Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Alzheimer's / May 2006
Parkinson's and Alzheimer's / oxidative stress
|
|
Thread rating:  |
ironjustice@aol.com - 28 Apr 2006 10:58 GMT Public release date: 27-Apr-2006
Contact: Holly Korschun hkorsch@emory.edu 404-727-3990 Emory University Health Sciences Center
Scientists discover possible link between oxidative stress and non-hereditary degenerative disease ATLANTA--The irreversible neurological degeneration associated with Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases may be the consequence of oxidative stress--the imbalance of antioxidants and pro-oxidants in cells. This imbalance results in an excess of reactive oxygen species--harmful oxygen-containing molecules that can cause damage to proteins. In the April 21 issue of the Journal of Biological Chemistry, scientists from the Emory University School of Medicine report that the protein DJ-1 is oxidatively damaged in non-hereditary (sporadic) Parkinson's disease. While scientists do not know the function of DJ-1, they have previously identified abnormalities in DJ-1 that directly cause hereditary (familial) Parkinson's disease. About 10 percent of Parkinson's disease cases are hereditary forms caused by either a genetic deletion or mutations that result in amino acid substitutions, which can dramatically affect protein structure or function.
The cause of the 90 percent of Parkinson's Disease cases not influenced by genetics has remained more of a mystery. Lian Li, PhD, is associate professor of pharmacology at Emory University School of Medicine and lead author of this study, which was funded by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. "One popular theory has suggested that these sporadic cases result from exposure to environmental toxins, such as herbicides or pesticides," she says. "Previous research has indicated that these toxins lead to oxidative stress. While oxidative stress does occur naturally as humans age, further oxidation caused by toxins may overwhelm the bodyÕs antioxidants."
Until now, attempts to link environmental toxins to oxidation and neurological disorders have been only somewhat successful, in part because scientists have been unable to identify the molecular target of oxidation. "This theory [that toxins cause oxidative stress] has been around for a long time," says Dr. Li. "But whatÕs been damaged by this oxidative stress?"
Aware of the connection between DJ-1 mutations and familial Parkinson's disease, Dr. Li and her collaborators examined the oxidation levels of the protein in sporadic cases. Their hypothesis that DJ-1 was the missing link proved to be correct: DJ-1 in patients who had Parkinson's disease showed signs of oxidative damage, including structural changes as the protein accumulated additional oxygen molecules (carbonylation and methonine oxidation).
These modifications to DJ-1 caused by the oxidative stress are irreversible and irreparable. Like familial Parkinson's disease, the structural changes to the DJ-1 protein in sporadic Parkinson's disease signal an abnormality, leading to the eventual degradation and loss of the protein. "The protein unfolds and cannot function normally," Dr. Li explains. "Not recognizing the unfamiliar shape, the protein is broken down by the cell. The end result is the same: you lose your protein. Any mutation or modification causing this protein to lose its function will then lead to neurodegeneration in Parkinson's disease."
Now that Dr. Li and her team are clear that a relationship between DJ-1 and neurodegeneration exists, they are preparing to extend their examination into the protein's role. Based on biochemical analysis, Dr. Li believes DJ-1 may serve as a protease, activating and deactivating a protein by cleaving the bonds that connect its amino acids. Dr. Li is also currently exploring the possibility that DJ-1 may serve as an antioxidant, and that when mutated or damaged, the protein cannot defend the cell.
Future information about the role of DJ-1 may enable the development of drugs to specifically target the protein, perhaps stopping or reversing Parkinson's disease or Alzheimer's disease, which also may be impacted by the oxidation of DJ-1. In the meantime, says Dr. Li, people looking to prevent neurological degeneration might do well by looking to the kitchen cabinet, not the pharmacy: green tea and vitamin C supplements are two bountiful sources of antioxidants.
###
Who loves ya. Tom
Jesus Was A Vegetarian! http://jesuswasavegetarian.7h.com
Man Is A Herbivore! http://pages.ivillage.com/ironjustice/manisaherbivore
DEAD PEOPLE WALKING http://pages.ivillage.com/ironjustice/deadpeoplewalking
heerabiji@gmail.com - 28 Apr 2006 13:43 GMT studies had proved that use of turmeric in dishes will reduce the Alzheimer's disease to a good extend
http://arremedies.blogspot.com/
Tumbleweed - 28 Apr 2006 17:04 GMT > studies had proved that use of turmeric in dishes will reduce the > Alzheimer's disease to a good extend > > http://arremedies.blogspot.com/ tosh and piffle, studies have 'proved' no such thing.
