Can a prebiotic help you feel better?

January 22, 2021January 24, 2021 gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Epigenetics, Immune system, Stress Antidepressants, Control group, Psychotropic medication

This 2019 rodent study investigated an inulin-type fructo-oligosaccharide (FOS):

“The microbiota-gut-brain axis was used to investigate anti-depressive properties of FOS at the interface of gut microbiota. FOS was introduced via gavage to rats exposed to chronic unpredictable mild stress:

FOS alleviated depression-like behaviors and repaired intestinal epithelia damages.

FOS treatment lowered corticosterone level.

FOS-induced modulation of gut microbiota was more anti-depressive compared to fluoxetine, the standard antidepressant drug.

N-Ctrl and M-Ctrl were normal and model control groups which received only water.

N-FOS and M-FOS were normal and model rats administrated FOS (50 mg/kg) [human equivalent (50 mg x .162) x 70 kg = 567 mg].

M-Flx and M-DP5 rats were model rats given fluoxetine hydrochloride (10 mg/kg) and DP5 compound of FOS (15 mg/kg).

Villi structure was broken for rats in a depression-like state. Mucosal erosion was increased, and the crypt in the small intestinal epithelium was disrupted. Treatment with FOS, DP5 and fluoxetine relieved this damage.

However, a severe side effect was found in the colon of rats that demonstrated apposition to fluoxetine:

There was obvious goblet cell loss and inflammatory cells infiltration in the colonic epithelium of fluoxetine treated rats, which showed more severity than in model control rats. Although fluoxetine has high bioavailability, its irritation to gastrointestinal tract may cause inflammation reaction thus lead to colonic destruction.

These pathological changes in the intestine were investigated to compare the influence of stress and possible drug irritation to the gastrointestinal tract. Stress had negatively affected microstructure of the small intestine.

Anti-depressant efficacy of FOS was inseparable from and strongly associated with modulation of the host’s gut microbiota.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0944711319304738 “Fructo-oligosaccharides from Morinda officinalis remodeled gut microbiota and alleviated depression features in a stress rat model” (not freely available)

Forcing people to learn helplessness explored human equivalents of this study’s chronic, unpredictable stress experiments. Related phenotypes and symptoms in humans and animals include:

“Social defeat
Social avoidance behavior
Irritable bowel syndrome
Depression
Anxiety
Anhedonia
Increased hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA)-axis sensitivity
Visceral hypersensitivity.”

These researchers spent a lot of time and effort comparing microbiota categories. The point for people, though, is how we feel.

The future of your brain is in your gut right now

January 12, 2021May 30, 2021 gettingwell4 5+ stars Premium, Acetylcholine, Brain development, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Dopamine, Epigenetics, Hypothalamus, Immune system, Limbic system, Lower brain, Memory, Neurochemicals, Serotonin, Stress Antidepressants, Control group, Critical period, Embryo development, Genetic factors, Infants, Neural plasticity, Neurodegenerative disease, Psychotropic medication, Reciprocity, Unconscious feelings, Unconscious memories

A 2020 paper by the author of Sulforaphane: Its “Coming of Age” as a Clinically Relevant Nutraceutical in the Prevention and Treatment of Chronic Disease:

“The gut and brain communicate bidirectionally via several pathways which include:

Neural via the vagus nerve;

Endocrine via the HPA axis;

Neurotransmitters, some of which are synthesized by microbes;

Immune via cytokines; and

Metabolic via microbially generated short-chain fatty acids.

How does nature maintain the gut-microbiome-brain axis? Mechanisms to maintain homeostasis of intestinal epithelial cells and their underlying cells are a key consideration.

The symbiotic relationship that exists between microbiota and the human host is evident when considering nutrient requirements of each. The host provides food for microbes, which consume that food to produce metabolites necessary for health of the host.

Consider function of the human nervous system, not in isolation but in integration with the gastrointestinal ecosystem of the host, in expectation of a favorable impact on human health and behavior.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128205938000148 “Chapter 14 – The gut microbiome: its role in brain health” (not freely available)

Always more questions:

What did you put into your gut today?
What type of internal environment did it support?
What “favorable impact on human health and behavior” do you expect from today’s intake?
How will you feel?
Will you let evidence guide feeding your gut environment?

