4 ms·
I'm here for two probably contradictory comments. The first is collagen: I'd love to see Lowe's take on recent peer review which says boosting oral collagen do
by ggm 7mo ago
I'm here for two probably contradictory comments.
The first is collagen: I'd love to see Lowe's take on recent peer review which says boosting oral collagen does appear to show signs of improved joint pain and skin resilience. Obviously modulated through how protein deprived you are, but for older people, eating enough protein can be an issue: it's not rapidly absorbed so you need 3 squares a day to get to the higher numbers. Collagen powders and vitamin C (oj) at breakfast might kick start this.
The second contradictory point is that this entire thread makes me want to shout GELL MAN AMNESIA because it's an exercise in otherwise intelligent people who can distinguish between anecdata, their personal experience and some cold hard facts in their core field, but not when it's self injecting unknown chemicals from China bought off-script.
- IsTom 7mo ago> you need 3 squares a day to get to the higher numbers. > Collagen powders In that case if you're eating collagen powder you could be eating just regular protein powder then?
- flexagoon 7mo agoFor the first one, I assume you mean a systematic review, not a peer review? I guess you're talking about this one: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10180699/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10180699/ It has a Mechanism section which explains that when collagen is digested, one of the products of that is Gly-Pro-Hyp, which is what has the effects. I don't think that conflicts anything in this post?
- staticassertion 7mo agoI assume they're referring to the brief bit in the post that indicates that oral ingestion leads to a breakdown that makes oral supplements of amino acids pointless. They say it very briefly and they don't really outright assert it, it's just a sort of implied aside.
- A_D_E_P_T 7mo agoSweeping statements in biochemistry must be made with caution. It is well known that there are some small peptides that are absorbed following oral administration. ...BPC-157 itself is said to be among this class. As are certain milk tripeptides: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactotripeptides https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactotripeptides Interestingly enough, those two, as well as Gly-Pro-Hyp, are proline/hydroxyproline-rich, which might suggest that proline-rich small peptides are resistant to degradation in the gut. Anyway, in general oral proteins and peptides are broken down prior to systemic absorption, but not always...
- staticassertion 7mo agoI'm in agreement. It's the article that made the sweeping statement.
- oa335 7mo ago> It is well known that there are some small peptides that are absorbed following oral administration. ...BPC-157 itself is said to be among this class Do you know of any studies that suggest BPC-157 absorption from gut?
- A_D_E_P_T 7mo agohttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jor.21107 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jor.21107 Among others. If you read the paper, it's actually apparent that there's little difference between i.p. and oral administration in terms of efficacy -- both were roughly equally effective in improving MCL ligament healing. Admittedly the paper's in rats -- as are 99% of the others -- as there's no incentive for anybody to run human trials.
- malfist 7mo agoYou should note that your study is not controlled. There are two groups, those with oral administration those with sub-q administration. There is not group without administration. This means you can't say that oral vs injected is "equally effective" because you can't assert that BPC 157 is effective at all. You can't tease out the effect size because you don't know if any or all of the MCL ligament healing was done via normal pathways
- mapotofu 7mo agoI want to point out your own contradictory comments about absorption and specifically mentioning a typically highly processed food (orange juice), one which has been stripped of its natural fibers and flavors. That age group (and all others) should be eating real/whole fruit or having the juice fresh (I.e. just juiced). They would be better served getting this advice than creating more anxiety about protein intake.
- elil17 7mo agoIs there any reason to think that freshly squeezed juice is chemically different from, for example, frozen juice concentrate?
- nick3000 7mo agoyes it’s been frozen and concentrated..
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- brokensegue 7mo agoYou can freeze and concentrate a substance without chemically altering it
- mapotofu 7mo agoThere is reason to think the differences are biotic vs. abiotic, between the two. Our digestive system is dependent on healthy microbiota. Pasteurization would be the difference here.
- reverius42 7mo agoSo it's essentially the same argument as for raw milk, but at least it's less likely to make you sick (?).
- 7mo ago
- allador 7mo agoNote that there is research showing that whey protein powder has exactly the same effects as collagen, for much lower price. Mechanistically it makes sense, as I understand the ingredients in Collagen are largely a subset of the ingredients in whey powder, albeit at different ratios.
- ericmcer 7mo agoit is the same if you base it just on the amino acid profiles, they are both just proteins with different amounts. I always wondered if there were nutrients we can’t measure though, because collagen is typically made from skin or bones whereas whey protein is dairy. Even though both have similar “nutrition facts” maybe there are some unmeasurable differences. Both are highly processed though so who knows.
- eutectic 7mo agoI think the idea is that some short peptides might survive the digestion and make it to the blood stream, but I'm doubtful there's any specific benefit to collagen.
- driuha 7mo agoAfaik, not exactly, collagen has hydroxyproline which is attributed for skin\hair\joint improvement.