.

.
marylin monroe
Showing posts with label EGCG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EGCG. Show all posts

Weight Loss Supplements Exposed: Green Tea & Probiotics. Fat Loss, Energy Expenditure, Fat Oxidation, Sex & More

Yesterday at Starbucks: "I just ordered a bottle of probiotics!"
In view of the fact that all the feedback I got in response to the re-installment of the Short News was positive, I guess you won't mind if I use the chance and bundle the two soon-to-be-published weight loss studies from the British Journal of Nutrition into a Weight Loss Supplement Mini-Special of the SuppVersity Short News.

If you were actually sitting next to you, I would probably ask you, whether you'd prefer the good, or the bad news, first!? Well, I guess I'll start with the bad one, then: Green tea sucked - again!

ZERO effect of EGCG supplementation in overweight women

To examine the effects of green tea epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) on the changes in body composition (! not just weight), energy and substrate metabolism, cardiometabolic risk factors and liver function enzymes after an energy-restricted diet intervention in obese women, a group of researchers from the University of the Basque Country in Spain recruited a group of 83(!) obese (BMI 30-40 kg/m2) pre-menopausal women (Mielgo-Ayuso. 2013).

The women were randomly assigned to consume either 3x100 mg/d of EGCG or placebo (lactose) with each of their three main meals for 12 whole weeks. During those twelve weeks, all women followed a specifically designed low-energy mixed (55 % carbohydrates, 30 % lipids and 15 % proteins) diet that provided ca. 600 kcal/day energy less than the women would need to maintain their body weight. The energy content and macronutrient composition of diets were designed to achieve a weight loss of 0.5 to 1 kg per week, as it was observed by Davis et al. (2006) and Bantle et al. (2008) on very similar regimen. As the scientists point out, the "dietary instructions were reinforced weekly by a dietitian" (Mielgo-Ayuso), to optimise compliance.
Figure 1: Changes in body composition, energy expenditure and fat oxidation, left; changes in glucose, cholesterol metabolism and inflammation, right (Mielgo-Ayuso. 2013)
I am not sure how compliant the participants actually were, but in view of the fact that the women were advised not to change their physical activity habits during the energy restriction program, the relatively meager and statistically non-significant changes in body weight (-0·3 kg, p > 0.05) and fat mass (-0·7 kg, p > 0.05) are probably not really surprising. It is nice to see, though, that the women lost more fat than total mass - muscle loss was thus not an issue for the ladies.

What was not to be expected, though, - at least if you believe a single word of the hype about green tea supplements - were the non-existent effects of the purported weight loss supplement on  energy expenditure, fat metabolism, HOMA-IR (insulin sensitivity), total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, or triglycerides. In fact, the only good thing about the whole EGCG intervention was that the recently observed negative effects on the liver did not occur, either.

SIGNIFICANT Effect W/ 16 Million CFU of Nestlé's Lactobacillus rhamnosus strain

Want to check out the patent?
Despite the fact that the overall results are much more exciting than those in the previously discussed green tea study, I'd advise you to keep calm. We are after all dealing with another Nestlé study on a patented strain of Lactobacillus rhamnosus (LPR), i.e. "CGMCC1.3724" (date patented: 2012-05-10; #20120114622), and cannot tell how many never published negative study results the Nestlé guys had to dispose of, before Marina Sanchez et al. finally produced study results that pleased the marketing division of this multinational corporation.

What? Ok, ok... let's get back to the facts: The scientists from the Laval University and the Nestlé Research Center randomized a group of one-hundred fifty-three 18 to 55 year-old obese men and women to receive either a placebo or the said LPR formulation with 1·6 × 108 colony-forming units of LPR and additional oligofructose and inulin per cap for a total of 24 weeks.

In the course of the first 12 weeks (phase 1), each participant received a personalised diet plan that would have him or her consume 500 kcal/d less than he or she'd need for weight maintenance (just as an aside, that's 100kcal more than for the subjects in the green teas study). During phase 2, each participant received a personalised diet plan without energy restriction. The good thing, the resting energy expenditure (REE) was actually measured: after a 12 h overnight fast in subjects having had rested for at least 15 min in a standardised supine position. This procedure was repeated thrice: (1) At baseline, (2) after the weight-loss and (3) after the second phase weight-maintenance periods using indirect calorimetry.
Figure 2: Changes in body composition (all data in kg) in men (left, blue) and women (right, orange) after weight loss (ΔW12) and weight maintenance (ΔW24) phase (Sanchez. 2013)
The data in figure 2 confirms what the abstract says: "The intention-to-treat analysis showed that after the first 12 weeks and after 24 weeks, mean weight loss was not significantly different between the LPR and placebo groups when all the subjects were considered."

Figure 3: Changes in metabolic parameters, i.e. energy intake (kcal/day), resting energy expenditure (REE, kcal/day) and respiratory quotient (RQ, remember: low RQ = high fat, low carb oxidation) after 12 and 24 weeks (Sanchez. 2013)
It does yet also confirm - and that there was a significant treatment × sex interaction, observed with the women in the treatment group losing significantly more weight than those in the placebo group (P= 0·02). More importantly, though...
"[...w]omen in the LPR group continued to lose body weight and fat mass during the weight-maintenance period, whereas opposite changes were observed in the placebo group."
For the unlucky men, on the other hand, the (unquestionably expensive) supplement didn't do sh*t: Their "changes in body weight and fat mass during the weight-maintenance period were similar" irrespective of whether they received the placebo or the active treatment.

Whether this was the reason or a consequence of the fact that the the men didn't show similar significant reductions in circulating leptin, as the women is questionable. Based on the fact that the relative abundance of bacteria of the Lachnospiraceae family in faeces increase only in women, we do yet have to assume that the missing reduction in leptin, as well as the absence of the significant body fat reductions, the researchers observed in their female subjects was simply a results of ...
  • under-dosing - the same the 1·6 × 108 colony-forming units of LPR that was sufficient for the average woman (body weight ~89kg) could have been too low for the guys (body weight ~104.3kg) 
  • dietary interference - there could have been something in the diets of the guys that ruined the effects of the supplementation (lactobacilli are not exactly friends of meats and we all know that men love their meat ;-)
  • different baseline gut microbiome - it goes without saying that you cannot place a group of rabbits in forest full of predators and expect them to survive; similarly the LPR spores may have come off second in the guts of the men, because they have a less "LPR-friendly" baseline colinization
  • fundamental sex differences - at the moment I am not sure what the underlying reasons could be, but it's not impossible that hormonal difference could have played a role as well
I am pretty sure that I could come up with a whole host of additional, increasingly bizarre ad-hoc explanations for the null-effect Marina Sanchez and her colleagues from the Laval University and the  Nestlé Research Center in Lausanne observed in their male study but would rather conclude this news-item with the scientists own funky, but not unlikely explanation: Men are simply too good at dieting!

True: Women have a harder time losing weight even with high protein | more
As the authors point out, we know from previous trials (and corresponding SuppVersity posts, read more) that men are generally more prone to respond to a negative-energy balance intervention than women - and that's true irrespective of whether it is an exercise-training programme (Tremblay. 1984), a diet– exercise programme (Doucet. 1999), or a session of exercise and of mental work (Pérusse-Lachance. 2013). Plus, if you look at the data in figure 2, you'll see that this is actualy "concordant with the results of the present study that shows higher weight loss in men in the placebo group than in the women". Sanchez et al. do now believe that the high baseline success "abolished this difference" (Sanchez. 2013).

