12 votes
Posted 14 February 2020 - 11:57 AM
Is there anything wrong with getting it from straight dark chocolate or mango butter? Because I think a lot of us are super worried about palmitic acid.
You tell us, Nate. You've been using these alternatives for years, right? Any problems?
Posted 14 February 2020 - 01:32 PM
Is there anything wrong with getting it from straight dark chocolate or mango butter? Because I think a lot of us are super worried about palmitic acid.
Another group buy of that USP grade stuff from sigma would be ideal obviously.
To get 24 gms of stearic acid from dark chocolate you would end up consuming near toxic amounts of theobromine. How about a group buy for raw mango butter?
Posted 14 February 2020 - 04:37 PM
To get 24 gms of stearic acid from dark chocolate you would end up consuming near toxic amounts of theobromine. How about a group buy for raw mango butter?
You mentioned theobromine, but what about caffeine?
Melatonin is associated with mitochondrial fusion, and caffeine is bad with melatonin.
24 grams of stearic acid
roughly 32 percent of fat in chocolate is stearic acid, this means roughly 75 grams of fat
This roughly 187.5 grams of dark chocolate.
cocoa butter has not much amount of theobromine and caffeine.
Well, if one consumes in terms of cocoa butter, then?
Posted 14 February 2020 - 06:54 PM
You mentioned theobromine, but what about caffeine?
cocoa butter has not much amount of theobromine and caffeine.
Well, if one consumes in terms of cocoa butter, then?
I think there is very little caffeine in chocolate. Theobromine is a caffeine metabolite, and I think that a lot of people confuse it with caffeine.
As for calling it near toxic that was somewhat hyperbolic. However, I once ate an entire bar of unsweetened baking chocolate and my heart wouldn't stop racing and I had to lay in bed for several hours until my heart rate returned to normal.
But you are correct that cocoa butter would solve the theobromine issue.
Posted 14 February 2020 - 10:15 PM
The early experiments of Turnbuckle were made with commercial food-grade stearic acid, that is, 50-50% stearic and palmitic. The results, which the whole theory is built upon, were obtained with such product and C60.
So we have to assume 50-50% it's plenty efficacious. The other considerations are interesting for optimization and whatever, but probably are marginal at best. There's no real reason to use mango butter or any other exotic option.
Posted 15 February 2020 - 03:50 PM
To get 24 gms of stearic acid from dark chocolate you would end up consuming near toxic amounts of theobromine. How about a group buy for raw mango butter?
Not true at all. Plus why 24g? I thought 10 was all it took. I can get 10g with 2/3 of an 88% chocolate bar. I seriously doubt that's toxic.
Posted 15 February 2020 - 04:30 PM
Not true at all. Plus why 24g? I thought 10 was all it took. I can get 10g with 2/3 of an 88% chocolate bar. I seriously doubt that's toxic.
In one of the links that someone previously posted (https://www.nature.c...467-018-05614-6), 24 grams is what was administered in their trial.
As for the toxic part, I did correct that in a subsequent post admitting that the statement was exaggerated. My statement was based on what happened to me when I ate an entire bar of unsweetened chocolate. Try it, and you'll see why I feel that eating chocolate is not the way to get 24 grams of stearic acid. However, if 10 grams is all you want then chocolate would probably work. Just be aware that you will get a noticeable increase in your hearth rate.
Posted 25 February 2020 - 06:01 AM
Posted 25 February 2020 - 08:58 AM
From a biochemical and efficacy point of view, what would be the difference between ready-made NADH in drops compared to Niacinamide plus ribose? Would it make sense to use NADH plus ribose to get the same effect?Thanks I hope I haven't gone too far off the topic.
What you want is NAD+, not NADH, as you want to push up the ratio of NAD+/NADH, not lower it. As for me, I've found that 2 grams each of Nicotinamide and ribose is ideal. So that's quite a bit.
Posted 01 March 2020 - 04:13 PM
Hi Turnbuckle,
Once again thank you so very much for the absolutely fabulous input, not only in this thread, but everywhere on this forum.
If someone has been on mitochondrial uncouplers for a while, we would think that they have been in a chronic state of fusion, right? If someone who is in such a state would want to engage in your protocol, how would you suggest they go about it?
Posted 01 March 2020 - 06:36 PM
If someone has been on mitochondrial uncouplers for a while, we would think that they have been in a chronic state of fusion, right? If someone who is in such a state would want to engage in your protocol, how would you suggest they go about it?
Which uncoupler? I expect most will not be strong fusion promoters, and thus any accumulated damage from long term use will probably be less than I experienced with statins.
Posted 01 March 2020 - 07:26 PM
DNP experiments in rats showed a large uptick in fission promoter proteins--
Regarding the mitochondrial dynamic, mitochondrial fission 1 protein (Fis-1), which promotes mitochondrial fission, clearly increased in the DNP group (+ 507%; P < 0.01; Fig. 7), without any significant difference in both groups for mitofusin-1 and -2 (MFN-1 and MFN-2), mitochondrial membrane proteins that participate in mitochondrial fusion.
https://journals.phy...siol.01177.2013
Posted 01 March 2020 - 09:27 PM
DNP experiments in rats showed a large uptick in fission promoter proteins--
So in that case, an individual who has been on DNP for a while would be expected to have had a lot of "bad" mitochondria already eliminated -correct me if I am mistaken.
How would the protocol be modified for a person in this situation?
Posted 01 March 2020 - 09:35 PM
So in that case, an individual who has been on DNP for a while would be expected to have had a lot of "bad" mitochondria already eliminated -correct me if I am mistaken.
