Blog Entries: 2
Recognitions:
Homework Help

## Turning back the clock on aging muscles.

This is some compelling new research...
"A study led by researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, has identified critical biochemical pathways linked to the aging of human muscle. By manipulating these pathways, the researchers were able to turn back the clock on old human muscle, restoring its ability to repair and rebuild itself." ref01
"The research also found evidence that aging muscles need to be kept in shape, because long periods of atrophy are more challenging to overcome." ref02

This research was led by scientists at Berkeley.
and recently published in the journal, EMBO Molecular Medicine
 PhysOrg.com medical sciences news on PhysOrg.com >> Obese British man in court fight for surgery>> 2008 crisis spurred rise in suicides in Europe>> New food labels dished up to keep Europe healthy
 Blog Entries: 3 yeah, getting old sucks. better get in the gym while you can and do your squats. immobility correlates with death. as for repair and rebuild, we already have some things that help: http://jp.physoc.org/content/573/2/525.abstract
 Mentor Interesting link, Ouabache. Are they planning to bring something to market out of the research? I couldn't tell with a quick scan. Proton -- I didn't know that about creatine. Do you use it as part of your workout/nutrition regimen? What kind, and how much?

Blog Entries: 3

## Turning back the clock on aging muscles.

 Quote by berkeman Proton -- I didn't know that about creatine. Do you use it as part of your workout/nutrition regimen? What kind, and how much?
oh, yeah, there's a ton of papers you can find on it at pubmed. i use 5g/day of creatine monohydrate. other varieties are simply hype because the old-fashion mono is dirt cheap.

and i keep meaning to check back and do some more research on this thread topic. there are a couple of other things that may be useful for older people. one is anti-inflammatories like ibuprofen. there was a study that showed taking an entire day's recommended dose in one bolus inhibited protein synthesis in muscle, but another showed that older men that took it ad lib. according to the bottle directions actually improved their strength performance. what i want to know is whether the reduced pain simply encourages more effort towards training, or if there is a link between inflammation and the formation of scar tissue in muscle that is mentioned in the article. another thing is vitamin D, which reduces falls in the elderly.

you may also want to look into fish oil if you're not already doing so. the number of things in the body that it makes better is just amazing.

 Quote by Proton Soup oh, yeah, there's a ton of papers you can find on it at pubmed. i use 5g/day of creatine monohydrate. other varieties are simply hype because the old-fashion mono is dirt cheap. and i keep meaning to check back and do some more research on this thread topic. there are a couple of other things that may be useful for older people. one is anti-inflammatories like ibuprofen. there was a study that showed taking an entire day's recommended dose in one bolus inhibited protein synthesis in muscle, but another showed that older men that took it ad lib. according to the bottle directions actually improved their strength performance. what i want to know is whether the reduced pain simply encourages more effort towards training, or if there is a link between inflammation and the formation of scar tissue in muscle that is mentioned in the article. another thing is vitamin D, which reduces falls in the elderly. you may also want to look into fish oil if you're not already doing so. the number of things in the body that it makes better is just amazing.
Just a foot note on creatine.

Work your body to a stall point - that is you hit a plateau where strength increases stop or slow. The conditioned body will respond very well to a short term creatine program along with heavy weight training. It is not intended or recommended for continuous use.

Blog Entries: 3
 Quote by WhoWee Just a foot note on creatine. Work your body to a stall point - that is you hit a plateau where strength increases stop or slow. The conditioned body will respond very well to a short term creatine program along with heavy weight training. It is not intended or recommended for continuous use.
why do you think that? and how long does it take you to hit a stall point?

 Quote by Proton Soup why do you think that? and how long does it take you to hit a stall point?
I'm not saying that creatine won't provide a benefit to anyone who gives it a try.

What I am saying is if you are someone who trains a great deal - eventually you will hit a plateau. This is a "stall point" in your development. Often, you'll struggle to maintain the same resistance weight or possibly the number of reps or sets. Some people argue exhaustion/lack of rest and others argue lack of proper nutrition, either way, it does happen.

This is when creatine really seems to help - in the short term. I've witnessed several cases where creatine was effective.

I personally went through this when I competed in the discus. I didn't like to lift weights and focused on my form, balance, and agility. Accordingly, I focused my weight training on low reps and sets with the heaviest weights possible. My bench press quickly jumped from 300#'s to 325#'s in about a 9 week period, then it stayed at 325 for about 5 to 6 months and the sets and reps seemed harder and harder to complete. Looking back, I was very discouraged and nearly quit.