In view of the fact that there was a difference in a single low-abundance taxonomic group  (Prevotellaceae) between the baseline gut microbiome of the male and female study participants, I would still not exclude that the different baseline gut microbiomes could at least have added to the 'effect abolishing effect' of the sex-specific ease of weight loss in men. I mean, why wouldn't the feces of the men show an increase in lactobacillus spores, if the supplement worked?
Bottom line: Today's installment of the short news is very characteristic of the dilemma with weight loss supplements. We are just realizing that the classic thermogenic 'rodent fat burner' don't really work in humans. Against that background the rise of supplements that target the gut microbiome and exert much more complex body recompositioning effects comes in the nick of time.  Unfortunately, our understanding of the complex interactions between the gut microbiome and our immune system in the context of the emerging science of immunonometabolism is so incomplete (Mathis. 2011) that we are more or less groping in the dark, whenever we supplement subjects, patients or even ourselves with allegedly healthful bacteria.

All alleged benefits aside,  "specificity", the 2nd Principle of Sensible Supplementation, should keep you away from the next best GNC or online supplement store. The two studies at hand do after all not warrant the use of either green tea or lactobacillus supplements as weight loss aids in lean, healthy and active  men or women.
Accordingly, the observation that green tea supplements won't help sedentary over-weight women to lose weight appears to be much more reliable than the allegedly impressive weight loss effects of the probiotic during the "maintenance phase" of the Sanchez study.

We must however not forget the respective constraints of the research design and irresponsibly over-interpret the results of the EGCG study to (a) the potential benefits of regular 'whole' tea consumption in the average, non-obese individual (Wu. 2003) or (b) visceral fat loss in diet + exercise interventions in obese individuals (cf. Maki. 2009). Similarly, the fact that obese women will lose weight on a LPR supplemented maintenance diet is very unlikely going to translate to lean, athletic folks like you and me. According to the 2nd Principle of Sensible Supplementation, which is "specificity" (learn them all), I don't see you or me heading over to the next best online shop to buy LPR or EGCG supplements - irrespective of the promising results of the Sanchez trial.

References: 
  • Bantle JP, Wylie-Rosett J, Albright AL,et al.(2008) Nutrition recommendations and interventions for diabetes: a position statement of the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care31, Suppl. 1, S61– S78.
  • Davis NJ, Emerenini A & Wylie-Rosett J (2006) Obesity management: physician practice patterns and patient preference. Diabetes Educ32, 557 – 561. 
  • Maki, K. C., Reeves, M. S., Farmer, M., Yasunaga, K., Matsuo, N., Katsuragi, Y., ... & Cartwright, Y. (2009). Green tea catechin consumption enhances exercise-induced abdominal fat loss in overweight and obese adults. The Journal of nutrition, 139(2), 264-270.
  • Mathis, D., & Shoelson, S. E. (2011). Immunometabolism: an emerging frontier. Nature Reviews Immunology, 11(2), 81-83.
  • Mielgo-Ayuso J, Barrenechea L, Alcorta P, Larrarte E, Margareto J & Labayen I (2013). Effects of dietary supplementation with epigallocatechin-3-gallate on weight loss, energy homeostasis, cardiometabolic risk factors and liver function in obese women: randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. British Journal of Nutrition, available on CJO2013. 
  • Tremblay, A., Despres, J. P., Leblanc, C., & Bouchard, C. (1984). Sex dimorphism in fat loss in response to exercise-training. Journal of obesity and weight regulation.
  • Wu, C.-H., Lu, F.-H., Chang, C.-S., Chang, T.-C., Wang, R.-H. and Chang, C.-J. (2003), Relationship among Habitual Tea Consumption, Percent Body Fat, and Body Fat Distribution. Obesity Research, 11: 1088–1095.

Green Tea Extracts for Building Strength & Size and Losing Weight - Fact or Fraud? Or, Why It is Always Worth Taking a Look at the Data that Is NOT in the Abstract.

Image 1: If the watery green tea is healthy, then a potent extract must be even more healthy, right? This may well be just another instance of "supplementational idiocy"...
I know people love their Green Tea! After all, Camellia sinensis is one of the staples that has not yet been debunked as another hoax of the supplement of pharmaceutical industry - a real healthfood, right!? Well, you will probably be familiar with my skepticisms towards the notion that taking tons of the polyphenols you are "supposed" to get in relatively small quantities from 2-3 cups of green tea in supplemental form must necessarily be a good thing, just because epidemiological data suggests that people who consume green tea (for those who only now this stuff in capped form: Green tea is actually a beverage ;-) in moderation are overall healthier than people who abstain from drinking hot water extracts (=tea) from minimally oxidized (=green) Camellia sinensis leaves.
Did you miss my previous blogposts on the negative effects of high dose green tea extracts on testosterone levels and male fertility? If so, I suggest you read up on that one before adopting the (stupid) more-is-more principal and popping the whole box of green tea caps at once.
Two recent studies do confirm the notion that green tea, even as a supplement, may be a worthwile addition to your dietary (I suggest you drink the tea not use the supplement) or supplemental (if you cannot stand the taste of the brew) regimen. The first one comes from scientists from the University of Warsaw in Poland (Jówoko. 2011). In a small-scale study with 35 subjects, Ewa Jówoko and her co-workers investigated the effect of 1280mg of green tea polyphenols (from a standardized GTE supplement by Olimp Sports) had on the adaptational response to a standardized 4-week strength training regimen (cf. figure 1)
Figure 1: Summary of the study design - participant characteristics, training and supplementation regimen.
If you look at the summary of the study protocol in figure 1, you may notice that there are two factors which contribute to the real-world significance of the study. Firstly, the subjects followed a semi-standardized diet (90g protein; 270g carbs; 104g fat), because they had to eat at the University's cafeteria. Secondly, the training, as well as the supplementation protocol are similar to what a real beginner would be doing in the gym, when he strives to build lean muscle tissue. On the other hand, this also means that we will probably see different (I would bet even less pronounced) results in trained athletes / advanced strength trainees with an optimized diet and a highly sophisticated supplement regimen - so bare that in mind, when you interpret the following results.
Figure 2: Changes in back squat and bench press 1-RM max and repetition max after 4-weeks of strength training with and without GTE supplement (data calculated based on Jówoko. 2011).
It should not surprise you that 4 weeks of training led to increases in squat and bench press performance. The inter-group differences, as well as the increase in maximal repetition number on the bench, however, did not reach statistical significance. In other words, what we are seeing here are effects of the exercise regimen, independent of GTE supplementation.
Figure 3: Changes in blood pH, base excess and lacate subsequent to the initial (Term I) and post (Term II) muscular endurance and max strength tests (data calculated based on Jówoko. 2011).
Similarly, the changes in blood ph, base excess and lacate subsequent to the initial (Term I) and post (Term II) muscular endurance and max strength tests (cf. figure 3), were not statistically different between groups. But if you followed the SuppVersity news lately, you will already know that blood ph is the domain of plain baking soda... so why even bother with green tea in this regards? After all its not even supposed to be a H+ buffer, but a powerful anti-oxidant, so what we should see are decreased rates of oxidation...
Figure 4: Lipid hydroxyperoxides at rest, 5min and 24h after a strength and endurance test before and after the 4-week intervention (data based on Jówoko. 2011).
And in fact, if you take a very close look at the data in figure 3, you may be able to see (I highlighted the bar for you ;-) why the title of the study, "Green tea extract supplementation gives protection against exercise-induced oxidative damage in healthy men", is not totally off: The degree of lipid peroxidation at rest(!) remained constant (within statistical margin) in the GTE group, while it increased by +27% in the non-supplemented group. In view of the non-existent differences in terms of strength or endurance gains between the groups, it is yet very questionable whether this "protective" effect is worth the 16$ (based on the price of the original supplement used in the study that is only available in Europe) it would cost to mimic the supplementation regimen used in the study - especially for someone who does meet the dietary requirements for vitamin E, which is something the study participants with their cafeteria food didn't.

