4 ms·

I recently read the book "Oxygen, The molecule that made the world" by Nick Lane. Roughly the first half talks about the geologic aspects of oxygen in world hi

I recently read the book "Oxygen, The molecule that made the world" by Nick Lane. Roughly the first half talks about the geologic aspects of oxygen in world history. The second half talks about biological processes relating to oxygen. One thing he gets across is that dietary anti-oxidant intake is often ineffective, and in some cases can be harmful. Also, vitamin C isn't just an antioxidant -- it it involved in a number of different reactions and having too much can be as bad as too little. In fact it can be a pro-oxidant.

notafraudster 7y ago
My almost certainly incorrect chronology of events, cobbled together from pop science headlines I've read: 1) Free radicals are bad because they cause oxydation (oxydization?) and this is bad for our cells? 2) Thus, anti-oxidants are good, because they prevent this process 3) People recommended more dietary anti-oxidants 4) It turns out that ingesting anti-oxidants doesn't actually produce the antioxidants necessary to combat free radicals, the same way eating dietary fat doesn't create human fat. Dietary sources of anti-oxidants largely are not absorbed and are useless. 5) Instead, we should look for foods that stimulate production of anti-oxidants in... the liver? the spleen? Wherever those are made in your body? But no one knows which foods are good for that?
- aprao 7y ago
  I recall reading in 'The Vital Question' (also by Nick Lane) that free radicals (produced when a cell is unable to meet energy production demands) signals the replication of mitochondria. Antioxidants suppress this signal which leads to cell death. Interestingly an increase in free radicals themselves beyond a certain threshold also result in programmed cell death
- goodcharles 7y ago
  Also should add - some molecules like Nitric Oxide act as both an antioxdiant and free radical. The vitamin sellers often use the browning of a cut apple as an easy-to-explain example of the effects of oxidation.

notafraudster 7y ago

My almost certainly incorrect chronology of events, cobbled together from pop science headlines I've read: 1) Free radicals are bad because they cause oxydation (oxydization?) and this is bad for our cells? 2) Thus, anti-oxidants are good, because they prevent this process 3) People recommended more dietary anti-oxidants 4) It turns out that ingesting anti-oxidants doesn't actually produce the antioxidants necessary to combat free radicals, the same way eating dietary fat doesn't create human fat. Dietary sources of anti-oxidants largely are not absorbed and are useless. 5) Instead, we should look for foods that stimulate production of anti-oxidants in... the liver? the spleen? Wherever those are made in your body? But no one knows which foods are good for that?

aprao 7y ago
I recall reading in 'The Vital Question' (also by Nick Lane) that free radicals (produced when a cell is unable to meet energy production demands) signals the replication of mitochondria. Antioxidants suppress this signal which leads to cell death. Interestingly an increase in free radicals themselves beyond a certain threshold also result in programmed cell death
goodcharles 7y ago
Also should add - some molecules like Nitric Oxide act as both an antioxdiant and free radical. The vitamin sellers often use the browning of a cut apple as an easy-to-explain example of the effects of oxidation.