.

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

PUFA Increases Postprandial Thermogenesis in Healthy Premenopausal Women & Beyond - 14% Increase Over MUFA & SFA Sounds Huge, But Does it Matter?

Is there something to the good vs. bad fat shenanigan, after all?
Only recently scientists from the Texas Tech University report that a PUFA-rich high-fat meal led to a greater diet-induced thermogenesis in normal-weight premenopausal women compared with SFA- or MUFA-rich high-fat meals.

Reason enough to take a closer look at this and previous studies investigating the diet-induced thermogenic effects of PUFA-, MUFA- and SFA-rich meals and to conduct a reality check wrt to the question whether these differences actually matter - I mean, will you get and stay lean by upping your PUFA intake? Let's take a look!
You can learn more about fat at the SuppVersity

Are Men Fat- & Women Sugar-Cravers?

Fat, not Fructose Cons. Increased in the US
Adding Fats to Carbs Does not Reduce Insulin

The Forgotten Pro-Insulinogenic Effects of SFAs

Margarine Not Butter Incr. EU Waists

Low Fat to Blame for Low Vitamin D Epidemic?
In the initially mentioned study, Hui C. Clevenger, Amanda L. Kozimor, Chad M. Paton and Jamie A. Cooper explored the effect of three HF meals enriched with different fatty acids (MUFAs, PUFAs or SFAs) on metabolism in premenopausal women of normal weight. In that, the metabolic parameters of interest included postprandial energy expenditure (EE), which is then used to calculate DIT, and substrate oxidation, which included respiratory exchange ratio (RER), fat oxidation and carbohydrate (CHO) oxidation.

Based on previous research in men of normal weight, the Texas Tech researchers hypothesized that the diet induced thermogenesis (DIT) and fat oxidation would be the highest after the PUFA- and MUFA-rich meals and lowest after the SFA-rich meal in premenopausal women - a result of which you already know that it was only partly confirmed.
Figure 1: Diet-induced thermogenesis and respiratory exchange rate (higher RER = lower fatty acid oxidation vs. higher CHO oxidation) in the 5h after the test meal (Clevenger. 2014)
The data in Figure 1 does after all tell you that the expected MUFA-induced increase in diet-induced thermogenesis did not occur. PUFAs, on the other hand did the job, Clevenger et al. expected them to do. They increased the DIT by an ostensibly whopping 14% over the DIT the scientists observed in response to the ingestion of the high MUFA and SFA liquid meals that had been prepared with the same base of 8 fl oz (237 ml) of chocolate Ensure(R) with soy lecithin and Nesquik (R, but contained different additional dietary fatty acids added depending on the treatment condition:
  • Table 1: Liquid meal nutrient composition
    breakdown (Clevenger. 2014).
    The PUFA-rich meal was ‘base’ plus sunflower oil and flaxseed oil, with 42% of total energy coming from PUFA.
     
  • The MUFA-rich meal was ‘base’ plus canola oil and extra virgin olive oil, with 42% of total energy coming from MUFA.

  • Finally, the SFA-rich meal was ‘base’ plus butter, coconut oil and palm oil, with 40% of total energy coming from SFA. 
As the data in Table 1 indicates, the nutrient profiles didn't differ much. The fatty acid composition, on the other hand did, with the SFA meal being the only one with measurable amounts of Butyric, Caprioc, Caprylic, Capric, Lauric, Myristic and Hepatedic acid. Fatty acids of which previous research indicate that they induces an obesity-linked proinflammatory gene expression profile in adipose tissue of subjects at risk of metabolic syndrome (van Dijk. 2009).

High MUFA diets, on the other hand, have been shown to potentiate the effects of weight loss in obese NIDDM patients (Low. 1996). They are the major group of fatty acids in the one oil, everyone appears to agree that it's health (Olive oil). And last but not least, even the allegedly unhealthy omega-6s have been shown in randomized controlled to reduce liver fat and modestly improve metabolic status, without weight loss, when compared to high saturated fat diets (Bjermo. 2012).

All of these effects / this evidence could potentially be more important than the increase postprandial thermogenesis in the study at hand - so the ultimate question is: Does DIT even matter?
Now, does this increase in DIT matter? Westerterpet et al. who found a negative correlation between body fat levels and the diet induced thermogenesis in their 2008 study (Westerterpet al. 2008), certainly believe it matters. If we look at the total extra diet-induced energy expenditure in 5h after the test-meal in the study at hand, on the other hand, I cannot but ask myself, whether those 1.4kcal can actually make a difference.

I am not sure what you think, but considering the fact that you can burn those 1.4 extra calories in less than one minute in the gym, it's hard to believe that the increased thermogenesis alone warrants the layman's conclusion that the study at hand would provide evidence for the superiority ot PUFAs over MUFAs and saturated fats ... what do you think?
References:
  • Bjermo, Helena, et al. "Effects of n− 6 PUFAs compared with SFAs on liver fat, lipoproteins, and inflammation in abdominal obesity: a randomized controlled trial." The American journal of clinical nutrition 95.5 (2012): 1003-1012.
  • Clevenger, Hui C., et al. "Acute effect of dietary fatty acid composition on postprandial metabolism in women." Experimental physiology (2014): expphysiol-2013.
  • Westerterp, Klaas R., et al. "Dietary fat oxidation as a function of body fat." The American journal of clinical nutrition 87.1 (2008): 132-135.

Fat Burners Don't Work in the Obese!? BAT Activity Almost Zero, Even after the Ingestion of ~290mg Ephedrine!

Do thermogenic fat burners only work if you already look like this? I mean, what would be the sure, then and why did the ECA stack work for overweight people, as well?
I don't know if you have ever thought about the problems mostly involuntarily obese individuals are facing in their everyday lives!? Even if you discard the constant bullying and the subliminal messages they receive from their peers, not fitting into a regular seat in an airplane certainly is more than just an embarrassment. Now what would you say, if I told you that they are discriminated against even, when they shop at their local GNC, or whichever other supplement vendor they may be using? And I am not talking about the lean guys and girls on the labels of the supplements, here! No, I am referring to a discrimination that takes place on a more fundamental level and it happens right in front of the shelf with every overweight person's favorite supplements: The so-called fat burners!

Ok, now that I got everyone's attention, I guess its about time to break the news: Fat burners don't burn fat!

If this does not happen to be your first visit, here, at the SuppVersity you may now be asking yourself how an (unfortunately still not so) common wisdom like this could make it into the news... right? Well, the answer is simple: In addition to the fact that the active fat burning effects of almost all thermogenics are negligible, so that they can - if anything - support your nutritional weight loss efforts by making it easier for you to stick to your diet and training regimen, a recent study by Carey et al. suggests that the minimal effects they do actually have diminish with each pound of superfluous body fat you are carrying around (Carey. 2012).

"Hold on! 2.5mg/kg ephedrine? That's 170mg and 287.5mg ephedrine. That's madness!" Usually I would say "yeah, you are right", but based on previous studies (Nedergaard . 2011), Carey et al. knew that 1.0mg/kg did not elicit any BAT activity, despite significant physiological adrenergic responses (blood pressure and heart rate; cf. Astrup. 1985a,b). I still don't have to tell you not to "try that at home" - and this is more than just a "parenteral advisory" ;-)
In a randomized, double-blinded, crossover trial, the Australian researchers administered 2.5 mg/kg of ephedrine to nine lean (BMI 22±1 kg/m²) and nine obese (BMI 36±1 kg/m²) young men and measured the thermogenic response of their "fat burning" brown adipose tissue (note: BAT burns glucose as well and the activity of the latter is usually measured by [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose, which can be detected via PET-CT imaging).
Figure 1: PET-CT scan of lean (left) and obese (right) individual (Carey. 2012)
As the images in figure 1 clearly shows the actual BAT activity (located in the neck, where humans carry almost all their BAT; cf. Zingaretti. 2009), which has long been hailed as the underlying reason of the real-world effects the administration of ephedrine HCL, ephedra or mua huang, was far from earth-shaking and by no means comparable to what you would expect based on the almost legendary status of ephedrine as "the most potent thermogenic" that ever hit the market.