See Harnessing endogenous defenses with broccoli sprouts for further elaboration. See Switch on your Nrf2 signaling pathway for an interview with these papers’ author.

How will you feel?

January 8, 2021January 9, 2021 gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Amygdala, Beliefs, Brain development, Cerebrum, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Immune system, Lower brain, Memory, Neurochemicals, Oxytocin, Serotonin, Stress Antidepressants, Brain neurons, Control group, Embryo development, Genetic factors, Neural plasticity, Psychotropic medication

Consider this a partial repost of Moral Fiber:

“We are all self-reproducing bioreactors. We provide an environment for trillions of microbes, most of which cannot survive for long without the food, shelter and a place to breed that we provide.

They inhabit us so thoroughly that not a single tissue in our body is sterile. Our microbiome affects our development, character, mood and health, and we affect it via our diet, medications and mood states.

The microbiome:

Affects our thinking and our mood;

Influences how we develop;

Molds our personalities;

Our sociability;

Our responses to fear and pain;

Our proneness to brain disease; and

May be as or more important in these respects than our genetic makeup.

Dysbiosis has become prevalent due to removal of prebiotic fibers from today’s ultra-processed foods. I believe that dietary shift has created a generation of humans less able to sustain or receive love.

They suffer from reduced motivation and lower impulse control. They are more anxious, more depressed, more selfish, more polarized, and therefore more susceptible to the corrosive politics of identity.“

Other recent blog posts by Dr. Paul Clayton and team include Skin in The Game and Kenosha Kids.

Image from Thomas Cole : The Consummation, The Course of the Empire (1836) Canvas Gallery Wrapped Giclee Wall Art Print (D4060)

Clearing out the 2020 queue of interesting papers

December 1, 2020December 1, 2020 gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Acetylcholine, Brain development, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Dopamine, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Immune system, Limbic system, Lower brain, Memory, Neurochemicals, Serotonin, Stress Antidepressants, Brain neurons, Control group, Critical period, DNA methylation, Embryo development, Genetic factors, Infants, Inherited disease, Neural plasticity, Neurodegenerative disease, Prefrontal cortex, Psychotropic medication

I’ve partially read these 39 studies and reviews, but haven’t taken time to curate them.

Early Life

Epigenetic clocks

Epigenetics

Aging

Broccoli sprouts

Treating psychopathological symptoms will somehow resolve causes?

September 29, 2020September 9, 2021 gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Acetylcholine, Amygdala, Anterior cingulate cortex, Brain development, Cerebellum, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Dopamine, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Immune system, Limbic system, Lower brain, Memory, Neurochemicals, Serotonin, Stress, Thalamus Brain neurons, Control group, Infants, Neurodegenerative disease, Prefrontal cortex, Psychotropic medication

This 2020 Swiss review subject was potential glutathione therapies for stress:

“We examine available data supporting a role for GSH levels and antioxidant function in the brain in relation to anxiety and stress-related psychopathologies. Several promising compounds could raise GSH levels in the brain by either increasing availability of its precursors or expression of GSH-regulating enzymes through activation of Nrf2.

GSH is the main cellular antioxidant found in all mammalian tissues. In the brain, GSH homeostasis has an additional level of complexity in that expression of GSH and GSH-related enzymes are not evenly distributed across all cell types, requiring coordination between neurons and astrocytes to neutralize oxidative insults.

Increased energy demand in situations of chronic stress leads to mitochondrial ROS overproduction, oxidative damage and exhaustion of GSH pools in the brain.

Several compounds can function as precursors of GSH by acting as cysteine (Cys) donors such as taurine or glutamate (Glu) donors such as glutamine (Gln). Other compounds stimulate synthesis and recycling of GSH through activation of the Nrf2 pathway including sulforaphane and melatonin. Compounds such as acetyl-L-carnitine can increase GSH levels.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0149763419311133 “Therapeutic potential of glutathione-enhancers in stress-related psychopathologies” (not freely available)

Many animal studies of “stress-related psychopathologies” were cited without noting applicability to humans. These reviewers instead had curious none-of-this-means-anything disclaimers like:

“Comparisons between studies investigating brain disorders of such different nature such as psychiatric disorders or neurodegenerative diseases, or even between brain or non-brain related disorders should be made with caution.”

