Hi Turnbuckle, this update is greatly appreciated- I'm a little confused, however, regarding if there is a typo regarding DHM below - is it used on both fission and fusion days? I understood it to be an alternative to GMS but it is listed as an alternative to AKG. If you could please clarify- I already did day 1 as written and included DHM, but no matter I'll take a day off and reset if this was a mistake.
thanks very much!
An updated Mito protocol
The previous protocol can be found at post #1739
The update here gives DHM as an option or supplement to GMS. DHM crosses the BBB while stearic acid does not.
Background:
Previously I posted methods of cycling mitochondrial morphology to clean up defective mtDNA, which eliminated mutations via the PINK1/Parkin QC process. The normal QC process can detect mutated mtDNA genes during fission as all mito genes are critical and thus the mito membrane potential goes to zero if just one is defective. Greatly magnifying fission and fusion with supplements will aid that process. But there is another source of mitochondrial damage that isn’t so easily eliminated — epigenetic damage. Like nDNA, mtDNA also picks up aberrant methylation with age. This methylation degrades ATP production, but the QC process doesn’t catch it unless the problem is addressed at a critical time, like during biogenesis. If a mitochondrion with one loop of methylated mtDNA runs out of enzymes while involved with replication, then membrane potential may dip to zero and it will get labeled for recycling. Thanks to methylation, it won’t have as much enzyme reserves as other mitochondria, so it will be preferentially targeted. Also, biogenesis is the best time to demethylate mtDNA as methyltransferase can’t operate while there is only one strand.
Until recently, mtDNA wasn’t even known to have methylation, and researchers are still confused as to why it is there. Some speak of mtDNA hypermethylation like it is bad while normal methylation has some purpose.
See, for instance: Hypermethylation of mitochondrial DNA in vascular smooth muscle cells impairs cell contractility
I don’t agree. I say all mtDNA methylation is bad. Methylated mtDNA mooches enzymes off other mtDNA, and because they don’t produce as much ATP they don’t produce as much ROS, and thus have a survival advantage as they are less prone to mutation. Eventually the cell will become full of moochers and result in fatigue and many other problems of aging.
So I say get rid of them all, mutations and methylation alike.
The new protocol:
This new procedure is much simplified. It requires only two doses, Mito1 and Mito2, which are alternated on a daily basis.
Mito1 (fission)
● NAM+R, 1 g of each
● AKG, 1 g and/or DHM, 2 g
● PQQ, 20 mg
Mito2 (fusion)
● GMS, 1 g
● AKG, 1 g and/or DHM, 2 g
● PQQ, 20 mg
NAM+R (nicotinamide plus ribose) is a fission promoter, GMS (glycerol monostearate) and DHM (dihydromyricetin) are fusion promoters, AKG (alpha-ketoglutarate) is a demethylase promoter, and PQQ is a biogenesis promoter. All of these are fast acting.
A two week experiment using reps to failure and GMS:
Warm water was sufficient to dissolve everything, but the PQQ was taken in a capsule to insure that the other ingredients got a slight head start (probably unnecessary).
Mito1 and Mito2 were taken on alternating days. Each dose was taken in the evening and reps of dumbbell curls to failure counted first thing in the morning — five or six hours after dosing — using the same arm.
My hypothesis was that the number of reps would reflect mito damage. With mito fusion, enzymes are shared, thus ATP production and reps would be maximum. With fission, methylated (or otherwise damaged) mtDNA produce less ATP and reps would be minimum. The difference would reflect average damage, and if the treatment worked, the difference should decline. If all damage was removed, then the difference should go to zero.
Which in fact it did. See the plot below. The y-axis shows the reps and % difference, while the x-axis shows days. The curve labeled baseline is without any treatment, and likely reflects the normal intermediate situation with mito morphology in a dynamic state. It is stable at 16 reps. The upper fusion curve is relatively flat and higher than baseline as expected, while the lower fission curve is lower than baseline, but rises to meet the fusion curve after about two weeks, and stays there. Thus the percent difference goes to zero.
Results:
Improvement in running endurance, reduced hunger, and reduced need for hypertension medication.
This topic is locked