Keep in mind: There are also inter-individual differences in the amount of BAT people have. Still the differences between lean and obese were so pronounced that you can hardly argue that the results of the study were mere coincidence.

What is even more striking than the overall magnitude of BAT activity the scientists observed is however that the latterw was more or less completely absent in the obese individuals -- and that despite the fact that I am honestly wondering none of them collapsed after ingesting his 287mg of ephedrine (remember the dosages were scaled according to body weight!). When you think about it, the scientists subsequent conclusion that they have...
"[...] demonstrated for the first time that BAT can be activated in the majority of lean, but not in obese humans with a single dose of ephedrine" (Carey. 2012)
could in fact have far reaching consequences that are not simply restricted to the use of respective dietary supplements, but extend into the realms of the development of future anti-obesity drugs and the use and usefulness of "alternative" obesity "treatments", such as cold exposure, as well.The latter for example may be a more potent activator of BAT activity than ephedrine, but it's falling short, when it comes to the centrally mediated effects, of which it is now becoming increasingly clear that they and not the insignificant BAT activity must be responsible for the indisputable real-world weight loss effects, both, lean and overweight individuals, have seen in the past, when they consumed much lower doses of ephedrine, than the subjects in the study at hand.
Figure 2: BAT activity, nor-adrenaline response, changes in systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure in response to 2.5mg/kg body weight ephedrine in lean and obese subjects (data based on Carey. 2012)
If we also take into account that ephedrine is probably still one the most potent inducers of BAT activity among the (formerly) OTC thermogenics and most currently available (and recently banned) ingredients are nothing but central nervous system stimulants, the scientists' remark that their "data highlight[s] the poor responsiveness of BAT to systemic adrenergic stimulation compared with that of the cardiovascular system", should actually make it pretty obvious why so many of the purported (and in some cases even factual) thermogenics don't deliver the "fat burning" results their consumers are expecting: At the moment they start to work, the cardiovascular side-effects are already in the "danger zone", so that anything but a negligible increase in thermogeneisis is rare in the lean and - as the study at hand would suggest - probably totally absent in the average obese diet pill junkie.

Thermogenics won't work for you, but you can work with them... not infinitely, though! 

You can't light the candle from both sides and still expect it to last forever. Stims and meditation are like Jing and Jang, and you got to master them both (read more about how meditation can increase telomere length by 50%).
That many of these products do still work and that they do so even in the obese, as long as they are willing to accept that these products are adjuvants to and not replacements for a sound nutrition and exercise regimen, is thus probably more of a result of their ability to keep you training and dieting longer and harder, than due to any real "thermogenenic" effect. That said, I guess, I don't have to tell you that you cannot light the candle from both sides and expect to last it forever, do I?

Oh, I see, ... I would first have to to tell you what that's supposed to mean, right?! Well, basically it means that unless you want to make the acquaintance of "adrenal fatigue", "central fatigue syndrome" and the "athlete's triad", you better restrict the use of respective products to short time periods of max. 4-6 weeks and make sure not to (ab-)use them to simply ignore the physical necessity of rest and recovery! Believe it, or not, both of them are equally, if not more important, when you are trying to get ripped, as they are, when you are trying to get buffed.

References:
  • Astrup A, Lundsgaard C, Madsen J, Christensen NJ. En-hanced thermogenic responsiveness during chronic ephedrine treatment in man. Am J Clin Nutr. 1985a; 42:83–94
  • Astrup A, Bulow J, Madsen J, Christensen NJ. Contribution of BAT and skeletal muscle to thermogenesis induced by ephedrine in man. Am J Physiol. 1985b; 248:E507–E515
  • Carey AL, Formosa MF, Van Every B, Bertovic D, Eikelis N, Lambert GW, Kalff V, Duffy SJ, Cherk MH, Kingwell BA. Ephedrine activates brown adipose tissue in lean but not obese humans. Diabetologia. 2012 Oct 13.
  • Nedergaard J, Bengtsson T, Cannon B. New powers of brown fat: fighting the metabolic syndrome. Cell Metab. 2011 Mar 2;13(3):238-40.
  • Vosselman MJ, van der Lans AA, Brans B, Wierts R, van Baak MA, Schrauwen P, Lichtenbelt WD. Systemic β-Adrenergic Stimulation of Thermogenesis Is Not Accompanied by Brown Adipose Tissue Activity in Humans. Diabetes. 2012 Aug 7.
  • Zingaretti MC, Crosta F, Vitali A et al. The presence of UCP1 demonstrates that metabolically active adipose tissue in the neck of adult humans truly represents brown adipose tissue. FASEB J, 2009; 23:3113–3120.

Sweet, But Not Innocent!? The Fattening Effects of the Non - Nutritive Sweeteners Erythritol & Aspartame Are On Par With Equally Sweet Sugar Water

I just hope that today's SuppVersity article is not going to cause scenes like this, because when it all said and done it may be less likely, but not impossible that it is (for whatever vexed reason) still aspartame that caused the negative effects observed in the study at hand.
It is one of the recurring motifs here at the SuppVersisty and at the same time one of the most popular issues of dispute in the health and fitness community: The Obesogenic Effects of Artificial Sweeteners. Or, in plain English, the question  

"Can I use Sucralose, Aspartame and Acesulfam-K without taking the risk of getting fatter - not leaner, as I actually intended?"

For all three of the explicitly mentioned agents human studies clearly suggest that the answer is "Yes, you can!" And I will now dare saying that the of the most recent study from the Oita University in Japan are not going to change that - as long as you use them instead of carbs in your diet the said zero-calorie sweetener are going to help not block weight loss.

So why did the mice in the Mitsutomi study get obese then?

By anticipating the most important conclusion, I have made things easy for us, after all the only questions we still have to answer are:
  • Why did the mice in the Mitsutomi study get obese?
  • Is it possible that this is an erythritol-specific effect?
It would appear as it it could not be all too difficult to answer the first question. It was after all part of the research interests of the Japanese scientists, so that you would expect it to be answered in the discussion of their result. Well, let's see then, ...
Exactly what the energy drinks promise, the sugar water got the rats "on sucrose" going: They were >40% more active than their peers - without caffeine as you may notice (Mitsotomi. 2013)
"Compared with sucrose supplementation, NNS supplementation decreased the serum glucose level. Interestingly, compared with the control treatment, NNS supplementation increased the serum insulin level in mice with DIO. In addition, NNS administration influenced glucose tolerance compared to controls.

These observations suggest that NNS supplementation induced insulin resistance by increase of tissue triglyceride, although some NNSs are used to control hyperglycemia.

NNS supplementation increased the WAT leptin level in DIO mice in the present study.

It is possible that the high leptin level was related to body adiposity. Indeed, NNS administration increased the weight of epididymal fat. Thus, it is possible that the high leptin level was related to the influence on body adiposity." (Mitsotomi. 2013)
No, I don't see an explanation, rather a concise summary of the results, that tells us that the addition of plain sugar (33%)  to the drinking water did - as the scientists already expected - lead to a decrease in food intake and an increase in obesity and its nasty unhealthy side effects.
Figure 1: Differences in food intake & body composition of mice with 33% sucrose and 4% erythritol + aspartame in the drinking water (left) expressed relative to control w/ plain water, histology of lover (top) and white adipose tissue (WAT, bottom) of mice with regular (control) and sucrose respectively NNS drinking water (Mitsotomi. 2013)
Much to their own surprise, Mitsotomi et al. did also observe that the group that received the "non-nutritive sweeteners" as a 4% solution (99% of which were erythritol and 1% was aspartame) in their drinking water got exactly as fat (see Figure 1), had a slightly less pronounced increase in adipocyte size, and experienced a similar fatty acid deposition in the liver (NAFLD). And as if that had not been bad enough, there were also pathological changes in the "fat burning brown adipose tissue" (BAT) of the rodents in the NNS group - a physiological deterioration, Mitsotomi et al. observed exclusively in the erythritol + aspartame goup.
Figure 2: Leptin resistance (in WAT) and the major downregulation in UCP-1 (in BAT; both left) are candidates of which the researchers believe that they were responsible for the visible defect (right) in the BAT architecture (Mitsotomi. 2013)
Let's be honest, if you take another look at the BAT histology in Figure 2 (right) even you as a non-expert will see that there is a major difference between the meshed BAT in the rodents on the control diet and the messy BAT of the NNS group, compared to which the brown fat cells of the sugar guzzlers still look very healthy.