I tried a variety of amino acid supplements and vitamins and tried working different muscle groups and nothing helped. Finally, a strength coach talked me into trying creatine for a few weeks. After about a week I was back on track. Within 3 weeks I was at 350 (we stopped the creatine at that point) and I reached my 400# goal within another 4 to 5 months. From that point, I focused on extra reps and strength maintenance.

On a side note, my son is currently a high school football player and I won't let him try creatine. My logic is that he hasn't yet hit a legitimate plateau and he's growing like a weed. He doesn't need it and I don't know if it's safe for him at this point.
 Blog Entries: 3 yeah, i know all about plateaus. it took me two years to add about 25 lbs to my bench and 80 lbs to my deadlift. you didn't hit a plateau before because, as you say, you didn't like to do it and didn't take it seriously. wait til you're actually focusing on strength, not agility, and still can't make fast progress.
 When it comes to creatine you're really trading in your muscles for your endocrine system. If that's acceptable to you (in light of the reasonable fashion you're talking about using it) so be it, but it's not harmless. Of course, lots of things break weight-loss/gain/bulking plateaus and it can be VERY hard to tell what is the culprit. I would suggest you hold off on supplements until you run the full gamut with your standard diet. High protein, low protein, etc. If that doesn't work, then consider a kick-start as WhoWee is suggesting. I would listen to the guy who reaizes that giving this to his growing boy is a BAD idea... he's not blowing smoke.

Blog Entries: 3
 Quote by Frame Dragger When it comes to creatine you're really trading in your muscles for your endocrine system.
what are you trying to say? creatine is not a hormone

 Quote by Proton Soup what are you trying to say? creatine is not a hormone
No it's not, but Creatine is metabolized in the first pass by an enzyme produced by the kidneys, and in the second pass by the liver and pancreas. It's unclear just how the demand of supplementation effects this whole process, but as some people with metabolic disorders, poor kidneys/liver, or who otherwise challenge those organs are effected in the long run.

You can safely assume that, while it certainly may not be what kills you in the end, it's not doing anything for the specific lifespan of your kidney, liver, or pancreas. Muscles beyond the norm for age/size/etc..., or internal organs... did you think you could have it both ways? lol

Blog Entries: 3
 Quote by Frame Dragger No it's not, but Creatine is metabolized in the first pass by an enzyme produced by the kidneys, and in the second pass by the liver and pancreas. It's unclear just how the demand of supplementation effects this whole process, but as some people with metabolic disorders, poor kidneys/liver, or who otherwise challenge those organs are effected in the long run. You can safely assume that, while it certainly may not be what kills you in the end, it's not doing anything for the specific lifespan of your kidney, liver, or pancreas. Muscles beyond the norm for age/size/etc..., or internal organs... did you think you could have it both ways? lol
you have no idea what you are talking about.

Effect of Short-term High-Dose Creatine Supplementation on Measured GFR in a Young Man With a Single Kidney.
Gualano B, Ferreira DC, Sapienza MT, Seguro AC, Lancha AH Jr.
Am J Kidney Dis. 2010 Jan 7. [Epub ahead of print]

It currently is unknown whether creatine supplementation is safe for people with or at risk of kidney disease. We report on the short-term effects of creatine supplementation on kidney function in a young man with a single kidney and mildly decreased glomerular filtration rate (GFR). A 20-year-old man who had undergone unilateral nephrectomy and presented with mildly decreased GFR without kidney damage underwent a trial with 35 days of creatine supplementation (20 g/d for 5 days followed by 5 g/d for the next 30 days) and had his kidney function monitored. After the intervention, (51)Cr-EDTA clearance (pre, 81.6 mL/min/1.73 m(2); post, 82.0 mL/min/1.73 m(2)), proteinuria (protein excretion: pre, 130 mg/d; post, 120 mg/d), and electrolyte levels were unchanged. Albuminuria, serum urea level, and estimated creatinine clearance were decreased (pre, 4.6 mg/d; post, 2.9 mg/d; pre, 37 mg/d; post, 28 mg/dL; and pre, 88 mL/min/1.73 m(2); post, 71 mL/min/1.73 m(2), respectively), whereas serum creatinine level was slightly increased (pre, 1.03 mg/dL; post, 1.27 mg/dL), falsely suggesting kidney function impairment. This prospective report suggests that short-term creatine supplementation may not affect kidney function in an individual with a single kidney, mild decreased GFR, and ingesting a high-protein diet (ie, 2.8 g/kg/d). This finding has great relevance considering that creatine-induced kidney disease has been a growing concern, even for healthy people.
__________________

