complex to be generalized.

 

This is one of those cases where we can adopt subjective degrees of belief and a mathematical theory has been founded on this (Dempster-Shafer theory).

 

Considering the known multifarious beneficial properties of black pepper (for example,cancer prevention), considering the recent developments of the hormetic/xenohormetic theory and the role of phytochemicals as boosters of immune functions and beneficial genetic expressions, my belief is that consumption of natural black pepper (not the pure extract piperine) has a significant probability to enhance healthspan and lifespan.

 

Of course, we should balance the positive effects against the possible detrimental effects due to glucuronidation inhibition. Again, my belief is that the natural food, in reasonable quantitites, will rarely exhibit deleterious effects (barring intolerances).

 

A reasonable quantity in my reasoned subjective belief is up to 10 grains of black pepper a day, even 20 for those who are tolerant.

Black pepper is used in massive amounts in some north-African cuisines (tunisia for example) and it would be interesting to study the possible prevalence of diseases due to glucuronidation inhibition.

[Mike C]

https://www.scienced...80123101908.htm

This just released double blind, placebo controlled long term study found cucurmin improved mood and memory in older adults.

Edited by Mike C, 24 January 2018 - 02:04 PM.