Remember: All this mess happened in the absence of an increase in calorie intake

Just to make this clear: This is not the first study to show that artificial sweeteners can have obesogenic effects in rodent models. In contrast to Naismith et al. (1995) and Blundell & Hill (1986) who observed a "pradoxical effects" of  artificial sweeteners on the appetite of their lab rodents, the rats in the study at hand did not overeat, though! They also moved about as much as their peers in the control group and still got fat and sick.

Want to change your "Fat-o-type"? Work out! | read more
In other words, the weight gain the Japanese researchers recorded was neither a result of a mismatch between energy intake and expenditure nor the consequence of a promotional effect of artificial sweeteners on the "sweet tooth" of the rodents. Rather than that it was either brought about or accompanied and promoted by the impairment of the thermogenic capacity of the brown adipose tissue, of which you can argue, based on histologies in Figure 2 that the brown adipose tissue of the furry "subjects" of this study was not just functionally, but also structurally compromised by the ingestion of the non-nutritive sweeteners.

The defective brown adipose tissue (BAT) and the correspondingly reduced UCP 1 expression (UCP increases mitochondrial uncoupling in BAT and burns off energy to increase the body temperature), led to a significant reduction in oxygen consumption. With the latter being a direct marker of fatty acid oxidation the it is difficult to say which came first, the defect in BAT or the onset of obesity. What we can say for sure, though, is that the defective BAT had its share in the rapid weight gain and the corresponding metabolic deterioration.

This could be an erythritol specific effect

Despite the fact that Mitsotomi et al. did not address the potential influence the type of artificial sweetener they used, it is not unlikely that the use of erythritol, of which I have seen dozens of toxicity studies, but no long(er) term feeding studies in a potentially obesogenic diet scenario, could explain the unexpected study outcome. So: "Is this an erythritol specific effect?"

An advantage of erythritol is that it has almost the same sweetness profile as sugar (sucrose), but is 30-40% less sweet (de Cock. 2012)
Without further studies, it is obviously not possible to answer this question, it does however not appear to be unlikely that it were the 99% of erythritol in the commercial erythritol + aspartam mixture the researchers used in their study that's to blame for the obesogenic effects. If this was a general NNS effect, a similar impairment of the brown adipose tissue and corresponding increases in body, muscle and liver fat should after all have been observed in previous studies, already. To my knowledge these studies do not exist - specifically not for aspartame. Without speculating about unpredictable interactions within the two we are thus left with erythritol as out only culprit.

While erythritol has only 60% to 70% of the sweetness of sucrose (comparing 10% solutions in water; this means you need much more of it to achieve a similar sweetness) it has an almost identical sweetness profile (no "off" tastes; cf. de Cock. 2012). This is not the only reason both scientists and the food industry are fond of the low-calorie sweetener. It's rather the combination of its gut- and tooth-friendliness that makes it such a valuable addition to everything sweet. So, despite the fact that it does share the the anti-caries effects with sugar alcohols like xylitol, it is so easy on the gut that its use is not restricted to chewing gums and other "food" items that need only marginal amounts of sweeteners to achieve the desired degree of sweetness. If you want to sweeten larger amounts of foods / beverages, erythritol is thus the sugar alcohol of choice
There is evidence that suggests aspartame reduces insulin - at least during workouts | learn more
Why don't you suspect aspartame? The reason that I am scrutinizing erythritol and not aspartame is simple. Despite or rather because of all the hoopla around potential toxic effects of aspartame it is one of the best researched artificial sweeteners and evidence for obesogenic effects in the absence of increases in food intake are simply non-existent. It may thus make this article more popular among the high number of aspartame haters out there, but it would not help us understand the experimental results,if I started lamenting about how Coke and Pepsi are trying to kill us.
If you take a peak at the Wikipedia article and many scientific papers, you will learn that erythritol has been shown to be mostly (90%) absorbed before the chyme enters the colon (Bernt. 1996). The non-negligible rest of the erythritol  (10%), on the other hand, is said to pass through the short and long intestine, where it is generally believed not to fermented by the gut bacteria (Arrigoni. 2005).

The cholesterol increase scientists observed in response to a high sucralose diet is another of the many yet not fully understood side effects of artifical sweeteners | learn more
In view of a more recent study by Beards et al. (2010) it is however more than questionable that this assumption for which researchers usually cite the in vitro results Arrigoni et al. presented in a 2005 paper is accurate.

Beards and her colleagues from the University of Reading in the UK were after all able to show that erythritol is not simply excreted undigested. Rather than that it is fermented and leads to changes in the bacterial composition and a 6.25x increase in acetate production.

In view of the beneficial effects of SFCA (acetate, propionate and butyrate) on the production of satiety hormones this certainly appears to be a good thing. From studies by Patil et al. we do however know that chronically high SCFA levels and decreased relative bacteroides levels are characteristic of features of human obesity (Patil. 2012; see Angelakis. 2012, as well).

If we include the comparatively short timespan (24h) in the course of which the said changes in the bacterial composition and acetate production in the Beards study occured and assume that this may, after days of constant erythritol exposure have destabilized the previous "ecosystem" in the gut, it does not appear too far fetched to assume that the rodents may have suffered from weight gain and all sorts of metabolic deterioration as a consequence of the potential lactobacilli + Atopobium overgrowth in response to the erythritol in their drinking water.

By now it should no longer appear totally odd to assume that neither artificial sweeteners per se, nor the "bad bad" aspartame are to blame for the "fat effects" the researchers observed in the study at hand, right? I mean, of all the three short chain fatty acids, butyrate, acetate and propionate, acetate is the one with the weakest antiobesogenic effects (Lin. 2012) and in view of the fact that it is preferentially used as a substrate for de novo lipogenesis (=deposition of fat) in colonocytes, hepatocytes and adipocytes (Samuel. 2008), both the fatty liver and the 172% increase in body fat could be explained by the constant influx of acetate from a dysbiotic gut - right?
Suggested Read + Podcast: "he Pro-Insulinogenic Effect of Artificial Sweeteners + Mechanisms & Consequences" | read more
Reason to be afraid - yes or no?"It could be possible...", these are the four little words that would have to go before each and every of the sentences in this conclusion. It could be possible that the interaction of erythritol with the gut microbiome of the rodents drove the accumulation of lipids in the liver, which would in turn have lead to the development of insulin and leptin resistance and could have compromised the function of the "fat burning brown adipose tissue" of our furry friends. The latter could have sped up the weight gain and may eventually explain why the mice in the "non-nutritive sweetener" group were by no means better off than their similarly obese peers in the sucrose group.