 Quote by Proton Soup you have no idea what you are talking about. Effect of Short-term High-Dose Creatine Supplementation on Measured GFR in a Young Man With a Single Kidney. Gualano B, Ferreira DC, Sapienza MT, Seguro AC, Lancha AH Jr. Am J Kidney Dis. 2010 Jan 7. [Epub ahead of print] It currently is unknown whether creatine supplementation is safe for people with or at risk of kidney disease. We report on the short-term effects of creatine supplementation on kidney function in a young man with a single kidney and mildly decreased glomerular filtration rate (GFR). A 20-year-old man who had undergone unilateral nephrectomy and presented with mildly decreased GFR without kidney damage underwent a trial with 35 days of creatine supplementation (20 g/d for 5 days followed by 5 g/d for the next 30 days) and had his kidney function monitored. After the intervention, (51)Cr-EDTA clearance (pre, 81.6 mL/min/1.73 m(2); post, 82.0 mL/min/1.73 m(2)), proteinuria (protein excretion: pre, 130 mg/d; post, 120 mg/d), and electrolyte levels were unchanged. Albuminuria, serum urea level, and estimated creatinine clearance were decreased (pre, 4.6 mg/d; post, 2.9 mg/d; pre, 37 mg/d; post, 28 mg/dL; and pre, 88 mL/min/1.73 m(2); post, 71 mL/min/1.73 m(2), respectively), whereas serum creatinine level was slightly increased (pre, 1.03 mg/dL; post, 1.27 mg/dL), falsely suggesting kidney function impairment. This prospective report suggests that short-term creatine supplementation may not affect kidney function in an individual with a single kidney, mild decreased GFR, and ingesting a high-protein diet (ie, 2.8 g/kg/d). This finding has great relevance considering that creatine-induced kidney disease has been a growing concern, even for healthy people. __________________
In short, you see that protein passes in the urine, returns to pre-supplementation levels upon withdrawel, but there is no indication as to potential damage. Especially with a single kidney, this is hardly surprising in a 20 year old man. You won't see risk factors as quickly as you would in an older man, and you're ALREADY going to find protein in his urine that may mask the results of using Creatine. You are in fact the one who is flying blind. Given the role of CPK in predicting renal failure: (John W. McBride; Kingsley R. Labrosse; Harry G. McCoy; David H. Ahrenholz; Lynn D. Solem; Irvin F. Goldenberg JAMA, Feb 1986; 255: 764 - 768.) and myocardial issues: (JAMA Thomas Q. Kong Jr; Charles J. Davidson; Sheridan N. Meyers; Jason T. Tauke; Michele A. Parker; Robert O. Bonow Prognostic Implication of Creatine Kinase Elevation Following Elective Coronary Artery Interventions as well as Arthur J. Siegel; Lawrence M. Silverman; William J. Evans
Elevated Skeletal Muscle Creatine Kinase MB Isoenzyme Levels in Marathon Runners) and several dozen others.

The role of Creatine supplementation isn't well understood, because most of the studies are concerned with secondary effects of Creatine metabolism such as hightened levels of the afformentioned CPK, and longitudinal studies are inconclusive. You're burning through a lot of ADP and that dumps a lot of metabolites that must be broken down further, and the Creatine requires the Enzymes I mentioned in my previous post. There are many issues that arise during the use of Creatine supplementation (originally studied for vegitarians actually, not knuckleheads ) including mild and transient proteinuria despite your example.

The issue isn't that you might be down a kidney for the purposes of filtration, but rather what the kidneys, liver, and pancreas need to produce by way of enzymes, and the resulting metabolites that are still an open question. Open Question vs. Questionable Bodybuilding... Hmmm which side of that health puzzle to fall on. Hmmmm...

Recognitions:
Gold Member
 Quote by Ouabache This is some compelling new research... "A study led by researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, has identified critical biochemical pathways linked to the aging of human muscle. By manipulating these pathways, the researchers were able to turn back the clock on old human muscle, restoring its ability to repair and rebuild itself." ref01 "The research also found evidence that aging muscles need to be kept in shape, because long periods of atrophy are more challenging to overcome." ref02 This research was led by scientists at Berkeley. and recently published in the journal, EMBO Molecular Medicine
Dear Ouabache,

I read this on the news the other day:

Dr-Jeffry-life-at-71

He uses testosterone and human growth hormone since his mid 60's and sticks to a very rigorous exercise regime.