Regardless, this paper had informative sections for my 27^th week of eating broccoli sprouts every day.

1. I forgot to mention in Broccoli sprout synergies that I’ve taken 500 mg of trimethyl glycine (aka betaine) twice a day for over 15 years. Section 3.1.2 highlighted amino acid glycine:

“Endogenous synthesis is insufficient to meet metabolic demands for most mammals (including humans) and additional glycine must be obtained from diet. While most research has focused on increasing cysteine levels in the brain in order to drive GSH synthesis, glycine supplementation alone or in combination with cysteine-enhancing compounds are gaining attention for their ability to enhance GSH.”

2. Taurine dropped off my supplement regimen last year after taking 500 mg twice a day for years. It’s back on now after reading Section 3.1.3:

“Most studies that reported enhanced GSH in the brain following taurine treatment were performed under a chronic regimen and used in age-related disease models.

Such positive effects of taurine on GSH levels may be explained by the fact that cysteine is the essential precursor to both metabolites, whereby taurine supplementation may drive metabolism of cysteine towards GSH synthesis.”

3. A study in Upgrade your brain’s switchboard with broccoli sprouts was cited for its potential:

“Thalamic GSH values significantly correlated with blood GSH levels, suggesting that peripheral GSH levels may be a marker of brain GSH content. Studies point to the capacity of sulforaphane to function both as a prophylactic against stress-induced behavioral changes and as a positive modulator in healthy animals.”

Sunrise minus 5 minutes

Forcing people to learn helplessness

April 13, 2020April 13, 2020 gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Beliefs, Brainstem, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Epigenetics, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Locus coeruleus, Lower brain, Memory, Neurochemicals, Stress Antidepressants, Infants, Psychotropic medication, Unconscious feelings, Unconscious memories

Learned helplessness is a proven animal model. Its reliably-created phenotype is often the result of applying chronic unpredictable stress.

As we’re finding out worldwide, forcing humans to learn helplessness works in much the same way, with governments imposing what amounts to martial law. Never mind that related phenotypes and symptoms include:

“Social defeat
Social avoidance behavior
Irritable bowel syndrome
Depression
Anxiety
Anhedonia
Increased hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA)-axis sensitivity
Visceral hypersensitivity” [1]

Helplessness is both a learned behavior and a cumulative set of experiences. Animal models demonstrate that these phenotypes usually continue on throughout the subjects’ entire lifespans.

Will the problems caused in humans by humans be treated by removing the causes? Or will the responses be approaches such as drugs to treat the symptoms?

A major difference between our current situation and the situation depicted below is that during communism, most people didn’t really trust or believe what the authorities, newspapers, television, and radio said:

Image from Prague’s Memorial to the Victims of Communism

[1] 2014 GABAB(1) receptor subunit isoforms differentially regulate stress resilience curated in If research provides evidence for the causes of stress-related disorders, why only focus on treating the symptoms?

Too cheap for clinical trials

August 13, 2019May 28, 2022 gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Acetylcholine, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hippocampus, Limbic system, Memory, Neurochemicals, Stress Antidepressants, Brain neurons, Control group, Neurodegenerative disease, Psychotropic medication

Let’s compare and contrast a 2019 meta-analysis and a 2017 review of using acetyl-L-carnitine to treat diabetic neuropathy.

A 2019 Brazilian meta-analysis Acetyl‐L‐carnitine for the treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy of four previous trials stated:

“The risk of bias was high in both trials of different ALC doses and low in the other two trials.

No included trial measured the proportion of participants with at least moderate (30%) or substantial (50%) pain relief.

At doses greater than 1500 mg/day, ALC reduced pain more than placebo. This subgroup analysis should be viewed with caution as the evidence was even less certain than the overall analysis, which was already of very low certainty.

The placebo-controlled studies did not measure functional impairment and disability scores.

No study used validated symptom scales.

Two studies were funded by the manufacturer of ALC and the other two studies had at least one co-author who was a consultant for an ALC manufacturer.

Authors’ conclusions:

We are very uncertain whether ALC causes a reduction in pain after 6 to 12 months treatment in people with DPN, when compared with placebo, as the evidence is sparse and of low certainty.