Despite the fact that it could also be possible that similar negative effects on the accumulation of liver and whole body fat would be observed in humans, the failure of the brown adipose tissue wouldn't be much of a problem for us, a species that has long lost most of its brown fat stores (learn more). Against that background and in view of the fact that I'd hope that no one of you follows a 60% fat, 20% carbohydrate diet and tries to sooth his / her sweet tooth with 2-3l of erythritol + aspartame sweetened water per day, I'd suggest you refrain from freaking out until we do have more compelling evidence that the stress hormones you will be producing are not more harmful than the few mg of sugar alcohols in your protein bars.
References:
  • Angelakis E, Armougom F, Million M, Raoult D. The relationship between gut microbiota and weight gain in humans. Future Microbiol. 2012 Jan;7(1):91-109.
  • Arrigoni E, Brouns F, Amadò R. Human gut microbiota does not ferment erythritol. Br J Nutr. 2005 Nov;94(5):643-6. 
  • Beards E, Tuohy K, Gibson G. Bacterial, SCFA and gas profiles of a range of food ingredients following in vitro fermentation by human colonic microbiota. Anaerobe. 2010 Aug;16(4):420-5.
  • Bernt WO, Borzelleca JF, Flamm G, Munro IC. Erythritol: a review of biological and toxicological studies. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 1996 Oct;24(2 Pt 2):S191-7. Review.
  • Blundell JE, Hill AJ. Paradoxical effects of an intense sweetener (aspartame) on appetite. Lancet 1986;1(8489):1092–3.
  • de Cock P. Erythritol. In "Sweeteners and Sugar Alternatives in Food Technology". 2nd edition. Ed. O'Donnell & Kearsley. Wiley. 2012.
  • Lin HV, Frassetto A, Kowalik EJ Jr, Nawrocki AR, Lu MM, Kosinski JR, Hubert JA, Szeto D, Yao X, Forrest G, Marsh DJ. Butyrate and propionate protect against diet-induced obesity and regulate gut hormones via free fatty acid receptor 3-independent mechanisms. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35240. 
  • Mitsutomi K et al. Effects of a nonnutritive sweetener on body adiposity and energy metabolism in mice with diet-induced obesity. Metabolism. Oct. 2013 [ahead of print]
  • Naismith DJ, Rhodes C. Adjustment in energy intake following the covert removal of sugar from the diet. J Hum Nutr Diet 1995;8:167–75.  
  • Patil DP, Dhotre DP, Chavan SG, Sultan A, Jain DS, Lanjekar VB, Gangawani J, Shah PS, Todkar JS, Shah S, Ranade DR, Patole MS, Shouche YS. Molecular analysis of gut microbiota in obesity among Indian individuals. J Biosci. 2012 Sep;37(4):647-57.
  • Samuel BS, Shaito A, Motoike T, Rey FE, Backhed F, Manchester JK, Hammer RE, Williams SC, Crowley J, Yanagisawa M, Gordon JI. Effects of the gut microbiota on host adiposity are modulated by the short-chain fatty-acid binding G protein-coupled receptor, Gpr41. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Oct 28;105(43):16767-72.
  • Sell H, Deshaies Y, Richard D. The brown adipocyte: update on its metabolic role. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 2004;36: 2098–104.

MCT + Chili Make a Pretty HOT Pair: 50% Increase in Diet Induced Thermogenesis in Well-Controlled Human Trial

If you like chili oil, go for it, otherwise perform the reality check before ruining your taste-buds.
While the word "thermogenic" still carries much weight in the world of the average fitness maniac, SuppVersity readers like yourself should know better than to go crazy over rodent study #1021412 showing "potent thermogenic effects" when an extract from an exotic herb in Dr. Oz garden was administered once in an equivalent dosage that would require you to ingest the whole package of the corresponding "brand new, revolutionary" fat burner that's marketed by the said study.

Human study + no exotic herbs - so does it work?

Well with the study at hand, things are somewhat different. Firstly, the experiment Miriam E. Clegg, Mana Golsorkhi and C. Jeya Henry conducted was done with human, not rodent "subjects". Secondly, the "supplements" they used were no exotic herbs from Dr. Oz Garden or whatever remote region in the Himalaya they were simple MCT oil & Chilis - 20g of 30g of a hot chilli spice blend (Gourmet garden, Northampton, UK), to be precise the former and 30g of. And thirdly, the a +50% increase in diet induced thermogensis could actually make a difference - in the very long term and if you are using it on top of a energy restricted diet.
Figure 1: Macronutrient composition of the iso-caloric test meals; *due to the lower energy density of long-chain triglycerides, only 18.4 g of sunflower oil was used to match the energy content of the meals (Clegg. 2013)
In a randomized controlled fashion, the subjects, 7 healthy volunteers (6f 1m; 25.7±3.6 year;
1.69±0.09 m; 62.5±7.5 kg) who had reported fasted to the lag in the morning of the testing days, consumed a standardized English breakfast consisting of  consisting of an egg omelet, tomato, mushroom, sausage, bacon, toast and some "good old" orange juice.
Suggested read: "Capsaicin - 2.56mg to Keep Your Metabolism Running on a Diet. Cold Thermogenesis - 5°C for 6kcal/h. Mobile Phones - 0.853 W/kg Pulsed EMR to Mess Up Neuro-transmitters" | read more
"The cooked breakfast was prepared with chilli and MCT oil, chilli and sunflower oil, bell pepper and sunflower or bell pepper and MCT oil added to the omelet.

Glucose was added to chopped bell pepper to give it a similar macronutrient and energy cost as the chilli mix. The chilli mix consisted of 60 % chilli (cayenne, habanero). The capsaicin content of the chilli blend was estimated about 2,000 ppm capsaicin (based on information provided by the manufacturers). According to this, the 30 g chilli blend added to breakfast meal was comparable to the amount of chilli used (30 g) in earlier studies to assess the effect of chilli on metabolic parameters." (Clegg. 2013)
The resting metabolic rate of the subjects had been deterimned before breakfast, while the diet induced thermogenesis (DIT) was quantified for 15 minutes they "broke their fast" (learn more about "breaking the fast" here) and then every 30 min within the following 6h.
Suggested read: "Are You Still Burning Calories or Already Losing Fat? Study Shows: 5x15 Min HIIT Reduce Body Fat & Improve Fitness Twice as Effectively as 5x40min of Classic Cardio" | read more
"The energy expenditure increased postprandially following all four breakfasts reaching a peak in the chilli–sunflower oil and pepper–sunflower oil at 1 h and at 2 h in the chilli– MCT oil and pepper–MCT oil, respectively. [...]

There were significant differences in total DIT and percentage DIT between the different breakfast meals (P=0.003). [...]

Chilli–MCT had the highest EE, and pepper–sunflower oil had the lowest. It was noted that the increased energy expenditure occurred between 2 and 6 h postprandially; analysis of these data alone substantiated the results above.
Interestingly, the rate of fatty acid oxidation did not vary significantly. Well, with one exception: The difference between the contribution of fats to the total energy expenditure was significantly different for the pepper–sunflower oil and pepper–MCT oil (P=0.032) trials. Similarly, the meal induced elevation in carbohydrate expenditure was more pronounced in the +MCT trials than in the + sunflower oil trials, but neither of these effects resulted in measurable differences in terms of satiety, hunger, fulness or prospective food consumption, which were all identical across the groups.

Real-world Significance and the Theory of Relativity

The same goes for symptoms of gastrointestinal distress, which is something that's actually a little surprising. After all, both MCTs and chili have been described as potential gut irritants in certain populations, yet none of the participants appeared to suffer more during the corresponding testing conditions.
Figure 2: Ratios are important, but total increases in energy expenditure of max. 12kcal are simply laughable (Clegg. 2013)
So, we do have a side-effect 50% increase in diet-induced thermogenesis? Awesome... well, you look at the absolute value of post-prandial energy "wasting" in response to the selection of the "right" oils and take into consideration that a previous study showed that the "fatty oxidation bonus" from MCTs vanish over time (learn more), it remains questionable, whether even these, allegedly pronounced increases in diet-induced thermogenesis will do anything.