How would the protocol be modified for a person in this situation?
In that situation they wouldn't need it.
Posted 02 March 2020 - 07:31 PM
In that situation they wouldn't need it.
But you had said on multiple occasions that constant fission is not good.
Are there any steps that a a person in this situation (someone who has pushed for constant fission with months on end.without a break) may wish to take to optimize mitochondrial function and integrity?
Thanks
Posted 03 March 2020 - 07:23 AM
I thought I would take the protocol used by the Mayo Clinic. 20 mg Fisetin/kg x 2 consecutive days. I weigh 85 kg so my dose was 1700 mg per day. It really kicked my ass, felt very tired especially the second day. Just thought I would give a little feedback to the group about my experience. Was thinking about doing this once a month. I have Fisetin powder from Amazon. Of course, I continue on Turnbuckle's protocol also minus the Fisetin.
Posted 03 March 2020 - 08:57 PM
Thanks for sharing your anecdotal information, Pampaguy. I also am both following a modified version of Turnbuckle's protocol (but cycling the NAD+ precursor NMN with sulforaphane and PQQ), as well as having recently completed a two day Mayo Clinic type fisetin protocol, so I'll also share my anecdotal information here. I weigh about 80 kg and took 1500 mg of fisetin for two consecutive days on an empty stomach, except for a little olive oil (as a solvent) and black pepper (piperine), but with no other supplements for those two days. Unlike you, I could detect no changes in myself whatsoever. Of course, we're all different, and as mentioned, I don't follow Turnbuckle's protocol precisely, but do you think that your tiredness could possibly have been caused by some confounding variable?
Posted 03 March 2020 - 11:47 PM
I thought I would take the protocol used by the Mayo Clinic. 20 mg Fisetin/kg x 2 consecutive days. I weigh 85 kg so my dose was 1700 mg per day. It really kicked my ass, felt very tired especially the second day. Just thought I would give a little feedback to the group about my experience. Was thinking about doing this once a month. I have Fisetin powder from Amazon. Of course, I continue on Turnbuckle's protocol also minus the Fisetin.
Did you add anything to boost the bioavailability?
Posted 06 March 2020 - 01:22 AM
a cheap australian source for me is here. unsure of ratio but it says pharm grade which would be above food grade?
https://www.ebay.com...q0AAOSwVEFb6OLg
Posted 06 March 2020 - 05:30 PM
a cheap australian source for me is here. unsure of ratio but it says pharm grade which would be above food grade?
Yes, pharm is higher grade than food.
But it is 50/50 stearic/plamitic acid, not 100% stearic acid.
EP/BP - Stearic Acid 40.0 - 60.0 % 49.9
EP/BP - Stearic and Palmitic Acids >= 90.0 % 96.3
Posted 06 March 2020 - 06:25 PM
No, Mayo Clinic had none I was aware of. If you do Nate, let me know.
Not sure mayo clinic has anything. I would search through Google scholar but what I've found there in scattered articles is my conclusion below:
I'd suggest using piperine for glucuronidation, a small amount of vitamin C for oxidation and fish oil or any phospholipid lecithin as a carrier. These are the best ways I've found to boost bioavailability of flavonoids and catechins. You can also probably find a liposomal solution that can help. This is more off topic from this thread though.
https://www.scienced...818087614000725
https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC3634921/
https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC3189735/
Edited by Nate-2004, 06 March 2020 - 06:45 PM.
Posted 07 March 2020 - 06:10 AM
Not sure mayo clinic has anything. I would search through Google scholar but what I've found there in scattered articles is my conclusion below:
I'd suggest using piperine for glucuronidation, a small amount of vitamin C for oxidation and fish oil or any phospholipid lecithin as a carrier. These are the best ways I've found to boost bioavailability of flavonoids and catechins. You can also probably find a liposomal solution that can help. This is more off topic from this thread though.
https://www.scienced...818087614000725
https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC3634921/
I will try all of your suggestions on boosting bioavailability on my April 1st. dose. Will keep everyone informed. Thanks Again!
Posted 07 March 2020 - 04:13 PM
But you had said on multiple occasions that constant fission is not good.
Are there any steps that a a person in this situation (someone who has pushed for constant fission with months on end.without a break) may wish to take to optimize mitochondrial function and integrity?
Thanks
Hate to clutter the thread with repetitive questions, so one last push here real quick:
I do recall that too much fission or a state of fission continued for too long without an interruption was undesirable. However, searching for what exactly the associated problems might be, I am not coming up with anything concrete (just fatigue).
Would you think that having been in a state of fission for too long may have caused problems, which now should be addressed? Jut wild speculation would lead me to think that perhaps one could end up with too few mitochondria as a result of having eliminated too many semi-defective ones? If that is the case, could one benefit from forcing mitochondria to divide, thereby increasing their numbers?
Posted 08 March 2020 - 03:59 AM
Could this be a good source of stearic acid？
The product description says about risk of high blood pressure. In this forum, there was the one member mentioned that the mitochondrial fusion induces the blood pressure higher. This would be important for people who have the blood pressure issue in their health history, and it would be informative if anyone has the scientific references writing about the relation between the mitochondrial fusion and the blood pressure.
Is it the issue with GMS or does it apply to general stearic acid?
Could it be possible that taking stearic acid with food might alleviate this effect?
Edited by Graviton, 08 March 2020 - 04:01 AM.
0 members, 5 guests, 0 anonymous users
Community Forum Software by IP.Board
Licensed to: ImmInst.org
This topic is locked