Data on functional and sensory impairment and symptoms are lacking, or of very low certainty.

The evidence on adverse events is too uncertain to make any judgements on safety.”

A 2017 Italian review Effects of acetyl-L-carnitine in diabetic neuropathy and other geriatric disorders stated:

“A long history of diabetes mellitus and increasing age are associated with the onset of diabetic neuropathy, a painful and highly disabling complication with a prevalence peaking at 50% among elderly diabetic patients. The management of diabetic neuropathy is extremely difficult: in addition to the standard analgesics used for pain control, common treatments include opioids, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, and local anesthetics, alone or in combination. Such therapies still show a variable, often limited efficacy, however.

Many patients do not spontaneously report their symptoms to physicians, but, if asked, they often describe having experienced a persistent and non-abating pain for many years. The prevalence of painful symptoms is just as high in patients with mild neuropathy as in those with more advanced DPN.

Through the donation of acetyl groups, ALC exerts a positive action on mitochondrial energy metabolism. ALC has cytoprotective, antioxidant, and antiapoptotic effects in the nervous system.

ALC has also been proposed for the treatment of other neurological and psychiatric diseases, such as mood disorders and depression, dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and Parkinson’s disease, given that synaptic energy states and mitochondrial dysfunctions are core factors in their pathogenesis. Compared to other treatments, ALC is safe and extremely well tolerated.”

“In nerve injury, the mGlu2 receptor overexpressed by ALC binds the glutamate, reducing its concentration in the synapses with an analgesic effect. ALC may improve nerve regeneration and damage repair after primary nerve trauma.”

Where will the money come from to realize what the 2017 review promised, as well as provide what the 2019 meta-analysis required?

Do we prefer the current “limited efficacy” treatments of “opioids, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, and local anesthetics?”

Who will initiate clinical trials of a multiple of the normal dietary supplement dose (500 mg at $.25 a day, retail)? How profitable is a product whose hypothetical effective dosage for diabetic neuropathy (3000 mg) sells for only $1.50 a day?

A drug that countered effects of a traumatizing mother

July 21, 2019March 21, 2020 gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Acetylcholine, Amygdala, Brain development, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Dopamine, Epigenetics, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Memory, Neurochemicals, Oxytocin, Stress, Telomeres Brain neurons, Control group, DNA methylation, Embryo development, Genetic factors, Infants, Inherited disease, Neural plasticity, Prefrontal cortex, Psychotropic medication, Unconscious feelings, Unconscious memories

This 2019 US rodent study concerned transmitting poor maternal care to the next generation:

“The quality of parental care received during development profoundly influences an individual’s phenotype, including that of maternal behavior. Infant experiences with a caregiver have lifelong behavioral consequences.

Maternal behavior is a complex behavior requiring the recruitment of multiple brain regions including the nucleus accumbens, bed nucleus of the stria terminalis, ventral tegmental area, prefrontal cortex, amygdala, and medial preoptic area. Dysregulation within this circuitry can lead to altered or impaired maternal responsiveness.

We administered zebularine, a drug known to alter DNA methylation, to dams exposed during infancy to the scarcity-adversity model of low nesting resources, and then characterized the quality of their care towards their offspring.

We replicate that dams with a history of maltreatment mistreat their own offspring.

We show that maltreated-dams treated with zebularine exhibit lower levels of adverse care toward their offspring.

We show that administration of zebularine in control dams (history of nurturing care) enhances levels of adverse care.

We show altered methylation and gene expression in maltreated dams normalized by zebularine.

These findings lend support to the hypothesis that epigenetic alterations resulting from maltreatment causally relate to behavioral outcomes.”

“Maternal behavior is an intergenerational behavior. It is important to establish the neurobiological underpinnings of aberrant maternal behavior and explore treatments that can improve maternal behavior to prevent the perpetuation of poor maternal care across generations.”

The study authors demonstrated intergenerational epigenetic effects, and missed an opportunity to also investigate transgenerational epigenetically inherited effects. They cited reference 60 for the first part of the above quotation, but the cited reviewer misused the transgenerational term by applying it to grand-offspring instead of the great-grand-offspring.

There were resources available to replicate the study authors’ previous findings, which didn’t show anything new. Why not use such resources to uncover evidence even more applicable to humans by extending experiments to great-grand-offspring that would have no potential germline exposure to the initial damaging cause?