Remember: "The only consistent finding among [fat loss trials on both ends of the low vs. high carb spectrum] is that adherence - the degree to which participants continued in the program or met program goals for diet and physical activity - was most strongly associated with weight loss." (Pagato. 2013)
Bottom line: Personally, I don't think it's worth to spice up your food with "MCT + chili" - unless, of course, you like it this way. If that's the case the extra 12kcal of energy expenditure are something I believe few of you will mind.

If, on the other hand, you are just telling yourself that you like your food with chili and MCTs, you should not be wondering that all your past weight loss efforts have sucked. If there is anything that really messes with weight loss success, it's not low postprandial thermogenesis, but not sticking to one's diet; and if the food you eat does not only contain less energy than you want, but also tastes like fiery crap, falling off the wagon and not achieving your fat loss goals is almost guaranteed; and if that happens your relatively large (~50%), but in absolute terms already irrelevant increase in daily energy expenditure is not going to help you.

References:
  • Clegg ME, Golsorkhi M, Henry CJ. Combined medium-chain triglyceride and chilli feeding increases diet-induced thermogenesis in normal-weight humans. Eur J Nutr. 2013 Sep;52(6):1579-85.
  • Pagato SL, Appelhans BM. A Call for an End to the Diet Debates. JAMA. 2013;310(7):687-688.

Fat Burning Grains? Japanese Study Says: The Peppery "Grains of Paradise" Actually Qualify as True Thermogenics

If you are as cool as the subject on the right (no black dots in the neck and trap area = no BAT activity) you don't have to keep thinking about BAT thermogenesis (img from Sugita.2013)
"Grains are the root of all our problems." It would be nice if it really were that simple... what would be even better is if they turned out to be the solution, as well. Wouldn't that be paradise?

It would. And what's more, it could! At least if the Grains of Paradise, i.e. the seeds of Aframomum melegueta(Rosco) K. Schum.) (GP), Guinea pepper or Alligator pepper would increase thermogenesis a significant amount more than those ~6kcal/h that have been observed in healthy non-obese subjects in a recent study by Jun Sugita and his (or her?) colleagues from the Department of Nutrition at the School of Nursing and Nutrition of the Tenshi Collage in Japan (Sugita. 2013).
.
~6 kcal/h in BAT positive subjects that's definitely not enough

The mechanism by which the ingestion of the ginger relative to its high content of pungent, aromatic ketones such as 6-paradol, 6-gingerol and 6-shogaol increased the resting energy expenditure in the nineteen healthy male volunteers aged 20 – 32 years was via an increase in the thermogenic activity in the brown adipose tissue of those 12 of 19 subjects who had been identified in a previous cold-exposure test to carry a significant amount of metabolically active brown fat. 
Figure 1: Effects of 40mg of grains of paradise extract on resting energy expenditure - absolute change in kcal (left) and time course of energy expenditure after the ingestion (right) in responders (BAT+) and non-responders (BAT-; cf. Sugita. 2013)
As you can see in figure 1, the effect was small and in the subjects without significant brown fat activity the 40mg of the GP extract had the exact opposite effects. Thus I am not willing to agree with the scientists who conclude that their results would
"[...] suggest that GP extract, like capsaicin and capsinoids, may be a potential tool for increasing BAT thermogenesis and decreasing body fat."
As a standalone ingredient, it is not going to do anything and the efficacy of true "thermogenics" (I am not talking about CNS activators, like ephedrine, here) as fat burners has a long history of lab results that don't carry from rodent models to human reality - even if the subjects don't compensate for the extra energy expenditure.

Histidine as a fat loss adjuvant? Laughable? Not for the obese! For lean folks like her? (learn more)
The reason for the repeated failure is simple: Rodents are no little men and unlike us, they are totally reliant on their ability to use metabolically active brown fat to generate heat and keep themselves warm. Intelligent and lazy as we are, we have come up with more than enough means to keep ourselves warm in the course of our evolutionary history not to be in need of this special fat. And the little amount of brown adipose tissue we have when we are born actually atrophies during the first years of our life. Any fat burner that works primarily by increasing the uncoupling proteins and thus the heat production in said tissue is thus not likely to produce visible results. This is the case for the lean and especially for the obese who happen to have even less brown adipose tissue than those of us, who don't schlep ourselves from the sofa to the fridge and back, sweating like crazy.

Bottom line: These "fake grains" are not going to solve the problems that are partly brought about by their "real" counterparts (i.e. the "healthy grains" in our diet ;-), but that is probably not going to hinder any snake oil vendor to putting it into his latest fat burning supplement. And who knows, when it's called "... grains", even Dr Oz may jump onto this paradise bandwagon. Why? Because there are enough people who'd rather waste thousands of dollars on false promises than spend a couple of bucks and a few hours of their TV time on a gym membership and the purchase and preparation of healthy whole foods.

References: 
  • Sugita J, Yoneshiro T, Hatano T, Aita S, Ikemoto T, Uchiwa H, Iwanaga T, Kameya T, Kawai Y, Saito M. Grains of paradise (Aframomum melegueta) extract activates brown adipose tissue and increases whole-body energy expenditure in men. Br J Nutr. 2013 Aug;110(4):733-8.

Cold Thermogenesis - A Safe Ephedra Alternative? 70kcal Increase in 24h Energy Expenditure is Negligible, 50% Lower Than Ephedrine, Not Likely to Occur Obese or Older People

Image 1 (odditycentral): Jin Songhao, one of China’s most seasoned icemen and not exactly as lean as you may expect based on what you currently read around the blogosphere, managed to beat the previous world record for the longest ice bath - 120min! Congrats, Jin!
Ephedrine for years the go-to OTC fat burner for physique athletes and average Joe's and Jane's alike is no longer (officially) available: No matter how bold the label claims about X mg of "ephedra extract" may be - NONE(!) of the currently available "ephedra based" over-the-counter (OTC) fat-burners contains significant amounts of the active alkaloids, which made the old Mua huang based herbal ephedra products so effective. Against that background, dieters are constantly on the look-out for novel "gimmicks" to help them finally get rid of those annoying love-handles. One of those gimmicks, which has caught quite some attention as of late, is called "cold thermogenesis" and revolves around the idea that our bodies should consume more energy to keep a normal body temperature in a cold, compared to a normal temperature environment.

How is that different from a "thermogenic fat burner"

The most obvious difference between cold thermogenesis and "thermogenic fat burners" is actually so straight forward that I hardly dare stating that the former is induced by exposing yourself to low(er than normal) temperatures, while the promise of the latter is that the various ingredients of currently or formerly available OTC "fat burners" will induce a thermogenic response, irrespective of the current ambient temperature.