Scientific fraud in the name of marketing

The results of the second study, which investigated the effects of decaffeinated green tea extract (DGE: 2x530mg per day; 800mg catechins per day, total) on body weight changes in 69 overweight subjects (sedentary males, aged 40–69 years, with BMI > 28 and < 38 kg/m²) are similarly dazzling. In their abstract, A. L. Brown and his collegues from Unilever (do I have to say anything else) summarize the results of their 6-week placebo controlled cross-over study as follows (Brown. 2011):
Despite a similar increase in estimated energy intake during intervention period 1, body weight decreased by 0.64 (SD 2.2) kg and increased by 0.53 (SD 1.9) kg in the DGT and placebo groups, respectively (P< 0.025), suggesting a protective effect of green tea catechins on weight gain.
Does not sound earth shattering, but -0.6kg weight loss does at least appear to be more desirable than +0.53kg weight gain. But even if you do not have access to the full-text (as I do) and are thus able to debunk this as a blatant manipulation of the facts (which, by the way, is the result of selecting data from the more favorable 2 weeks of the 6-week study period), the standard-deviations of 2.2kg in the DGE and the 1.9kg in the placebo group should ring an alarm. If you do have the full-text, and take a closer look at table 3 (cf. excerpt)...
Table 1: Excerpt from table 3 in Brown, 2011
... you should start sensing fraud. After all, the table clearly states that the mean body weight loss over the whole study period was -0.038kg for the placebo and -0.327kg for the decaffeinated green tea group. If you now scroll a few pages down and read the last paragraph...
The authors are all employed by Unilever Research & Development, which is a division of Unilever plc, a company which has a significant commercial interest in tea. Unilever plc provided all funding for the study.
... it should become obvious that, even in the case of something as "innocent" as green tea, you better not believe everything you hear and read about "superfood" and respective extracts on the Internet. So, instead of buying decaffeinated capped bullshit from Unilever, you better go to your local grocery store, get yourself some quality green tea and make tea-time a relaxing part of your probably hectic daily routine ;-)

Probiotics + Green Tea - Synergistic Superstack or Sciency Non-Sense? Green Tea Alone Totally Blunts HFD Induced Weight Gain, L. Plantarum Does Not Add to Its Effects

L. plantarum may metabolize green tea phenols, but don't add to their anti-diabesity effects 
Green tea has actually never seized being all the rage and probiotics are the sexy new kid on the block right around the corner of the supplement shops and and science laboratories of the western hemisphere. Against that background I guess that the title of a paper that's been published ahead of print on Monday will probably suffice to catch your interest: "Green tea powder and Lactobacillus plantarum affect gut microbiota, lipid metabolism and inflammation in high-fat fed C57BL/6J mice." (Axling. 2012) - and that despite the fact that "mice are no little men" ;-)

'1 + 1 =4' the synergism of green tea and probiotics could make it possible

I guess, the idea sounds logic: Take one thing that has been proven to ameliorate diet induced obesity, namely green tea, and combine that with another one, of which it appears as if it would also exhibit beneficial effects into an even more potent stack. In fact, the scientists' rationale was yet slightly different:
"The species Lactobacillus plantarum (L. plantarum) has the ability to metabolize phenolic acids  and to split up tannins. The metabolites are presumably more easily absorbed and distributed into the tissues where they can act as antioxidants and electron scavengers. Phenolic compounds can also have antimicrobial effects that may affect the composition of the gut microbiota, in favour of polyphenol-metabolizing components of the microbiota. Also, green tea extracts have been shown to selectively inhibit the growth of pathogenic bacteria while either enhancing or not affecting the growth of beneficial bacteria like lactic acid bacteria. To the best of our knowledge, the impact of green tea powder as a prebiotic compound to promote lactobacilli or other health promoting components of the microbiota has not previously been evaluated."
In other words, the expected benefits of providing both green tea and probiotics in conjunction were (1) an increased bioavailability of the phenols and tannins from the green tea that would be induced by the probiotics and (2) an increase in the probiotics' survival and ability to modify the gut microbiome that would be brought about by the addition of the green tea.

What looks good on paper does not necessarily work out in a complex organism

Figure 1: Ingredient total amount of Flavan-3-ol, Phenolic acid and Flavenol in water and methanol extracts from the green tea leaves that have been used in the study (Axling. 2012); as you can see the total quantity and the ratios of the bioactive ingredients of the extract actually depend on the extraction method.
Apropos green tea, you can see the exact ingredient profile of the green tea supplement that has been used in the study at hand in figure 1. In view of the fact that the C57BL/6J mice received no extract, but simply powdered green tea leaves, it may not be important in this context, but could be relevant for your future purchases that methanol and water extracts differ not only in terms of the total amount of Flavan-3-ol, Phenolic acid and Flavenol they contain, but also with respect to the ratio of the respective phytochemicals. I guess, those of you who have been around in September 2011, already, will remember that I have discussed the impact these ostensibly negligible differences can have more than a year ago in "-20% Reduction in Serum Testosterone by 5 Cups of Green Tea. Endocrine Effects Depend on Catechin Composition". In case you are one of the many newcomers or have simply forgotten (let alone missed ;-) this post, I suggest you go back and read that up, as it may help you get a better understanding of the underlying reasons due to which quality and quantity of the health effects of green tea (supplements) wary from study to study... but let's now get back to the experimental setup of the Axling study.

Green tea alone already blunts HFD induced weight gain

As mentioned before the extracts were simply mixed with the high fat diet, the mice were consuming in the course of the 22 week study period. With the probiotic supplement that was administered with the drinking water (L. plantarum at 1.5% (v/v) or roughly 3 × 10^9 cfu/ml) we are thus dealing with four different groups:
  • Control: High fat chow + no supplement
  • LP: High fat chow + L. plantarum
  • GT: High fat chow + green tea
  • GT + LP: High fat chow + green tea + L. plantarum
If you focus solely on the initially quoted hypothesis about the synergistic effects of green tea + L. plantarum, the actual study outcomes - at least as far as the blood markers in figure 2 are concerned  - are certainly disappointing.
Figure 2: Glucose insulin, fructosamine, cholesterol, triacylglycerol, non-esterified fatty acids and adiponectin levels in the blood of the mice in week 11 and week 22 of the study (Axling. 2012)
It's not like '1+1 would equal 4', but rather like '1 + 1' would just be sufficient to yield '1' not just '0.9' or even less. The in fact, the addition of the probiotics, alone, did very little within the first 11 weeks as far as it's ability to th reduce the diet-induced insulin resistance is concerned and it's addition to the green tea supplement did not improve blood glucose and lipid management, but did in fact diminish the impressive effects the green tea supplement brought about.
Figure 3: Relative change (compared to control) in bacterial diversity and lactobacilli count in response to the supplement regimen (Axling. 2012)
That the probiotic was basically useless, is actually no wonder if you take a closer look at the changes of gut microbiome in figure 3. Aside from an intermediate increase in lactobacilli, it could not boost the amount of these supposedly healthy bacteria in the long term. Rather than that it did induce an allegedly statistically non-significant decrease in the overall diversity (figure 3, left).