Could a study design similar to A limited study of parental transmission of anxiety/stress-reactive traits have been integrated? That study’s thorough removal of parental behavior would be an outstanding methodology to confirm by falsifiability whether parental behavior is both an intergenerational and a transgenerational epigenetic inheritance mechanism.

Rodent great-grand-offspring can be studied in < 9 months. It takes > 50 years for human studies to reach the great-grand-offspring transgenerational generation.

Why not attempt to “prevent the perpetuation of poor maternal care across generations?”
Isn’t it a plausible hypothesis that humans “with a history of maltreatment mistreat their own offspring?”
Isn’t it worth the extra effort to extend animal research to investigate this unfortunate chain?

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-46539-4 “Pharmacological manipulation of DNA methylation normalizes maternal behavior, DNA methylation, and gene expression in dams with a history of maltreatment”

The role of recall neurons in traumatic memories

August 21, 2018February 7, 2020 gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Amygdala, Cerebrum, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hippocampus, Immune system, Limbic system, Memory, Neurochemicals, Primal Therapy, Stress Brain neurons, Control group, Neural plasticity, Prefrontal cortex, Psychotropic medication, Unconscious feelings, Unconscious memories

This 2018 Swiss rodent study found:

“Our data show that:

A subset of memory recall–induced neurons in the DG [dentate gyrus] becomes reactivated after memory attenuation,

The degree of fear reduction positively correlates with this reactivation, and

The continued activity of memory recall–induced neurons is critical for remote fear memory attenuation.

Although other brain areas such as the prefrontal cortex and the amygdala are likely to be implicated in remote fear memories and remain to be investigated, these results suggest that fear attenuation at least partially occurs in memory recall–induced ensembles through updating or unlearning of the original memory trace of fear.

These data thereby provide the first evidence at an engram-specific level that fear attenuation may not be driven only by extinction learning, that is, by an inhibitory memory trace different from the original fear trace.

Rather, our findings indicate that during remote fear memory attenuation both mechanisms likely coexist, albeit with the importance of the continued activity of memory recall–induced neurons experimentally documented herein. Such activity may not only represent the capacity for a valence change in DG engram cells but also be a prerequisite for memory reconsolidation, namely, an opportunity for learning inside the original memory trace.

As such, this activity likely constitutes a physiological correlate sine qua non for effective exposure therapies against traumatic memories in humans: the engagement, rather than the suppression, of the original trauma.”

The researchers also provided examples of human trauma:

“We dedicate this work to O.K.’s father, Mohamed Salah El-Dien, and J.G.’s mother, Wilma, who both sadly passed away during its completion.”

So, how can this study help humans? The study had disclosed and undisclosed limitations:

1. Humans aren’t lab rats. We can ourselves individually change our responses to experiential causes of ongoing adverse effects. Standard methodologies can only apply external treatments.

2. It’s a bridge too far to go from neural activity in transgenic mice to expressing unfounded opinions on:

“A physiological correlate sine qua non for effective exposure therapies against traumatic memories in humans.”

Human exposure therapies have many drawbacks, in addition to being applied externally to the patient on someone else’s schedule. A few others were discussed in The role of DNMT3a in fear memories:

“Inability to generalize its efficacy over time,

Potential return of adverse memory in the new/novel contexts,

Context-dependent nature of extinction which is widely viewed as the biological basis of exposure therapy.”

3. Rodent neural activity also doesn’t elevate recall to become an important goal of effective human therapies. Clearly, what the rodents experienced should have been translated into human reliving/re-experiencing, not recall! Terminology used in animal studies preferentially has the same meaning with humans, since the purpose of animal studies is to help humans.

4. The researchers acknowledged that:

“Other brain areas such as the prefrontal cortex and the amygdala are likely to be implicated in remote fear memories and remain to be investigated.”

A study that provided evidence for basic principles of Primal Therapy determined another brain area:

“The findings imply that in response to traumatic stress, some individuals, instead of activating the glutamate system to store memories, activate the extra-synaptic GABA system and form inaccessible traumatic memories.”

The study I curated yesterday, Organ epigenetic memory, demonstrated organ memory storage. It’s hard to completely rule out that other body areas may also store traumatic memories.