Figure 1: Antropomorphic data of the study participants (Cypess. 2012)
The results of a recently published study from the the Boston Harvard Medical School does yet provide somewhat more sophisticated insights into the differences between cold exposure and a sympathomimetic (i.e. an activator of the sympathetic nervous system), such as ephedrine. On three separate, independent study visits that took place in random order the ten healthy volunteers (age 27.1 years) who participated in the study (see figure 1 for DEXA based anthropometric data) and had been fasting since 12am the day before were exposed to one of the following "stimuli":
  • ephedrine - a single intramuscular dose of 1mg/kg ephedrine
  • saline control - an equal volume of saline
  • cold exposure - in a surgeon’s cooling vest (Polar Products) w/ water temperature 14 °C
60min after the injection of ephedrine, saline, or the initiation of cold exposure, the change in metabolic rate was measured and blood was drawn to determine several metabolic and endocrine markers. Another 60min later, PET-CT scanner images (cf. figure 2, right) to quantify BAT mass and activity were taken. Since the participants obviously had to get rid of their cooling vests for this procedure, the total cold exposure time was limited to 120min, so that it is questionable how valid the 24h energy expenditure calculation (cf. figure 3) actually is. After all, it is not very likely that the norepinephrine levels would constantly stay at 200% over baseline (cf. figure 2).
Figure 2: Metabolic and endocrine effects (expressed relative to saline) of ephedrine injection and cold exposure (main image); CT scans with green arrows in the combined scans indicating  the principal cervical, supraclavicular,
and thoracic depots of BAT (Cypess. 2012)
As far as the acute phase is concerned, it is yet quite obvious that both cold exposure and ephedrine elicited statistically significant effects on various metabolic and endocrine parameters. The exact nature and the purported mechanism that is responsible for these metabolic and endocrine effects are however very different for both treatments:
  • while ephedrine lead to an increase in blood glucose (probably subsequent to increased glyconeogenesis), cold exposure did not 
  • while ephedrine lead to significant increases in lactic acid levels (corresponding to increases in glucose + glucose oxidation), cold exposure did not
  • while ephedrine lead to profound increases in β-hydroxybutyrate (increased ketone productions from fat), cold exposure did not
  • while ephedrine increased serum non-esterified fatty acid (NEFA) concentrations (due to increased lipolysis), cold exposure did not
  • while ephedrine elevated insulin production (probably due to stress induced insulin resistance), cold exposure did not (p = 0.29)
  • while ephedrine lead to highly significant (p < 0.001) increases in C-reactive peptide, cold exposure elicited "only" significant elevations (p = 0.005)
  • while ephedrine produced already highly significant increases in noripenephrine levels, those were even more pronounced upon cold exposure
  • while ephedrine lead to statistical significant increases in thyroid hormone Total T3 (+14%, p = 0.026) and Free T4 (+19%, p = 0.014), cold exposure did not
  • while ephedrine lead to a profound (-22%) and statistical significant (p = 0.007) drop in ghrelin ("hunger hormone" and metabolic regulator), cold exposure did not
In conjunction with the combined CT scans from figure 2 these differences clearly indicate that contrary to ephedrine, which is a mere sympathomimetic (put simply a potent "stim" ;-) without depot-specific (here brown adipose tissue) thermogenic effects, mild cold exposure (remember: those were no ice-baths!) has the ability to stimulate brown adipose tissue (BAT) energy expenditure without significant systemic effects on heart rate or thyroid hormone metabolism.

What does that mean? Is GNC soon going to carry cooling vests instead of fat burner pills?

If you read the scientists' rave conclusion that "[i]n contrast to ephedrine [...] mild cold exposure stimulates a specific response by the SNS [sympathetic nervous system] to activate BAT and increase energy expenditure with few other metabolic effects" and their subsequent reference to the "obesity and diabetes pandemics" and the demand for "safe and novel treatments" of the latter, it is quite understandable that people who are referred by their gurus to "scientific evidence" like this are willing to believe that "cold thermogenesis" would help them to finally get rid of their beer-, burger- and burrito-bellies.
Figure 3: Increase in 24h energy expenditure (kcal/day, left) and detectable BAT volume (right; Cypess. 2012)
If you do yet take a look at the actual metabolic effects (cf. figure 3) the 2x more pronounced effect of ephedrine on 24h energy expenditure (+140kcal/day vs. 70kcal) confirms what my previous overview of the metabolic and endocrine effects of ephedrine and cold exposure already suggested: Ephedrine does not simply have more "side effects" it is also more effective.
Figure 4: Activity of BAT activity in relation to body fat levels (van Marken Lichtenbelt. 2009)
Important:  One thing the scientists wink at in both the abstract as well as the conclusion are the profound inter-individual differences in terms of detectable BAT volume and activity. While the median volume of detectable brown adipose tissue in men and women was 22mL and 20mL, respectively, there was one female subject with a BAT mass of 190mL (85x over median!), one with 7ml and one woman without any detectable brown adipose tissue. Similarly, the BAT mass in the men ranged from 46mL to 12mL. Both the existence of individuals without any significant amounts of metabolically active body fat, as well as the observation of high inter-personal variability in the study at hand stand in line with previous results of Saito et al. who found a ratio of 15/32 (45%) non-responders in young (23-35y) and 22/24 (92%!) in older (38-65y) subjects (Saito. 2009). And as if that alone would not render the practical value of cold exposure as a means to battle the "obesity and diabetes pandemic" questionably enough, van Marken Lichtenbelt et al. report that exactly those people for whom ephedrine and other sympathomimetics such as sibutramine would actually pose a non-negligible health risk, i.e. obese and metabolically deranged people, don't just have 40% less brown adipose tissue, but also a -76% reduced BAT activity (van Marken Lichtenbelt. 2009; cf. figure 4). The implications of these findings should be obvious: It is a) by no means certain that sitting in a non-heated room, let alone an ice-bath, is not just going to give you a cold, but even if it works it is b) probably not going to make a difference for those people who need it most - I mean, let's do the math: "70kcal/day minus 76% of the former equals 16.8kcal per day"!
That being said, even the profoundly greater total increase in energy expenditure in the ephedrine group is of a "magnitude" (I would write "minitude" if such a word existed) that would be completely negligible if it were not for the bad and "dangerous" sympathostimulating side effects (Andraws. 2005), which will allow you to train longer, to diet harder (Astrup et al. ascribe 75% of the weight loss effect due to the ingestion of the infamous ECA stack to anorexia, i.e. loss of appetite; cf. Astrup. 1992) than any ice-filled bathtub in the world will ever do.

Skip on ice-baths, stop winning about the ephedra ban. Get your diet & workouts in check!

Image 2: I don't think Francine Sablan, IFBB Figure Pro and like Adelfo one of Myotropics' sponsored athletes, uses the air-conditioning, let alone a funky cooling vest or ice-baths to propel her fat loss. And why would she? She loves working out and she has her diet in check ;-)
I know this is not going to be a popular conclusion, but believe me, the additional +70kcal/day you could expend in the cold, if you are one of the lucky non-obese "responders" (see red box above), won't make you lose a single pound. Even the "good old" ECA stack (remember: the Cypess study used intravenously administered ephedrine; hence, the effect sizes are directly comparable with pertinent studies from the late 1980s and 1990s using orally administered herbals) worked its fat burning magic only, when it was combined with a comprehensive diet and exercise protocol - and in those scenarios it was mostly the influence of its sympathostimulating activity on your ability to adhere to your diet and to endure the hardships of strenuous workouts and not its often-touted and largely overestimated "thermogenic" effects (cf. Astrup. 1985; Astrup. 1992) that were mostly responsible for the larger-than-life results, people are still raving about.

References:
  1. Andraws R, Chawla P, Brown DL. Cardiovascular effects of ephedra alkaloids: a comprehensive review. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2005 Jan-Feb;47(4):217-25. 
  2. Astrup A, Bülow J, Madsen J, Christensen NJ. Contribution of BAT and skeletal muscle to thermogenesis induced by ephedrine in man. Am J Physiol. 1985 May;248(5 Pt 1):E507-15.
  3. Astrup A, Toubro S, Christensen NJ, Quaade F. Pharmacology of thermogenic drugs. Am J Clin Nutr. 1992 Jan;55(1 Suppl):246S-248S.
  4. Cypess AM, Chen YC, Sze C, Wang K, English J, Chan O, Holman AR, Tal I, Palmer MR, Kolodny GM, Kahn CR. Cold but not sympathomimetics activates human brown adipose tissue in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Jun 4. 
  5. van Marken Lichtenbelt WD, Vanhommerig JW, Smulders NM, Drossaerts JM, Kemerink GJ, Bouvy ND, Schrauwen P, Teule GJ. Cold-activated brown adipose tissue in healthy men. N Engl J Med. 2009 Apr 9;360(15):1500-8. Erratum in: N Engl J Med. 2009 Apr 30;360(18):1917.
  6. Saito M, Okamatsu-Ogura Y, Matsushita M, Watanabe K, Yoneshiro T, Nio-Kobayashi J, Iwanaga T, Miyagawa M, Kameya T, Nakada K, Kawai Y, Tsujisaki M. High incidence of metabolically active brown adipose tissue in healthy adult humans: effects of cold exposure and adiposity. Diabetes. 2009 Jul;58(7):1526-31. Epub 2009 Apr 28.