Minor differences with quasi-nonexistent real-world effects

At the mRNA level, the addition of L. planatrum counter-acted the anti-obesity effects of green tea, as evidenced by
    Figure 4: Body weight and fat levels of the mice (Axling. 2012)
  • 20% higher fatty acid synthase levels, an enzyme that's responsible for the synthesis of fatty acid
  • the reversal of the statistically significant reduction in acetyl-CoA caroxylase (ACC), an enzyme that's one step ahead of FAS in the cascade of which you could say that it supplies the raw material for fatty acid synthesis, and
  • minimally higher PPAR-gamma levels (responsible for fat storage) 
in the LP + GT vs. GT group, respectively. The net effects on body weight and fat mass, on the other hand were negligible. In essence the bulk of the beneficial effects of the green tea extract remained intact. Moreover, the addition of L. plantarum did have two distinct effects, that were not observed in the GT only group:
    Figure 5: Liver cholesterol and HMG-CoA-R after 11 (top) and 12 (bottom) weeks (Axling. 2012)
  1. a statistically non-significant -20% reduction in the mRNA expression of the inflammatory marker TNF-alpha, and
  2. a whopping and surprising increase in HMG-CoA reductase of +50% and +70% increase in HMG-CoA reductase mRNA compared to the green tee only and the control group, respectively
And while there is nothing in the study that would suggest that there were any beneficial effects from the TNF-alpha reduction, the increase in HMG-CoA reductase is in fact an oddity. After all, despite statistically significant increases in the enzyme that's responsible for the synthesis of cholesterol and the main target of statin drugs (Stancu. 2001), the cholesterol levels dropped by 64% and 39% compared to the control group, in weeks 11 and 22, respectively.

What do these Jerusalem artichokes, agave, bananas, burdock, camas, chicory, coneflower, costus, dandelion, elecampane, garlic,jicama, Leopard's-bane, mugwort, onion, wild yams, yacon and a whole host of other foods have in common? Right! They contain inulin. which has only recently been shown to have the ability to ameliorate body weight gains by up to 50%! Intriguing? Go back to my previous post and learn more about inulin, beta-glucans and their anti-diabesity effects.
Bottom line: A non-statistically significant reduction in TNF-alpha and an elevation of cholesterol synthesis in the presence of lower liver cholesterol levels, which would be suggestive of an increased excretion of cholesterol (thus the increased synthesis to come up for the loss), are in my humble opinion nothing that would render the combination of green tea + L. plantarum superior to the provision of green tea alone. The latter on the other hand, appears to be a great tool to keep the damage of the energy-dense Western diet in check - with no added, let alone synergistic benefit of these particular probiotic.

Maybe the provision of another probiotic or even another strain of L. plantaris would yield at least '1 + 1' results. This would yet be a research question for another study (one I would by the way not be willing to finance ;-) and does not change the fact that the original research hypothesis that there would be a potentiating effect due to the synergism of the two supplements is - even if the scientists don't openly acknowledge that - debunked for L. plantaris DSM 15313 and green tea.

References:
  • Axling U, Olsson C, Xu J, Fernandez C, Larsson S, Ström K, Ahrné S, Holm C, Molin G, Berger K. Green tea powder and Lactobacillus plantarum affect gut microbiota, lipid metabolism and inflammation in high-fat fed C57BL/6J mice. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2012 Nov 26;9(1):105.
  • Stancu C, Sima A. Statins: mechanism of action and effects. J Cell Mol Med. 2001 Oct-Dec;5(4):378-87.

Broccoli No Superfood? Female Orgasm, What's It Good For? Can Piperine Make You Lean? Skinfold Thickness, An Exact Indicator of Insulin Sensitivity? Exercise, Cortisol, BDNF, Fatigue, IGF, Pollution, NOPE, EGCG & More!

Alberto Contador almost certainly wouldn't benefit from the use of a nitrate supplement.
17 seconds and 5 watts! Those are the SuppVersity figures of the week and the performance "increases" which were associated with the consumption of either 0.5 L nitrate-boosting beetroot (BR) juice over a 0.5 L placebo (PLA) drink with blackcurrant juice during time trials and repeated maximal sprints, respectively, in 10 male elite cyclists who are competing at the highest domestic level in a study that was conducted by P. M. Christensen, M. Nyberg and J. Bangsbo from the University of Copenhagen in Denmark (Christensen. 2012).

What does sound as if it could make the difference between victory and defeat, was however statistically non-significant and is further evidence of the fact that things that work in rookies are not necessarily advantageous for highly trained athletes (for nitrates benefits have been reported in untrained or recreationally active individuals by e.g. Bailey or Vanhatalo in 2010, and Lansley in 2011).

As a SuppVersity student the specificity of the ergogenic effects of dietary supplements is yet not really news for you, but I would hope at least some of the following items of today's installment of On Short Notice are...





Next to broccoli blueberries got an "unhonorable mention" in the Kingston University press release, as well.
Is broccoli really no superfood? Usually this is not the place to discuss mainstream popular science "articles", mostly because 99% of them are simple "copy and paste" jobs of press releases. However, since just that, i.e. copying and pasting is what all the major "science website" have been doing with a recently published press release from the Kingston University College in London about their smartest scientists "debunking" the myths about superfoods, I felt impelled to check what all the fuss was actually about.

Let's start with the most important message first: There is no such thing as a "superfood" which will ward off all diseases and make you live forever, as long as you simply eat as much as you can and then, when your tummy is ready to explode, top that off with respective extracts and related dietary supplements. So, in this regard, there is no debating that Dr Jones, Deputy Dean at the University's Faculty of Science, Engineering and Computing, is right: Broccoli is no superfood!  It stands to reason that the same goes for blueberries, acai berries, parsley, rosemary, sage, thyme and the bazillion of other items on an ever-growing list of superfoods, which, by one way or another, continuously fails to to enlist dairy, meat, eggs and all the other "bad" foods of which you could easily argue that they are likewise "superfoods".