The wide range of epigenetic memory storage vehicles is one reason why effective human therapies need to address the whole person, the whole body, and each individual’s entire history.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6394/1239 “Reactivation of recall-induced neurons contributes to remote fear memory attenuation” (not freely available)

Here’s one of the researchers’ outline:

This post has somehow become a target for spammers, and I’ve disabled comments. Readers can comment on other posts and indicate that they want their comment to apply here, and I’ll re-enable comments.

A mid-year selection of epigenetic topics

July 4, 2018July 21, 2018 gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Acetylcholine, Amygdala, Anterior cingulate cortex, Beliefs, Brain development, Brainstem, Cerebellum, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Dopamine, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Immune system, Limbic system, Lower brain, Memory, Neurochemicals, Primal Therapy, Serotonin, Stress, Telomeres, Testosterone, Vasopressin Antidepressants, Brain neurons, Conscious awareness, Control group, Critical period, DNA methylation, Dr. Arthur Janov, Embryo development, Empathy, Genetic factors, Infants, Inherited disease, Levels of consciousness, Neural plasticity, Neurodegenerative disease, Prefrontal cortex, Psychotropic medication, Unconscious feelings, Unconscious memories

Here are the most popular of the 65 posts I’ve made so far in 2018, starting from the earliest:

The pain societies instill into children

DNA methylation and childhood adversity

Epigenetic mechanisms of muscle memory

Sex-specific impacts of childhood trauma

Sleep and adult brain neurogenesis

This dietary supplement is better for depression symptoms than placebo

The epigenetic clock theory of aging

A flying human tethered to a monkey

Immune memory in the brain

The lack of oxygen’s epigenetic effects on a fetus

Melatonin and depression

June 16, 2018July 18, 2021 gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Dopamine, Epigenetics, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Neurochemicals, Serotonin Antidepressants, Brain neurons, Genetic factors, Psychotropic medication

This 2018 Polish review subject was relationships between melatonin and depression:

“Although melatonin has been known about and referred to for almost 50 years, the relationship between melatonin and depression is still not clear. In this review, we summarize current knowledge about genetic and epigenetic regulation of enzymes involved in melatonin synthesis and metabolism as potential features of depression pathophysiology and treatment.

Melatonin has an antidepressant effect by:

Maintaining the body’s circadian rhythm;

Regulating the pattern of expression of clock genes in the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN); and

Modifying key genes of serotoninergic neurotransmission that are linked with a depressive mood.

Light input causes release of γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) by the SCN, and the inhibitory signal is transmitted to the pineal gland to inhibit melatonin production.

Melatonin is produced via metabolism of serotonin in two steps which are catalyzed by serotonin N-acetyltransferase (SNAT) and acetylserotonin-O-methyltransferase (ASMT). Serotonin, SNAT, and ASMT are key melatonin level regulation factors.

Both melatonin and serotonin are synthesized from the same amino acid, tryptophan. People on a high tryptophan diet (>10 mg/kg body weight per day) have a significantly lower level of depressive symptoms, irritation, and anxiety than people on a low tryptophan diet (<5 mg/kg body weight per day).

To our knowledge, there are only 2 studies in the literature that characterize mRNA expression of ASMT in the peripheral blood of recurrent depressive disorders. They demonstrated reduced mRNA expression of ASMT in patients with depression and cognitive impairment. Surprisingly, these studies, despite promising results, have not been replicated. Moreover, no analysis of other melatonin related-genes as potential biomarkers of depression has been provided.

The main monoamine hypothesis of pathophysiology of depression indicates that depression is induced by a change in levels of ≥1 monoamines such as serotonin, noradrenaline, and dopamine. Evidence for the serotonergic theory is an observation that antidepressants such as tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors increase the level of serotonin in the brain.

We focus on serotonin as a neurotransmitter which is a precursor of melatonin synthesis. In a depressed patient, serotonin synthesis is impaired, and poor precursor availability may prevent formation of an adequate amount of melatonin. However, only a few studies have analyzed the relationship between serotonin and melatonin levels and the correlation with blood serum.”

At eight cents a day ($.04 for women), melatonin is a cheap and effective supplement.