Histidine As a Fat Loss Adjuvant? 6% Fat Loss Without Dietary or Exercise Intervention & More Than Half a Dozen Other Reasons Not To Ignore This Essential Amino Acid

Histidine as a fat loss adjuvant? Laughable? Not for the obese! For lean folks like her? We'll see...
If I had to guesstimate the number of fitness enthusiasts who have ever heard of histidine at all, I would say that 50% probably don't even know what it is, while the majority of the lightened ones will re-iterate what the supplement business has been preaching them "You get more than enough histidine, anyway. So don't worry our superior beta-alanine supplement will work even if you don't take additional histidine."

Short term studies confirm this notion. It looks as if we usually have more than enough histidine to have it recombine with beta alanine and form carnosine, but long-term studies are missing and let's be honest: How likely is it that an essential amino acid is nothing but a servant to a non-essential amino acid from the 2nd row?

Early results: Histidine modulates feed efficiency

Actually we could have known that histidine could have some merit as a standalone supplement for more than 50 years now, so I am not sure if the recent publications of two studies by Feng et al. in Diabetolgy and Kumi Kimura et al. in Diabetes, the journal of the American Diabetes Association are going to change that over night. What is certain, though, is that they clearly support findings that date way back into early mid 20th century, when Ellison & King found that the provision of a low histidine diet to rodents increased the feed efficiency (=weight gain per energy unit) by 75%, while the addition of 0.75% histidine (per kg chow) to an already histidine sufficient diet  (Ellison. 1968) led to a 30% decrease in food efficiency.

About 45 years later, the previously mentioned studies on the effects of histidine on hepatic gluconeogenesis (Kimura. 2013) and insulin resistance (Feng. 2013) in rodents and human volunteers, respectively, could bring the hitherto often depreciated histamine precursor back to the center of scientific attention.

4g/day histidine improve insulin restiance, reduce fat mass and suppress inflammation

In that, the study by Feng et al., which investigated the effect of 4g/day supplemental histidine on the degree of insulin resistance, inflammation, oxidative stress and metabolic disorders in 100 obese women with the metabolic syndrome (aged 33–51 years; BMI≥28 kg/m²), is probably of greater significance for the average physical culturist that the nevertheless enlightening rodent trial by Kimura et al. we are going to address later.
Figure 1: Changes in amino acid levels, glucose & lipid metabolism, body composition and markers of inflammation after 12 weeks on placebo or 4g/histidine per day (Feng. 2013)
The effects the 4g/day of histidine had especially on the markers of inflammation are quire impressive for an amino acid of which you probably thought as either the "abundant" essential amino acid that's only an adjutant to 100% non-essential and on it's own just about as useless carnosine precursor beta alanine or - even worse - as the nasty precursor to the "allergy inducing", "inflammatory" organic nitrogen compound histamine.

"Hold on, but histidine is an allergy causing nasty bitch, isn't it?"

While the former perspective on histidine is laughable anyway, the fact that there were no increases in histamine levels and none of the participants experienced side effects such as headaches, which have been observed in previous trials with whopping amounts of 64g(!) of histidine per day (Geliebter. 1994) as they have been used, when scientists still believed that the main mechanism of histidine on body weight modulation was mediated by appetite reduction, are probably relevant. After all, histamine does play a role in the inflammatory response system of your body that the latter is not negatively, but positively affected by the consumption of pretty high amounts of histidine, is thus an important and in a way counterintuitive observation. On the other hand,
First the glucose repartitioning effects of isoleucine (learn more), now the benefits of histidine - what other secrets are still out there in the world of amino acids?
[h]istidine is a free radical scavenger and can chelate divalent metal ions (Babizhayev. 1994; Lee. 1999). Its effects against oxidative stress have been well investigated in animals and cells. Histidine has beneficial effects on liver and lung injury in rats and has been reported to protect against diabetic complications in a mouse model of diabetes through its actions against oxidative stress (Lee. 2005; Cuzzocrea. 2007; Yan. 2009). It can restrict accumulation of free radicals and delay activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase and c-jun N terminal kinase in neuronal cells (Kulebyakin. 2012).
Against that background it is actually not surprising that the levels of TNF-α, IL-6 and c-reactive protein (CRP) dropped by 33%, 35% and 33% in the course of the 12 week study period.

Health and weight loss, two independent pairs of shoes?

If histidine is a metal chelator, do I have to be afraid of losing zinc? That's easy to answer and the answer is no and not just because I believe that the importance of zinc is way overrated (cf. "15mg of Zinc are plenty"). Schechter & Prakesh have shown in 1979, already that the ingestion of 4g of histidine on a daily basis influences the excretion of zinc only in the very short run. After 2 weeks the body achieves a new steady state and the zinc excretion returns to normal. What? No you did not pee out all the zinc before. In fact histidine increases the absorption of dietary zinc as well (cf. Freeman. 1977).
Moreover the changes in serum histidine were correlated with the changes in HOMA-IR, NEFA, TNF-α, SOD, GSH-Px, WC, FM and BMI even after further adjustment for age and serum histidine, protein intake, physical activity, alcohol use, current smoking and menopause at baseline.
"Thus, improved insulin sensitivity and alleviation of inflammation and oxidative stress could be due to the increased serum histidine." (Feng. 2013)
What's questionable, though, is how interrelated the modest, but statistically significant weight, or rather fat loss (-6% total fat mass) and the improvements in inflammation are. If we take a peek at the aformentioned rodent study by Kimura et al. who observed that the effects of histidine are mediated mainly centrally via histamine action on the H1 receptors in the brain, which will - independently of insulin (!) - downregulate the hepatic glucose production, it becomes more and more evident that non-obese / insulin-resistant individuals for whom an abundant hepatic glucose production hardly ever is a problem are less likely to benefit than the patients with type 2 diabetes, Kimura et al. implicate as the group that would be most likely to benefit from high histidine diets.

What else do we know about l-histidine?

In the end, we are thus back to square one. But maybe we can find other arguments in favor or against keeping an eye on adequate histidine intake that would be significant for the non-diabetic majority(!?) of the SuppVersity readers, as well. Let's see, what about
  • Ok, put up or shut up - where is the relation between histidine, histamine and obesity? As so often I have to say in advance that the intricacies of the role the histamine receptors in the brain play in the regulation of food intake and metabolism are not yet fully understood. What we do know is that histidine is the dietary precursor for histamine and that the latter can interact with the same receptors (H1-H3) which participate in the regulation of dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine release and exert direct modulatory effects on food intake, meal frequency, adiposity and thermogenesis (Masaki. 2003; Masaki. 2004; Yoshimoto. 2006; Yoshimatsu. 2008).
    improved absorption of vitamin B12 and increased liver folate levels (Williams. 1976) 
  • low histidine intake increases carnosine breakdown, so that the ant-inflammatory intra-cellular buffer carnosine you are trying to increase by taking BA would decrease to be used as a histidine source if you actually got too little histidine in your diet (Tamaki. 1984)
  • increased absorption and excretion of zinc, with a primer on the former, when intakes are low, so that the overall result is an improved management of zinc (Sandström. 1985; Van Wouwe. 1989) 
  • potential anti-Alzheimer's effects; if we simply assume that an increased amount of dietary histidine could ameliorate the histidine and histamine reductions in the brains of Alzheimer patients (Mazurkiewicz-Kwilecki. 1989), it would be logical to assume that the presence of this metal-chelator could prevent the accumulation of toxic levels of copper in the brain
  • significant increases in UCP-1 activity (+57%) in brown adipose tissue and thus higher energy expenditure, reduced appetite, significantly lower feed efficiency (-30%), reduced insulin levels (-48%) and significantly lowered visceral fat pad weights; allegedly in rodents w/ additional 5% histidine in the diet (Kasaoka. 2004) 
Now you could certainly argue that the studies which support the weight loss effects Feng et al. observed in their obese subjects were almost exclusively conducted on rodents... what am I supposed to say? You're right and you know that I am very skeptical that UCP-1 and brown adipose tissue activity play a significant role in human weight / body fat control. Still, the high correlations between the histidine / total protein ratio Okubo et al. observed in a cohort of non-obese 18y-old female Japanese students does clearly suggest that at least part of the effects are not species specific (Okubo. 2005).

