7 mins
Popular Supplement Linked To Heart Diseas... - Cure Parkinson's
Popular Supplement Linked To Heart Disease. Niacin = B3 could be dangerous
Also discussed here: healthunlocked.com/cure-par...
Thanks Marc.
Keep in mind that I AM NOT A SMART PERSON.
Everybody has heard of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
It starts with Physiological:
Air
Water
Food
Heat
Clothes
Reproduction
Shelter
Sleep
I have a Hierarchy of fears:
LBD - MSA - PD
Everything else
I'm not offering advice here. Just sharing how I think.
Just as an aside, I don't understand Maslow's hierarchy. I would rearrange it:
Air
Water
Heat
Food
Sleep
Clothes
Shelter
Reproduction
This guy Stanfield is knocking down all the sacred cows of my supplement regimen. First Resveratrol, now Niacin. What’s next?
Well... he did not say B3 would not be helpful for some things. He just said it may cause heart disease.
I kind of think everything in life has to abide by Newton's third law. Newton's third law states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The "action" and "reaction" refer to forces; if Object A exerts a force on Object B, then Object B exerts an equal amount of force on Object A in the opposite direction.
As soon as he discovers that Big Pharma sells a form of B3 patented as an anti-cholestreol drug, he deletes the video and the search too.
*Acipimox*
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acipimox
my-personaltrainer.it/farma...
Correct to delete an incorrect link
FYI--
For those using the TruNiagen product they write this address. (Towards the bottom, where it starts with Table 1 Summary, originally in was in chart form, but didn't copy/paste here that way.)
===========================================
First, the active ingredient in Tru Niagen is not niacin, and was not implicated in this study. Niacin is a family of different forms of vitamin B3 that differ structurally and functionally. Tru Niagen features patented nicotinamide riboside (NIAGEN NR). While it’s in the niacin family, it is safe, with over 30 peer-reviewed, published clinical studies demonstrating no adverse effects or increased risk of cardiovascular disease.
You are referencing a highly sensationalized and misleading press release issued by the Cleveland Clinic regarding a recent niacin study (published in Nature Medicine).
It’s important to know that this was an observational study, meaning it could only assess associations, not determine causality. In other words, this was not a randomized, controlled intervention study (niacin, or other forms of vitamin B3 were not administered), so no conclusions of cause and effect can be drawn from the study. The clickbait press release and its title position the study results as conclusive, inappropriately linking common B vitamins and other NAD+ precursors to heart disease. Furthermore, the release fails to acknowledge key study limitations.
Below is a list of limitations mentioned by the study authors:
The study was observational, meaning it sought to identify associations between factors and outcomes. Observational studies cannot assess cause and effect and are not the gold standard for clinical research, which is randomized, placebo-controlled trials. As such, the study only showed correlation, not causation.
Subjects were recruited from four referral centers with a high prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cardiometabolic disease risk factors. Thus, the observations are not representative of the general population.
The authors implicate niacin (and other vitamin B3 NAD+ precursors) as potentially problematic in “excess,” but fail to define what constitutes “excess.” Furthermore, the authors speculate that fortification of foods like breads and cereals with niacin may increase the risk of CVD without providing any evidence that the doses used in fortification pose safety issues.
Despite suggesting a cautious approach be taken with NAD+ precursor fortification and supplementation, the present study does not assess the dietary intake of niacin or other vitamin B3 NAD+ precursors in the subject cohort studied.
It’s implied that the authors assume that all NAD+ precursors are the same, when in fact that is not the case. For example, niacin (also known as nicotinic acid) is known to cause uncomfortable flushing and cause liver toxicity at high (> 500mg/day) doses. In contrast, nicotinamide riboside (NR), another NAD+ precursor, does not cause flushing and its use has not been associated with liver toxicity.
We are working closely with the Council for Responsible Nutrition to contact the Cleveland Clinic and requested they issue a corrected press release.
Results of the study are contradicted by many other previously published clinical and preclinical studies showing that other vitamin B3 NAD+ precursors, such as NR, do not increase risk for CVD and/or increase inflammation. In fact, the opposite is true. Fifteen clinical studies demonstrate the safety of oral NR, with seven published clinical studies to date showcasing that oral NR actually reduces inflammation.
Table 1 below provides an outline of these clinical and preclinical studies showcasing the beneficial effects of NR supplementation in inflammation.
Tru Niagen is backed by the highest scientific, safety, quality, and transparency standards, and has been accepted by the world’s most rigorous regulatory bodies such as the United States FDA, Health Canada, the European Commission, and others.
If you have further questions, please contact our Tru Niagen customer service team at customercare@truniagen.com. Please note that Tru Niagen is a dietary supplement to be used as recommended, and is not intended to diagnose, treat, prevent, or cure any disease or illness. We recommend consulting your healthcare practitioner if you have any additional questions specific to your health.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TABLE 1. Summary of peer-reviewed, published NR studies demonstrating an anti-inflammatory effect in humans.
NICOTINAMIDE RIBOSIDE STUDIES
Publication
Dose/Duration
Study Population
Key Results
Elhassan et al., 2019
1,000mg/day for 21 days
Marginally overweight, but otherwise healthy older adult men
NR reduced levels of circulating inflammatory cytokines IL-6, IL-5, IL-2, and TNF-α
Zhou et al., 2020
1,000mg/day for 5-9 days
Hospitalized patients with stage D heart failure undergoing advanced heart failure therapy evaluations
NR reduced gene expression of NLRP3 and inflammatory cytokines (IL-1B, IL-6, and IL-18)
Remie et al., 2020
1,000mg/day for 6 weeks
Healthy overweight and obese men and postmenopausal women
NR resulted in a significant trend toward a reduction in plasma IL-1α levels
Wu et al., 2022
1,000mg/day for one week
Young healthy subjects and patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)
NR reduced relative mRNA expressions of inflammatory cytokines IFN-β and CXCL10
Brakedal et al., 2022
1,000mg/day for 4 weeks
Newly diagnosed dopaminergic therapy-naïve Parkinson’s disease patients
NR reduced levels of inflammatory cytokines in the serum: VEGF and GDF15, as well as in cerebrospinal fluid: G-CSF, IL-7, IL-1RA, CCL4
Wang et al., 2022
2,000mg/day for 12 weeks
Stage C heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients and age-matched healthy subjects
NR reduced expression of NLRP3 and resulted in directionally similar, though nonsignificant, changes in expression of other inflammatory markers (IL-1B, IL-6, IL-18, and TNF-α)
Han et al., 2023
1,000mg/day for 1 week
Young, healthy subjects
NR blunted TH1 and TH17 immune cell responsiveness and depressed the secretion of IFNγ and IL-17 in CD4+ T cells
Thanks. I guess that is a response from TruNiagen? That's fair. I don't understand how they can say NR is "safe" as there have been no long term studies. I am not suggesting NR is not safe either. I think it is an unknown.
I am sticking with my Nicotinic Acid. I'm not convinced that by the study there is a risk. I have a High School Degree. If there was a risk, I would accept the risk. I don't know why I have so much trust in NA. I am not a smart man. Buyer beware.
The video says high dose Niacin reduced LDL cholesterol but increased all cause mortality by 10%
This is in line with Dr. Paul Mason referencing studies on LDL where it was observed that the higher the LDL, the lower the mortality.
The higher the LDL, the LOWER the mortality?
👍 yep he did say it.
To quote Newton & Bolt, for every opinion on anything to do with cholesterol- there are equal, opposite & constantly changing opinions and studies.