Figure 2: Why do we need Caco 2 cells in the petri dish, when we do already have numerous studies on "superfoods" showing the actual rate of appearance of the purportedly active substances in the blood of both healthy human beings (top, cacao catechins; based on Hanlon. 2008) and rodents (bottom; for the purported anti-cancer molecule in sulforaphane from - you guessed it, the "unhonorable mention" from the press release, Broccoli; Mullen. 2009) after oral consumption? So, while the researchers criticism of the hilarious TEAC essays based on which snake oil vendors identify "superfood" after "superfood", may be right, their own approach appears likewise questionable and is by no means without alternatives.
It is also correct that the researchers observed in a previous study (Chohan. 2012) that raw, cooked and cooked + pre-digested parsley, rosemary, sage and thyme exert different (much more pronounced!) anti-inflammatory effects on peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBLs) and those Caco-2 cells, of which Dr. Opara, a colleague of Dr. Jones (likewise correctly) states:
"The Caco-2 is a single layer of cells grown in a laboratory environment that develops the characteristics and functions of the micro-villi, the tiny hair-like projections that aid efficient absorption found mainly in the small intestine.
[...] This allows us to look at what nutrients pass through into the body and could be used to test food supplements, drugs and foodstuffs. We found that while some compounds may have a local effect in the gut itself, in terms of the rest of the body the impact could be negligible." (Kingston. 2012)
What does yet not appear to be either logical or correct is the assumption that the absence of anti-inflammatory effects in the Caco-2 cells implies that systemic benefits can be ruled out. What's downright unwarranted, however is the way in which the press release generalizes these findings in the absence of experimental evidence to all polyphenols and (even more) the potential beneficial effects of whole foods, of which I hope that you, as a regular SuppVersity reader have meanwhile understood that they go well beyond those of the  individual nutrients you can extract and fill into caps, powders, tablets or gels.

Moreover, this approach also neglects potential effects of metabolites of the polyphenols that are formed in the body’s tissues or by the colonic microflora (see Scalbert. 2000; Rechner. 2002), as well as the existing real (not cell-line, petri dish, in vitro) data on the bioavailability of many of the beneficial polyphenols, catechins, flavonoids & co from both, rodent and human studies (Manach. 2005). What on earth would be the benefit then of reviving an early 1980s technique that has been developed by the US cancer research institute, which will never be able to capture the complex interactions that are taking place during the digestion absorption and subsequent metabolism of these molecules?





Exercise, cortisol, stress, IGF-1, BDNF, depression and cognitive impairment Sounds pretty damn complicated, right? If you add one and two together, or, in this case, very recent studies from the University of Hong Kong, the Vrije Universiteit in Brussel (Belgium) and the University of Heidelberg in Germany, the picture that emerges is actually pretty straight forward.

Figure 1: The difference between acute (~7days) and chronic (>21days) stress (in form of exogenous cortisol) does also reflect in the voluntary running distance. The initial motivating / ergogenic effects of cortisol begin to show their ugly face after roughly 3 weeks, though and it is likely that a continuation of the study would have put the rodents in a state similar to what is commonly labeled as "chronic fatigue" (based on Yau. 2012)
In their study, the results of which have just been published in the October issue of Neuroscience, the Chinese researchers report that acute (5-days) exposure to stress (here in the form of daily cortisol injections) exerts beneficial effects on both, the expression of the brain-derived neurotropic factor, as well as corresponding improvements in spatial learning, without altered cell proliferation compared to vehicle treatment. Chronic exposure to cortisol for 28 days in a row, however, decreased circulating and hippocampal BDNF and IGF-1 levels and lead to significant reductions in spatial learning, which were ameliorated, when the rodents had free access to running wheels.

In that it's noteworthy that the distance the animals covered also reflects the diametrically opposed (i.e. empowering vs. draining) effects of stress with initially higher (acute cortisol phase) activity rates and a profound lack of drive towards the end of the 27day study period.

That said, it appears likely that the protective effects of exercise would also begin to wear off with longer periods of chronic stress exposure; a hypothesis, by the way, which should remind you of the last installments of the (Female) Athletes Triad Series and the "vicious circle of overtraining, overdieting and overstressing".

As sarcastic as it may sound (and actually is), China would be the ideal place to study the long- and short-term consequences of air pollution on brain and overall health from childhood to (premature?) death
Now lastly, the Belgian study by Bos et al. adds yet another factor to the BDNF <=> cognition <=> exercise equation that may not be relevant for rodents, but could provide another incentive for you to incorporate regular, yet not overly taxing exercise and physical activity in general into your everyday life: Air pollution!

It has already been established that healthy children and young adults who have been exposed to particle matter from polluted air, show deposits of ultra-fine particles (UFP) in the olfactory bulb neurons. These depositions are accompanied by neuroinflammation, the disruption of the blood–brain barrier (read more about the latter in the SuppVersity Facebook News), and an early accumulation of amyloid β42 and α-synuclein (Calderón-Garcidueñas. 2008 & 20012).

Similar associations between living in a polluted environment with high particle matter concentrations and cognitive decline have been reported by other scientists, as well (Chen and Schwartz. 2009; Ranft. 2009; Suglia. 2008). Now the novel result in Bos et al.'s experiment is that even under those conditions, exercise can increase the otherwise successively suppressed hippocampal expression of BDNF and thus antagonize, or at least ameliarate some of the negative effects of environmental pollution (Bos. 2012)

You have read about the somewhat questionable use of colostrum as a muscle building IGF-1 booster before, but intranasal IGF-1 as a means to treat depression? That's news, right?
To finally come full circle, we do now only have to link these negative effects of air pollution on BDNF, the counter-intuitive circle of stress, cognitive abilities, exercise, the (female) athlete triad, BDNF and air pollution with the high correlation of daily emergency department visits for depression and air pollution Szyskowicz et al. observed in 2009 (Szyszkowicz. 2009) and the recently proposed necessity of adequate IGF-1 levels (as you know those are rock bottom in people suffering from the athlete triad) for BDNF to be able to exert its antidepressive effects, properly, and their suggestion to simply bump those up, with intranasal IGF-I so that you would have a novel, "plausible and promising treatment option of depression" (Paslakis. 2012).





Figure 3: The effects 0.05% piperine had on the fatty acid metabolism and storage of the HFD group was so pronounced that they ended up with a better visceral fat / body weight ratio than their peers in the control group (Jwa. 2012)
Piperine will get you lean This does not simply rhyme, according to a very recent study from the Yonsei University in Seoul, it could also be true (Jwa. 2012). At least in the rodent study Jwa et al. conducted in order to check, whether their promising in-vitro data would translate from the petri dish into the "real world" of a rodent cage, the addtion of 0.05% piperine to the chow of mice that were kept on a hypercaloric high fat diet did not just "markedly decrease LXRα mRNA expression and its lipogenic target genes (i.e., SREBP1c, ChREBPα, FAS, and CD36)" (check out figure 1 for the real world consequences of these epigenetic changes), it also lead to statistically highly significant reductions in plasma insulin and glucose concentrations, while concomitantly increasing the insulin sensitivity of the rodents.
"In addition, piperine downregulated the expression of genes involved in ER stress, including GRP78, activating transcription factor 6, and eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2α, and upregulated GLUT2 translocation from the cytosol to the plasma membrane in the livers of PSD mice." (Jwa. 2012)
In conjunction with the aforementioned epigenetic reprogramming of genes that are involved in the oxidation (upregulated) and formation (downregulated) of lipids, piperine's modulatory effect on the liver X receptor α  (LXRα) expression does thus entail a bi-variate anti obesity / metabolic syndrome effect that counters both of the two hall-mark features of diet-induced metabolic derangements: high blood glucose levels and lipid accumulation.