Additional health effects 
 
Milk thistle is unquestionably the more prominent liver protectant (learn more)
Furthermore, histidine also prevented colitis by reducing gastric inflammation (Andou. 2009) and exerted  ameliorative effects on
  • LDL oxidation and glycation (Lee. 2005), 
  • alcohol induced liver failure (Liu. 2008), 
  • acetaminophen induced liver injury (Yan. 2009), 
  • diet induced hepatic steatosis (Mong. 2011)
when it was co-administered with carnosine. Unfortunately, none of the studies tested, whether the same results would have been observed if only one of the compounds had been used in the respective rodent trials.

So, no strings attached? Well, not exactly...

As usually the dose-response curve is yet non-linear and an exuberantly high intake of histidine (8% of the diet in rodents → far more than 70g per day for humans) can lead to copper depletion and corresponding lipid disturbances in cholesterol metabolism (Harvey. 1981). Needless to say that for people with a messed up histamine metabolism far lower doses could potentially exert negative effects. It should be mentioned though that the equation"more histidine = more histamine" does not necessary hold - just take a look at the data from the Feng study: More histamine? Yes! Beneficial effects? Yes! Increased circulating histamine? No!



Bottom line: Wile it appears likely that the provision of supplemental histidine in amounts of up to 4g/day could provide a highly beneficial adjunct to exercise and diet intervention in obese and/or diabetic individuals, it remains to be seen, whether or not lean, healthy and insulin sensitive fitness enthusiasts benefit to a similar degree.

Histidine content of various foods; w/ a focus on high histidine food items
While I would exclude that the profound anti-inflammatory effects Feng et al. observed could hamper your performance / gains, I would not exclude that the non-vegetarian majority of the SuppVersity readers is not exactly at risk of running out of histidine anytime soon (see table on the right for good dietary sources). Against that background, you may have to revise your perspective on this rarely talked about amino acid. What you probably don't have to do, though, is to go and buy a pouch of l-histidine to up your histidine intake to exorbitantly high levels... well, at least not until research on human beings confirms the beneficial effects on UCP-1, insulin and the body fat levels Ksaoka et al. observed in non-obese rodents.

    References:
    • Andou A, Hisamatsu T, Okamoto S, Chinen H, Kamada N, Kobayashi T, Hashimoto M, Okutsu T, Shimbo K, Takeda T, Matsumoto H, Sato A, Ohtsu H, Suzuki M, Hibi T. Dietary histidine ameliorates murine colitis by inhibition of proinflammatory cytokine production from macrophages. Gastroenterology. 2009 Feb;136(2):564-74.e2.
    • Babizhayev MA, Seguin MC, Gueyne J, Evstigneeva RP, Ageyeva EA, Zheltukhina GA. L-carnosine (beta-alanyl-L-histidine) and carcinine (beta-alanylhistamine) act as natural antioxidants with hydroxyl-radical-scavenging and lipid-peroxidase activities. Biochem J. 1994; 304(Pt 2):509–516.
    • Cuzzocrea S, Genovese T, Failla M et al. Protective effect of orally administered carnosine on bleomycin-induced lung injury. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2007; 292:L1095–L1104
    • Ellison JS, King KW. Mechanism of appetite control in rats consuming imbalanced amino acid mixtures. J Nutr. 1968 Apr;94(4):543-54.
    • Feng RN, Niu YC, Sun XW, Li Q, Zhao C, Wang C, Guo FC, Sun CH, Li Y. Histidine supplementation improves insulin resistance through suppressed inflammation in obese women with the metabolic syndrome: a randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia. 2013 Jan 30. 
    • Freeman RM, Taylor PR. Influence of histidine administration on zinc metabolism in the rat. Am J Clin Nutr. 1977 Apr;30(4):523-7.
    • Geliebter AA, Hashim SA, Van Itallie TB Oral L-histidine fails to reduce taste and smell acuity but induces anorexia and urinary zinc excretion. Am J Clin Nutr. 1981; 34:119–120.
    • Harvey PW, Hunsaker HA, Allen KG. Dietary L-histidine-induced hypercholesterolemia and hypocupremia in the rat. J Nutr. 1981 Apr;111(4):639-47.
    • Kimura K, Nakamura Y, Inaba Y, Matsumoto M, Kido Y, Asahara SI, Matsuda T, Watanabe H, Maeda A, Inagaki F, Mukai C, Takeda K, Akira S, Ota T, Nakabayashi H, Kaneko S, Kasuga M, Inoue H. Histidine augments the suppression of hepatic glucose production by central insulin action. Diabetes. 2013 Mar 8.
    • Kulebyakin K, Karpova L, Lakonsteva E, Krasavin M, Boldyrev A. Carnosine protects  neurons against oxidative stress and modulates the time profile of MAPK cascade signaling. Amino
      acids. 2012; 43:91–96
    • Lee JW, Miyawaki H, Bobst EV, Hester JD, Ashraf M, Bobst AM. Improved functional recovery of ischemic rat hearts due to singlet oxygen scavengers histidine and carnosine. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 1999; 31:113–121.
    • Lee YT, Hsu CC, Lin MH, Liu KS, Yin MC. Histidine and carnosine delay diabetic deterioration in mice and protect human low density lipoprotein against oxidation and glycation. Eur J
      Pharmacol. 2005. 513:145–150.
    • Liu WH, Liu TC, Yin MC. Beneficial effects of histidine and carnosine on ethanol-induced chronic liver injury. Food Chem Toxicol. 2008 May;46(5):1503-9. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2007.12.013.
    • Mong MC, Chao CY, Yin MC. Histidine and carnosine alleviated hepatic steatosis in mice consumed high saturated fat diet. Eur J Pharmacol. 2011 Feb 25;653(1-3):82-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2010.12.001.
    • Okubo H, Sasaki S. Histidine intake may negatively correlate with energy intake in human: a cross-sectional study in Japanese female students aged 18 years. J Nutr Sci Vitaminol (Tokyo). 2005 Oct;51(5):329-34.
    • Sandström B, Davidsson L, Cederblad A, Lönnerdal B. Oral iron, dietary ligands and zinc absorption. J Nutr. 1985 Mar;115(3):411-4.
    • Schechter PJ, Prakash NJ. Failure of oral L-histidine to influence appetite or affect zinc metabolism in man: a double-blind study. Am J Clin Nutr. 1979 May;32(5):1011-4.
    • Tamaki N, Funatsuka A, Fujimoto S, Hama T. The utilization of carnosine in rats fed on a histidine-free diet and its effect on the levels of tissue histidine and carnosine. J Nutr Sci Vitaminol (Tokyo). 1984 Dec;30(6):541-51.
    • Van Wouwe JP, Hoogenkamp S, Van den Hamer CJ. Histidine supplement and Zn status in Swiss random mice. Biol Trace Elem Res. 1989 Oct;22(1):35-43.
    • Williams DL, Spray GH. The effects of dietary histidine, methionine and homocystine on vitamin B12 and folate levels in rat liver. Br J Nutr. 1976 May;35(3):299-307
    • Yan SL, Wu ST, Yin MC, Chen HT, Chen HC. Protective effects from carnosine and histidine on acetaminophen-induced liver injury. J Food Sci. 2009: 74:H259–H265.