I hadn’t considered possible antidepressant effects until reading this review. More human studies are needed.

https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/489470 “Pathophysiology of Depression: Molecular Regulation of Melatonin Homeostasis – Current Status” (not freely available)

Prenatal stress produces offspring who as adults have cognitive, emotional, and memory deficiencies

April 12, 2018June 1, 2020 gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Brain development, Cerebrum, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Memory, Neurochemicals, Oxytocin, Stress Antidepressants, Control group, Infants, Neural plasticity, Prefrontal cortex, Psychotropic medication

This 2018 French/Italian/Swiss rodent study used a prenatally restraint stressed (PRS) model to create problems that could be resolved by various chemicals:

“S 47445 is a positive modulator of glutamate AMPA-type receptors, possessing neurotrophic and enhancing synaptic plasticity effects as well as pro-cognitive and anti-stress properties.

Most of studies examining the antidepressant effects of new molecules are carried out using behavioral tests performed in unstressed animals.

Corticosterone-treated mice and rats exposed to chronic stress are models that do not recapitulate the early programming of stress-related disorders, which likely originates in the perinatal period. The PRS rat model is characterized by a prolonged corticosterone response to stress and by abnormal behavior.

All the behavioral alterations induced by PRS were corrected by chronic S 47445 administration at both doses.”

The paper included a section comparing S 47445 to ketamine:

“Ketamine, however, causes severe cognitive impairment and psychotomimetic [mimics the symptoms of psychosis, reference not freely available] effects that are direct consequences of the prolonged inhibition of NMDA receptors in cortical and hippocampal interneurons, and seriously limit the chronic administration of the drug in the clinical setting. [reference not freely available]

S 47445 by inducing a direct activation of AMPARs displayed an antidepressant activity without the adverse effect of ketamine. Indeed, contrary to ketamine, S 47445 presented no psychotomimetic effects and induced no occurrence of spontaneous epileptic seizures. [reference freely available] Moreover, S 47445 also presented pro-cognitive properties.”

Compare the above with this April 2018 Chicago Tribune story that had opinions with no linked references:

“ketamine, an anesthetic used to sedate both people and animals before surgery. It’s also a notorious street drug, abused by clubgoers seeking a trancelike, hallucinatory high. But in recent years, numerous studies have found that ketamine can be an effective and speedy treatment for people with depression.”

Which coverage better informed us?

Treating prenatal stress-related disorders with an oxytocin receptor agonist was performed by several of this paper’s coauthors. One references to it was:

“We have already reported that depolarization-evoked glutamate release in the ventral hippocampus is negatively correlated with risk-taking behavior of PRS rats, and that such correlation can be corrected by chronic treatment with monoaminergic/ melatoninergic antidepressants or oxytocin receptor agonist. Thus, an impairment of glutamatergic transmission in the ventral hippocampus lies at the core of the pathological phenotype of PRS rats.”

Looking at the above graphic of the experimental design, I’m not sure why the term perinatal (occurring during or pertaining to the phase surrounding the time of birth) was used in the paper’s title and content to describe the stress period. The pregnant females were stressed three times every day during the second half of pregnancy up until delivery, so the prenatal (previous to birth) term was more applicable.

So, how does this study help humans?

One takeaway is to avoid stressing pregnant mothers-to-be if her children will be expected to become adults without cognitive, emotional, and behavioral problems.

The study demonstrated one way prenatal events cause lifelong effects. The PRS model provides another example of why it’s useless to ask adult humans to self-report causes of epigenetic problems in their lives when these originated before birth, during infancy, or in early childhood, well before humans develop sufficient cognitive capability to recognize such situations. It’s incomprehensible that this unreliable paradigm is still given significant weight in stress studies, especially when experimental designs:

“Do not recapitulate the early programming of stress-related disorders, which likely originates in the perinatal period.”

Also, a relevant difference between humans and PRS rats is that we can ourselves individually change our responses to experiential causes of ongoing adverse effects. Standard methodologies can only apply external treatments such as those mentioned above.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028390818301291 “The reduction in glutamate release is predictive of cognitive and emotional alterations that are corrected by the positive modulator of AMPA receptors S 47445 in perinatal stressed rats” (not freely available) Thanks to coauthors Stefania Maccari and Dr. Jerome Mairesse for providing a copy.