That I would still like to see human data on the efficacy and safety of this approach is yet not the least related to previous research which suggests that piperine does not just mess around with the cytochrome P450 enzymatic cascade (among others with the enzyme that is also responsible to clear estrogen from the body), which is by the way also the most likely explanation that bioperine "improves the bioavailability" of all sorts of supplements - it simply hampers their metabolism and subsequent excretion (Najar. 2011)





In the minutes up to the orgasm "excitement" spreads in a chain reaction from the genital sensory cortex all over the brain (img whatsonxiamen)
Female orgasm? What's it good for, I mean "biologically" ;-) Probably some of you will have heard the SuppVersity Science News Round Up which broached the issue of anorgasmia (=inability to get an orgasm) in women. Now, while it is pretty much indisputable and straight forward that those women who are affected by this condition are missing out with respect to the literal climax of sexual intercourse, the potential biological consequences are actually less obvious.

In a recent article in The Science in Society Review, Claire Wilson points out that due to the complexity and the fact that it cannot be empirically measured, scientists have always been wondering, why the female orgasm even exists, "as its evolutionary significance is unclear compared with the male orgasm’s explicit connection to reproduction." Among the more prominent theories are among others:
  • the evolutionary / physiological "byproduct" theory
  • the socio(-evolutionary) "cryptic choice" theory and 
  • the (bio-)mechanistic "sperm upsuck" theory
From a mere mechanistic perspective, the latter, i.e. the proposal that the "uterine contractions may cause the cervix to lower into the seminal pool, resolving the obstacles against sperm transport posed by vaginal tenting" certainly appears to be most straight forward, as the actual orgasm is in fact accompanied by powerful striated muscles that surround the vagina producing rhythmic contractions in 0.8s intervals.

Video 1: Meg Ryan aka Sally in When Harry Meets Sally is not just an example of an evolutionary nonsensical orgasm. The popularity of the scene is also testimony of how exciting (all puns intended) the topic.
What's problematic about this theory is that according to Meston et al. some women report having experienced an orgasm when no contractions were observed (Meston. 2004). Moreover,
"non-genital stimulation, dreams, hypnosis, and even mental concentration have all been shown to produce orgasm in certain women, highlighting the critical role of the brain and psychology in female sexual response." (Wilson. 2012)
These observations would also speak against the "byproduct" theory according to which the female orgasm is just an unnecessary remnant or evolutionary "byproduct" of both sexes developing from the same embryological structure, much like how males develop nipples without any gender-specific need for them (Wallen. 2008).

In a way likewise of evolutionary (though more socially than biologically) origin is the "cryptic choice" theory, according which regards the "females’ greater difficulty in achieving orgasm" as an incentive "for taking multiple mates among pre-human ancestors" thus promoting the confusion over their offspring’s biological sires and consequently entrusting their care to the whole of the society (Thornhill. 1996). Others argue that unreliable orgasms may bond females to those males capable of eliciting
"Many 'cryptic choice' theorists furthermore believe that the inconspicuous nature of the female orgasm may aid in selecting which partners’ sperm make it to the egg. For instance, one study found that males’ body symmetry - a trait indicative of stable genes - predicted frequency of orgasm in their female partners." (Wilson. 2012)
"I think women rule the world and that no man has ever done anything that a woman either hasn't allowed him to do or encouraged him to do."
-Bob Dylan
Yet whatever the exact "reason" (if you can even talk about that in this context) of the female orgasm may be, in the end, it is just as Claire Wilson states: "The male sex drive may have played the major role in ensuring that future generations exist, female psychology may have had a major role in deciding what they are like." (Wilson. 2012) Why does that sound to me much like what Bob Dylan once said about the relation between men and women (see box on the right)?




Video 2: TAFE NSW video tutorial on how to measure the sub-scapular skinfold thickness. I guess it is obvious that you can hardly do that without the help of someone else ;-)
What skinfold thickness tells you about insulin resistance in adolescents was at the center of the statistical analysis O.Yaw Addo, Mark A. Pereira and John Hime ran on a subset of the cross-sectional data of 1496 adolescents (age 12.0–17.99y) from the US national health and nutrition examination survey (NHANES) cycles 2001–04.

According to their results, simply measuring the subscapular skinfold thickness (SF technique; see video 2 for how it's done) could provide an as reliable indicator of high risk of being / developing insulin resistance as an expensive X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) based body fat analysis (DTF technique):
"When the top quintiles of predicted HOMA-IR values from the SF and DTF models were
crosstabulated to identify adolescents at highest risk of insulin resistance, the exact agreement (efficiency) exceeded 92% in both sexes. Therefore, both in terms of estimating fatness-related contributions to measured HOMA and also in identifying those at most risk of insulin resistance, subscapular and triceps skinfold thickness compared well with DXA total body fat as estimators of insulin resistance in adolescents." (Addo. 2012)
While statistically non-significant, the skinfold method was even more precise than the DXA scans in view of it's prognostic value as a tool for estimating continuous HOMA IR with adiposity measures.
Compared to the group average, each 1 millimeter increase in subscapular skinfold thickness was associated with a ~1.5% increase in HOMA-IR in boys and girls.
Another interesting side-finding of the study was that after a transient rise during puberty the average HOMA-IR (by the way a measure of long-term blood sugar levels) returned to pre-pubescent in many of the adolescents. The effect was most pronounced in boys and showed a high interaction with the pubertal increase in body height.




NOPE + EGCG for practical diet help instead of overhyped fat burner!? I know that sticking to a diet and simply giving it time to do its magic does not sound half as sexy as taking the blue, red, yellow or whatever pill and shedding 4kg of pure fat within two weeks while you simply continue to eat the same junk that has made you obese in the first place, but the reality is - there is no such pill on the market and the one non-OTC "pill" I could think of that could do just that is toxic, has been used to produce ammunition in the first world war and will literally have you melt away.

NOPE, no idea what that is? The acronym stands for N- oleoyl- phophatidyl-ethanolamine, a naturally occurring phospholipid found in animal (fish) and vegetable (cereals, soy) food that is hydrolyzed into N-oleyl-ethanolamide (NOE) and phosphatidic acid when during the digestive process. The former of these, i.e. NOE has an inhibitory effect on the expression of the endocannbinoid anandamide (N- arachidonyl- ethanolamine). The latter leads to an increase in appetite and, consequently, an intake of food (Fu. 2003). In rats, an intra-peritoneal injection of NOE has been shown to promote an anorexic effect through the activation of several intestinal receptors, which signal the brain center to reduce food intake (Broccalli. 2005).
With N-oleoyl-phophatidyl-ethanolamine which occurs naturally in various animal and vegetable foods, and EGCG, of which I guess that all of you know that it stands for the unpronounceable green tea constiutent epigallocatechin gallate, Chemi Nutra, the manufacturer of PhosphoLean™ promises to have found a natural alternative that will help you by making it easier for you to stick to your diet.

