International ME/CFS and FM Awareness Day Is On May 12, 2018
Thomas Hennessy, Jr., selected May 12th to be our international awareness day back in 1992. He knew that May 12th had also been the birthday of Florence Nightingale. She was the English army nurse who helped to found the Red Cross as well as the first school of nursing in the world.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

PPARδ Promotes Running Endurance by Preserving Glucose - paper and media coverage

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by AndyPR, May 4, 2017.

  1. AndyPR

    AndyPR Senior Member

    ETA: I've now changed the title of the thread to the title of the paper, originally it had the title of the newspaper article.

    If, and how, this might apply to us I have no idea but thought it was interesting.
    https://www.theguardian.com/science...ld-deliver-benefits-of-fitness-in-tablet-form

    The article is based on this study - http://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/fulltext/S1550-4131(17)30211-5
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2017
    Kalliope, MastBCrazy, MEMum and 8 others like this.
  2. Barry53

    Barry53 Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,277
    Likes:
    13,716
    UK
    No doubt the BPS crew will think it just sorts out people's congitive aberrations, so that what they thought they couldn't do before taking the pill, they then realise they can do after all :D.
     
    MEMum, Mary and Skippa like this.
  3. A.B.

    A.B. Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,750
    Likes:
    23,207
    PPARδ was upregulated in Fluge & Mella's metabolic study.
     
    MEMum, Deltrus, AdamS and 2 others like this.
  4. Sidereal

    Sidereal Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,099
    Likes:
    17,223
    Easy to imagine dire long-term consequences of pushing the body beyond what it was naturally designed for.
     
    TiredSam, MEMum, Mary and 7 others like this.
  5. RogerBlack

    RogerBlack Senior Member

    Messages:
    897
    Likes:
    2,903
    But it wasn't naturally designed for that.
    The body is 'designed for' the level of activity at which individuals less fit than this suffer an evolutionarily important level of mortality or lack of reproductive capability in their natural setting.

    Or conversely, the level of activity at which the ease of such a level of activity becomes a cost, not a benefit.

    It might be plausibly argued for example that making running too easy will lead to increased energy expenditure, and is generally evolutionarily a bad idea, so this limit has been selected for, as it happened to be the first tried way to reduce maximum running time.

    Or, it could be you run into massive lifespan problems due to unaccounted for stressors due to the exercise - there is no data. (I have not looked to see if they checked the lifespan of the mice)
     
    MEMum and arewenearlythereyet like this.
  6. Tunguska

    Tunguska Senior Member

    Messages:
    514
    Likes:
    495
    That article is misleading. It's only an exercise pill insofar as you believe the main benefit of exercise is weight loss and fatty acid oxidation. They're talking about making a fat burning pill, not an exercise pill. I don't need to say more.
     
    barbc56 and MEMum like this.
  7. RogerBlack

    RogerBlack Senior Member

    Messages:
    897
    Likes:
    2,903
    If it permits exercise to be done to a higher level, then it's not unreasonable to call it an exercise pill.
    'Benefits of fitness in tablet form' - well...

    Anything that screws with the normal metabolic processes in this way could at least be illuminating for CFS. I need to read this paper in depth.
     
    Valentijn and MEMum like this.
  8. Tunguska

    Tunguska Senior Member

    Messages:
    514
    Likes:
    495
    It doesn't permit exercise at a higher level. It increases endurance. For prolonged aerobic activity. Not that it matters, the article wouldn't exist if it were about that. Knock yourself out, I don't see anything meaningfully new from that linked study and it's very short.
     
    MEMum likes this.
  9. RogerBlack

    RogerBlack Senior Member

    Messages:
    897
    Likes:
    2,903
    I think it's a reasonable hypothesis that PEM is caused by some immune mediated systemic reaction to a metabolic byproduct of exertion which interferes with later energy production by some mechanism.

    It is at least reasonable to ask what happens to the generation of that metabolic byproduct if you switch the muscles over as much as possible to run on fat, not glucose.

    Or if the muscles are as vulnerable to that fatigue factor if they're running on FA, not glucose.

    This would not directly change cognitive problems, as AIUI PPAR6 doesn't do much in the brain, but it might increase the exercise threshold at which PEM kicks in, and during PEM reduce that aspect of the fatigue which is due to muscle problems.

    (It would be as interesting from a research perspective if it worsened condition of course)
     
    HowToEscape? and MEMum like this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page