 Signature Tumbleweed
email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com
f.ck Google - 02 May 2006 15:09 GMT From Stuart Hyderman who also claims to be a chiropractor wrote in message: Stuart hydernan hyderman stuart
> > studies had proved that use of turmeric in dishes will reduce the > > Alzheimer's disease to a good extend [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > email replies not necessary but to contact use; > tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com Alan Meyer - 03 May 2006 03:55 GMT > > studies had proved that use of turmeric in dishes will reduce the > > Alzheimer's disease to a good extend > > > > http://arremedies.blogspot.com/ > > > tosh and piffle, studies have 'proved' no such thing. I don't think there's any proof yet that turmeric will combat Alzheimer's Disease, but there is some evidence for it. I searched Pubmed for "turmeric Alzheimer's" (without quotes). There were fifteen studies published from 2001-2005 that show some evidence, including a lot of good effects in mice with the mouse Alzheimer's that's used for testing these things.
There are no human studies that are yet complete, but not one of the 15 test tube and mouse studies said it was useless.
There's also evidence that it's pretty safe. People in south Asia have been eating lots of it for centuries and studies haven't shown any problems.
I can say for a fact that turmeric isn't sufficient to stop Alzheimer's. My father-in-law bought pounds of the stuff and fed it to his wife in home made capsules in the hope of arresting her AD. Who knows if it helped. But we do know it didn't stop her degeneration.
My view of these kinds of things - turmeric, omega 3 fatty acids, ibuprofen, green tea, red wine - is that, if they're cheap and safe, why not take them? If they make only a 10% difference in the time it takes for AD to develop, I still want that 10%. And besides, I like curry, tea, fish, and red wine, and the ibuprofen makes my knees feel better. [However I wouldn't buy any of these things from a guy I never heard of who's selling stuff on the web. I'd get it from someone I trust.]
There's another reason too that I take these things. Psychologically, it makes me feel like I'm doing something about it. It's little enough to do, but it keeps me from feeling totally helpless.
Still, the main things I'm relying on aren't the dietary supplements but physical and mental exercise. Those are things that absolutely make me feel better - whether or not they provide any protection against AD, so again, why not do them?
Alan
Tumbleweed - 03 May 2006 07:56 GMT >> > studies had proved that use of turmeric in dishes will reduce the >> > Alzheimer's disease to a good extend [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > Alan no disagreement there. just didnt want to let a statement that said that studies have *proved* something, go by unchallenged, when at best they have shown an association, not ' a 10% difference'. A recent massive re-evaluation of all the omega 3 studies, by the way, showed that they in fact make no discernible difference to heart attacks, and red wine isnt looking too clever either :-)
 Signature Tumbleweed
email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com
Alan Meyer - 03 May 2006 22:06 GMT > .... A recent massive re-evaluation of all the omega 3 studies, by the way, showed that > they in fact make no discernible difference to heart attacks, and red wine isnt looking > too clever either :-) It's incredible how many fads there are in health information. Somebody does a study that appears to show that eating X is associated with reduced (heart disease, cancer, AD, pick one) and another dozen studies support it. Everybody goes out and buys the stuff. Then somebody checks it again and casts doubt on the whole thing.
Part of the problem is that there's some irresponsible research being done that isn't careful enough. I think that part however is just that the biology is so complicated that science doesn't yet have the understanding we need to accurately analyze the issues.
Alan
Tumbleweed - 04 May 2006 12:20 GMT >> .... A recent massive re-evaluation of all the omega 3 studies, by the >> way, showed that they in fact make no discernible difference to heart [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Alan I think also its incredibly difficult to unpick all the various different factors however hard they try (and often they dont try very well).
For example, they might find two sets of people that appear, overall, to be the same except one takes, for example, a certain supplement or diet factor and the other doesnt, and then conclude that differences in, say alzheimers or heart attacks, are therefore due to that factor. However, what they might miss is, that say the group taking the supplement against heart attacks, might also walk up stairs instead of taking the elevator, or resist the temptation to have that 'one chocolate bar', or have other subtle differences in behaviour that simply arent picked up by surveys (that are usually the main way these studies are done.)
As I recall, the Omega 3 review went back and looked at the many previous studies out there (hundreds), and to summarise, found that the more careful each study was with regard to examining the lifestyle of the people in it, the smaller the "effect", down to no statistical effect at all in the most exacting studies (previously ignored as statistical flukes*). My mother takes a garlic pill each day and tells me she hasnt had a cold since 19xx. Hmm, she is forgetting quite a few I think :-: Some of these studies dont get much above that anecdotal level.
This is where the tumeric results are coming from, there isnt much Az in India and they eat lots of curries there. Ok, the conclusion is obvious, isnt it :-)
*there is also a worrying self-censorship effect in science. Person sets out to prove that X causes Y, does a study, it doesnt prove that,so first the study is marked as a failure (and maybe repeated until it does!), and secondly its much less likely to be published than a study that shows an effect, since its very dull to have an in depth study that shows that nothing happened :-)
 Signature Tumbleweed
email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com
|
|
|