And in fact, if we assume that the  40 mg of NOPE, 35 mg of EGCG and 25 mg of mixed phospholipids each serving of those pills contains, will have the same effect on you, as it had on the 50 healthy, but obese adults (35 female, 15 male; 32.7 ± 13.7 years; BMI = 33.4 ± 6.2; 43.2 ± 7.2% Body Fat), you will feel
  • more relaxed instead of more tense*,
  • happier instead of more depressed,
  • less angry instead of angrier,
  • much more vigorous instead of exhausted*, and
  • less confused instead of jazzed
while you are dieting. Unfortunately, those inter-group differences, which were evaluated by questionnaires were statistically significant only for those parameters I marked with an asterisk (*). Moreover, the purported psychological edge translated directly into a higher compliance, for the first four weeks only. It is therefore not very surprising that the overall changes in body composition in response to 8 weeks of -500 kcal or 30% (maximum of 1000 kcal) reduction in caloric intake and voluntary exercise (subjects were "encouraged to exercise 30 minutes per day, three times per week") were not significantly different.

The fact that there was a trend towards greater improvements in body composition in the placebo group, however, is surprising. So surprising, in fact, that it made me take a look at the funding of the study: "This study was supported by a grant from Chemi Nutra, White Bear Lake, MN" (Mangine. 2012) - must be coincidence that the researchers didn't mention this trend, right?





That's it for today, at least as far as the "On Short Notice" news here at the SuppVersity are concerned. If you want more, I suggest you take a closer look at the SuppVersity Facebook Wall, as well, where you will find (among a lot of other news) infobits on ...
  • a novel Anti-Alzheimer's drug that's based on a substance those of you who have been faithfully listening to Super Human Radio, even before the SuppVersity Science Round Up  was born will be familiar with, methylene blue,
  • even more on BDNF and its role in morphine addiction, including some insightful comments by Kamal Patal, the brain behind the PAINDatabase,
  • Pycnogenol(R) not delivering on all of the promises the producers of respective products are making, but does exert somewhat unexpected protective effects against hexavalent chromium induced spermatotoxicity, and lastly
  • CAD assisted insights into the endocrine side effects of the evil metabolic byproducts of bisphenol A and the association of BPA exposure with thyroid hormone abnormalities in mothers to be and their offspring
... as well as the handful of additional items I am probably going to post in the course of the next 24h before the third installment of the SuppVersity Athletes Triad Series will provide you with novel reading material ;-)


References:
  • Bailey SJ, Winyard P, Vanhatalo A, Blackwell JR, Dimenna FJ, Wilkerson DP, Tarr J, Benjamin N, Jones AM. Dietary nitrate supplementation reduces the O2 cost of low-intensity exercise and enhances tolerance to high-intensity exercise in humans. J Appl Physiol 2009: 107: 1144–1155.
  • Bos I, De Boever P, Int Panis L, Sarre S, Meeusen R. Negative effects of ultrafine particle exposure during forced exercise on the expression of Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor in the hippocampus of rats. Neuroscience. 2012 Oct 25;223:131-9.
  • Broccali GBM, Pistolesi E, Cestaro B: N-oleoylphosphatidylethanolamine reduces food intake and body weight of dietary obese rats ameliorating their antioxidant status. Gazzeta Medica Italiana Archivo Per Le Scienze Mediche 2005, 164:101–107.
  • Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Solt AC, Henríquez-Roldán C, Torres-Jardón R, Nuse B, Herritt L, Villarreal-Calderón R, Osnaya N, Stone I, García R, Brooks DM, González-Maciel A, Reynoso-Robles R, Delgado-Chávez R, Reed W. Long-term air pollution exposure is associated with neuroinflammation, an altered innate immune response, disruption of the blood-brain barrier, ultrafine particulate deposition, and accumulation of amyloid beta-42 and alpha-synuclein in children and young adults. Toxicol Pathol. 2008 Feb;36(2):289-310.
  • Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Kavanaugh M, Block M, D'Angiulli A, Delgado-Chávez R, Torres-Jardón R, González-Maciel A, Reynoso-Robles R, Osnaya N, Villarreal-Calderon R, Guo R, Hua Z, Zhu H, Perry G, Diaz P. Neuroinflammation, hyperphosphorylated tau, diffuse amyloid plaques, and down-regulation of the cellular prion protein in air pollution exposed children and young adults. J Alzheimers Dis. 2012;28(1):93-107.
  • Chen JC, Schwartz J. Neurobehavioral effects of ambient air pollution on cognitive performance in US adults. Neurotoxicology. 2009 Mar;30(2):231-9. Epub 2008 Dec 30.
  • Chohan M, Naughton DP, Jones L, Opara EI. An investigation of the relationship between the anti-inflammatory activity, polyphenolic content, and antioxidant activities of cooked and in vitro digested culinary herbs. Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2012;2012:627843.
  • Christensen PM, Nyberg M, Bangsbo J. Influence of nitrate supplementation on VO(2) kinetics and endurance of elite cyclists. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2012 Oct 1.
  • Fu J, Gaetani S, Oveisi F, Lo Verme J, Serrano A, Rodriguez De Fonseca F, Rosengarth A, Luecke H, Di Giacomo B, Tarzia G, Piomelli D: Oleylethanolamide regulates feeding and body weight through activation of the nuclear receptor PPAR-alpha. Nature 2003, 425:90–93.
  • Hanlon N, Coldham N, Gielbert A, Kuhnert N, Sauer MJ, King LJ, Ioannides C. Absolute bioavailability and dose-dependent pharmacokinetic behaviour of dietary doses of the chemopreventive isothiocyanate sulforaphane in rat. Br J Nutr. 2008 Mar;99(3):559-64.
  • Jwa H, Choi Y, Park UH, Um SJ, Yoon SK, Park T. Piperine, an LXRα antagonist, protects against hepatic steatosis and improves insulin signaling in mice fed a high-fat diet. Biochem Pharmacol. 2012 Sep 20. pii: S0006-2952(12)00640-5.  
  • Kingston University London. Press Release: Researchers challenge super food claims. October 01, 2012 < http://www.kingston.ac.uk/pressoffice/news/461/01-10-2012-researchers-challenge-super-food-claims.html > last accessed on October 03, 2012.
  • Lansley KE, Winyard PG, Fulford J, Vanhatalo A, Bailey SJ, Blackwell JR, Dimenna FJ, Gilchrist M, Benjamin N, Jones AM. Dietary nitrate supplementation reduces the O2 cost of walking and running: a placebo-controlled study. J Appl Physiol 2011: 110: 591–600.
  • Manach C, Williamson G, Morand C, Scalbert A, Rémésy C. Bioavailability and bioefficacy of polyphenols in humans. I. Review of 97 bioavailability studies. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 Jan;81(1 Suppl):230S-242S.
  • Mangine GT, Gonzalez AM, Wells AJ, McCormack WP, Fragala MS, Stout JR, Hoffman JR. The effect of a dietary supplement (N-oleyl-phosphatidyl-ethanolamine and epigallocatechin gallate) on dietary compliance and body fat loss in adults who are overweight: A double-blind, randomized control trial. Lipids Health Dis. 2012 Oct 4;11(1):127.
  • Meston CM, Levin RJ, Sipski ML, Hull EM, Heiman JR (2004). Women’s orgasm. Annual Review of Sex Research, 2004;15:173-257.
  • Mullen W, Borges G, Donovan JL, et al. Milk decreases urinary excretion but not plasma pharmacokinetics of cocoa flavan-3-ol metabolites in humans. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009; 89:1784–1791.
  • Najar IA, Sharma SC, Singh GD, Koul S, Gupta PN, Javed S, Johri RK. Involvement of P-glycoprotein and CYP 3A4 in the enhancement of etoposide bioavailability by a piperine analogue. Chem Biol Interact. 2011 Apr 25;190(2-3):84-90. 
  • Paslakis G, Blum WF, Deuschle M. Intranasal insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) as a plausible future treatment of depression. Med Hypotheses. 2012 Aug;79(2):222-5. Epub 2012 May 23.
  • Ranft U, Schikowski T, Sugiri D, Krutmann J, Krämer U. Long-term exposure to traffic-related particulate matter impairs cognitive function in the elderly. Environ Res. 2009 Nov;109(8):1004-11.
  • Rechner AR, Kuhnle G, Bremner P, Hubbard GP, Moore KP, Rice-Evans CA. The metabolic fate of dietary polyphenols in humans. Free Radic Biol Med. 2002 Jul 15;33(2):220-35.
  • Scalbert A, Williamson G. Dietary intake and bioavailability of polyphenols. J Nutr. 2000 Aug;130(8S Suppl):2073S-85S.
  • Suglia SF, Gryparis A, Wright RO, Schwartz J, Wright RJ. Association of black carbon with cognition among children in a prospective birth cohort study. Am J Epidemiol. 2008 Feb 1;167(3):280-6.
  • Szyszkowicz M, Rowe BH, Colman I. Air pollution and daily emergency department visits for depression. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2009;22(4):355-62.
  • Thornhill R, Gangestad SW. Human female copulatory orgasm: a human adaptation or phylogenetic holdover. Animal Behaviour, 1996;52(4):853–855. 
  • Vanhatalo A, Bailey SJ, Blackwell JR, Dimenna FJ, Pavey TG, Wilkerson DP, Benjamin N, Winyard PG, Jones AM. Acute and chronic effects of dietary nitrate supplementation on blood pressure and the physiological responses to moderate-intensity and incremental exercise. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 2010: 299: R1121–R1131.
  • Wallen K, Lloyd, EA. Clitoral variability compared with penile variability supports nonadaptation of female orgasm. Evolution & Development, 2008;10(1):1-2.
  • Wilson, C. The Mysterious Function of the Female Orgasm. The Triple Helix - A Global Forum For Science In Society. 2012; 17.
  • Yau SY, Lau BW, Zhang ED, Lee JC, Li A, Lee TM, Ching YP, Xu AM, So KF. Effects of voluntary running on plasma levels of neurotrophins, hippocampal cell proliferation and learning and memory in stressed rats. Neuroscience. 2012 Oct 11;222:289-301.