 Life's enthusiasm is undimmed by such skepticism. "The fact is that every male over 50 or 55 suffers from a slow, insidious fall in testosterone levels," he says. "You don't notice it for a long time until your 'T' levels cross a certain threshold. Then you suddenly find that you lose your enthusiasm, your sex drive and can't maintain muscle mass anymore -- even if you work out. It's even worse if your HGH levels are falling off the table. That's what happened to me." Adult HGH levels decline by half from age 20 to 60, and the loss accelerates thereafter. Adult testosterone levels begin a steady fall-off by age 30 or 40 that continues throughout life, although symptoms may not show up for decades, if at all. Noting that such declines are part of the natural aging process, many doctors are openly skeptical of the wisdom of replacing these hormones.
My personal approach to stay healthy is through sensible diet, vigorous exercise at the gym, hiking, bicycling, etc... get enough rest, and as best I can to manage the stress in life. It costs Dr Jeffry 1500 $a month to get human growth hormone and testosterone injections, but he feels it is worth the risk, and so far at least, it appears to be working for him. Rhody...  Quote by rhody Dear Ouabache, I read this on the news the other day: Dr-Jeffry-life-at-71 He uses testosterone and human growth hormone since his mid 60's and sticks to a very rigorous exercise regime. Quotes from his link: My personal approach to stay healthy is through sensible diet, vigorous exercise at the gym, hiking, bicycling, etc... get enough rest, and as best I can to manage the stress in life. It costs Dr Jeffry 1500$ a month to get human growth hormone and testosterone injections, but he feels it is worth the risk, and so far at least, it appears to be working for him. Rhody...
Note that your approach to aging is likely to give you a longer, healthier life and as liver failure and/or cancer is always a painful way to go, probably a better death. Then again, some people want to live a certain way or not live at all. I simply wish these people were honest about that, lived by that, and didn't try to sell it as "healthy". It may be EFFECTIVE... but it's not going to make you HEALTHIER.

Blog Entries: 3
seriously, you can stop with the trolling now. i know better. the test they do for heart damage measures a different form of creatine than what athletes use, and different than the kind of creatine you see released from skeletal muscle when it is damaged.

and there is a recent study about kidney damage in bodybuilders, but it is from steroid abuse.

 Quote by Frame Dragger In short, you see that protein passes in the urine, returns to pre-supplementation levels upon withdrawel, but there is no indication as to potential damage. Especially with a single kidney, this is hardly surprising in a 20 year old man. You won't see risk factors as quickly as you would in an older man, and you're ALREADY going to find protein in his urine that may mask the results of using Creatine. You are in fact the one who is flying blind. Given the role of CPK in predicting renal failure: (John W. McBride; Kingsley R. Labrosse; Harry G. McCoy; David H. Ahrenholz; Lynn D. Solem; Irvin F. Goldenberg JAMA, Feb 1986; 255: 764 - 768.) and myocardial issues: (JAMA Thomas Q. Kong Jr; Charles J. Davidson; Sheridan N. Meyers; Jason T. Tauke; Michele A. Parker; Robert O. Bonow Prognostic Implication of Creatine Kinase Elevation Following Elective Coronary Artery Interventions as well as Arthur J. Siegel; Lawrence M. Silverman; William J. Evans Elevated Skeletal Muscle Creatine Kinase MB Isoenzyme Levels in Marathon Runners) and several dozen others. The role of Creatine supplementation isn't well understood, because most of the studies are concerned with secondary effects of Creatine metabolism such as hightened levels of the afformentioned CPK, and longitudinal studies are inconclusive. You're burning through a lot of ADP and that dumps a lot of metabolites that must be broken down further, and the Creatine requires the Enzymes I mentioned in my previous post. There are many issues that arise during the use of Creatine supplementation (originally studied for vegitarians actually, not knuckleheads ) including mild and transient proteinuria despite your example. The issue isn't that you might be down a kidney for the purposes of filtration, but rather what the kidneys, liver, and pancreas need to produce by way of enzymes, and the resulting metabolites that are still an open question. Open Question vs. Questionable Bodybuilding... Hmmm which side of that health puzzle to fall on. Hmmmm...

 Quote by Proton Soup seriously, you can stop with the trolling now. i know better. the test they do for heart damage measures a different form of creatine than what athletes use, and different than the kind of creatine you see released from skeletal muscle when it is damaged. and there is a recent study about kidney damage in bodybuilders, but it is from steroid abuse.
You don't seem to grasp the relationship between one form and another, and how one is produced as a result of the metabolic process. You don't seem to grasp the process that is set into motion from the kidneys, to the liver to the pancreas. That being the case, it's your life, just as it is with old men shooting up "T" and HGH. You get to find things out the hard way I suppose, just as most do. The majority of these studies outside of JAMA and The Lancet are funded exclusively by companies with an interest in pimping these supplements. The questions is: Does Creatine, which is of dubious value and possible harm, provide a worthwhile risk-benefit outcome? Well it certainly does if you're GMC, or a similar company.

 Similar discussions for: Turning back the clock on aging muscles. Thread Forum Replies Special & General Relativity 31 Medical Sciences 2 Biology 2 Biology 1 Special & General Relativity 2