Re: specific amino acid restriction does the same thing as calorie restriction?

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sun Apr 20 2003 - 06:05:48 MDT

  • Next message: Robert J. Bradbury: "Re: SARS or something else?(long)"

    On Sun, 20 Apr 2003, gts wrote:

    > Am I looking at the right article? Perhaps not.
    > However if I am looking at the right article then why
    > is no one here discussing the properties of
    > methionine, cysteine or tryptophan?
    [big snip]

    Yes you are looking at the right articles. And your
    comments would generally be correct as far as I know
    without digging into the textbooks. I too generally
    agree with the comments about considering single amino
    acids as "drugs" though I'm opposed to the FDA regulating
    them.

    The problem I see with limiting methionine or cysteine
    is that they are primary sources of sulfur, which I
    believe is an essential component of glutathione which
    is a major antioxidant. So perhaps one might want to
    limit those but supplement with either glutathione or
    N-acetyl-cysteine (though that might defeat the
    purpose of cysteine restriction).

    The problem I see is that I don't believe we know yet
    precisely where in the pathways the "detection" of
    low essential amino acids are and how they upregulate
    protein recycling. But I'd guess we will know that
    within this decade. It seems likely that they should
    be highly conserved biochemical detection/regulation
    systems.

    Robert



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Apr 20 2003 - 06:23:37 MDT