-20% Reduction in Serum Testosterone by 5 Cups of Green Tea. Endocrine Effects Depend on Catechin Composition.

Image 1: Another SuperFood gone bad? More than 2-3 cups of green tea could do more harm than good to health-conscious male tea-consumers.
While I obviously do not know whether you have come in contact with the rumors surrounding the effects of green tea extract (GTE) on the male reproductive system, I assume that many of you (despite the fact that this is obviously not necessary if you read the SuppVersity news everyday ;-) will be active on one of the various health and fitness related bulletin-boards, where - and here I am certain - the issue of reduced testosterone levels from GTE consumption has certainly been addressed at some point. According to a recent study, published in the September issue Indian Journal of Experimental Biology (Chandra. 2011), your favorite anti-oxidant fat burner Camellia sinensis L., in other words, green tea, has in fact to be counted among those therapeutic agents that despite having been used since ancient times, are not as safe as many customers want to believe.
Figure 1: Molecular structure of the four major green tea catechins (from Kao. 2000)
Did you know that a study from the year 2000 by Kao et al. (Kao. 2000) established a differential effect of green tea catechins (cf. fig. 1) on serum testosterone levels of Sprague Dawley (SD), as well as lean (LZ) and obese Zucker (OZ) rats? While EGCG (and ECG) potently suppressed serum testosterone levels (-69% in SD; -72% in LZ; -69% in OZ), the administration of isolated Epicatechin (EC) and Epigallocatechin (EGC) at a dose of 85 mg/kg BW (human equivalent: 14mg/kg) resulted in a statistically significant increase in testosterone levels of +24% (EC) and +31%, respectively.

In view of the fact that a 2006 analysis of 19 commercially available green tea extracts (Seeram. 2006) revealed that major differences in terms of total catechin content and ratios, the individual effect of "your" green tea caps may be either beneficial or detrimental to your testosterone levels depending on the ratio of (EC+EGC)/(ECG+EGCG) - where a higher amount of the pro-testostosterone fraction, i.e. EC + EGC would obviously be preferable.
According to the results of Amar K. Chandra and his colleagues from Calcutta and West Bengal, green tea belongs to the ranks of plants, such as Neem (Azadirachta indica), Tulsi (Ocimum sanctum) and other agents previously mentioned here at the SuppVersity, all of which have conclusively been shown to hamper reproductive functions and that despite the fact that the neuroprotective, cytotoxic and antioxidant effects of Camellia sinensis L. have been well-established.
Figure 2: Reduction in sperm count after 26 days of consumption of green tea equivalent to 5, 10 or 20 cups of green tea (data calculated based on Chandra. 2011)
As the data in figure 2 goes to show, in the course of 26 days, even the consumption of the equivalent of 5 cups of green tea lead to a statistically significant -2% reduction in sperm count in the gonads of the adult rats who were orally administered with standardized doses green tea after it had been steeped for 15 minutes in 100ml of boiling water, then cooled to room temperature and combined with a second infusion from the same 2.5g of green tea, the catechin composition of which I plotted in figure 3.

Figure 3: Catechin composition and pro- to anti-testosterone ratio of the green tea that was used in the study (Chandra. 2011)
The catechin composition of the specific green tea that was used in the study (the green tea came from the Institute of Himilayan Bioresource Technology) is, as you know from my elaborations on the Kao study in the red "Did you know"-box, probably the determining factor for its effect on the rats testosterone levels. Judged by what I called the pro- to anti-testosterone ratio of 0.47, i.e. the ratio of Epicatechin (EC) + Epigallocatechin (EGC), which increased testosterone in the Kao study, to Epicatechin-3-Gallate (ECG) + Epigallocatechin-3-Gallate (EGCG), which decreased testosterone in the Kao study, the overall effect of the green tea on the testosterone levels of the rats should be negative - and in fact, what Chandra et al. found was a decrease in serum testosterone levels in the "GTE treated groups of animals as compared to their respective control", of which the scientists speculate that it was "due to the impaired synthesis of testosterone."
Figure 4: Reduction in serum testosterone after 26 days of consumption of green tea equivalent to 5, 10 or 20 cups of green tea (data calculated based on Chandra. 2011)
These results also shed a different light on the recently reported "anti-obesity" effect of green tea. After all, the lack of androgens could be an alternative explanation for the GTE-induced 7-20% reduction in body weight Pea et al. observed in their 2011 rodent study and the reduced weight gain (-10% and -14% in the 10 and 20 cup groups, respectively) observed in the study at hand.

Weight loss or lack of weight gain, reduced testosterone, increased LH and all the other negative side effects aside, I would be surprised if low to moderate green tea consumption (2-3cups max.) would actually reduce your chance of conception, hamper your gains in the gym or even induce testicular failure. After all, neither Japan nor China or the other Asian Countries, the inhabitants of which have been having their well-deserved daily cup of (green-)tea for centuries, now, seem to have rampant fertility issues ;-)