This dietary supplement is better for depression symptoms than placebo

March 11, 2018August 8, 2022 gettingwell4 5+ stars Premium, Cerebrum, Dopamine, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hippocampus, Limbic system, Neurochemicals, Serotonin, Stress, Testosterone Antidepressants, Control group, Prefrontal cortex, Psychotropic medication

This 2018 Italy/UK meta-analysis subject was the use of dietary supplement acetyl-L-carnitine to treat depression symptoms:

“Deficiency of acetyl-L-carnitine (ALC) appears to play a role in the risk of developing depression, indicating dysregulation of fatty acids transport across the inner membrane of mitochondria. However, the data regarding ALC supplementation in humans are limited. We thus conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the effect of ALC on depressive symptoms across randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Pooled data across nine RCTs (231 treated with ALC versus 216 treated with placebo and 20 no intervention) showed that ALC significantly reduced depressive symptoms.

In these nine RCTs, the majority of the studies used 3 grams of ALC as intervention.

In three RCTs comparing ALC versus antidepressants (162 for each group), ALC demonstrated similar effectiveness compared with established antidepressants [fluoxetine (Prozac), duloxetine (Cymbalta), amisulpride (Solian) respectively below] in reducing depressive symptoms. In these latter RCTs, the incidence of adverse effects was significantly lower in the ALC group [79%] than in the antidepressant group.

Subgroup analyses suggested that ALC was most efficacious in older adults. Future large scale trials are required to confirm/refute these findings.”

From the Methods section:

“Studies were excluded if:

did not include humans;

did not include a control group;

did not use validated scales for assessing depression;

did not report data at follow-up evaluation regarding tests assessing depression;

included the use of ALC with another agent vs. placebo/no intervention.”

The Discussion section was informative regarding possible mechanisms of ALC affecting depression, pain, and linked symptoms. Several citations were of a review rather than of the original studies, however.

Research needs to proceed on to investigate therapies that address ultimate causes for depression and pain. Researchers and sponsors shouldn’t stop at just symptoms and symptom relief, notwithstanding the requirement from a statistical point of view for “future large scale trials.”

Here are other acetyl-L-carnitine topics I’ve curated:

https://journals.lww.com/psychosomaticmedicine/Citation/2018/02000/Acetyl_L_Carnitine_Supplementation_and_the.4.aspx “Acetyl-L-Carnitine Supplementation and the Treatment of Depressive Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis” (not freely available)

Placebo is better than these drugs

March 10, 2018October 19, 2018 gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Neurochemicals, Serotonin, Stress Antidepressants, Psychotropic medication

Consider this post a reblog of Neuroskeptic’s informative About that New Antidepressant Study.

“Here’s why the new study doesn’t tell us much new. The authors..conclude that “all antidepressants were more effective than placebo,” but the benefits compared to placebo were “mostly modest.” Using the Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) measure of effect size, Cipriani et al. found an effect of 0.30, on a scale where 0.2 is considered ‘small’ and 0.5 ‘medium.’

The thing is, “effective but only modestly” has been the established view on antidepressants for at least 10 years. Just to mention one prior study, the Turner et al. (2008) meta-analysis found the overall effect size of antidepressants to be a modest SMD=0.31 – almost exactly the same as the new estimate.”

From the comments section:

“I put his data in a Forest plot and ALL of the positive effect[s] by CBT [cognitive behavior therapy] could be explained by publication bias.

Paroxetine was developed in 1975 and FDA approved for MDD in 1992. It was 2017 before we discovered the true data behind suicides in these trials. That is 25 years. The order of SSRI approval is fluoxetine-> sertraline-> paroxetine-> citalopram-> escitalopram. We know from court cases and other efforts that the suicide data for the first three are false.

PhRMA never got serious about studying clinically meaningful subtypes of “depression” so most data in the meta-analysis just bear on a weak construct called “major depression.”

The reality is these drugs do not help depression much (if any) at all – their effect is to numb the emotions in most people.

The only thing worse than Paxil is Paxil withdrawal.”

Another review of the study, Rewarding the Companies That Cheated the Most in Antidepressant Trials, from which this post is titled, had these comments:

“Patients who take part in these drug trials have been on an antidepressant before the trial. They are then put on placebo for 10 days, a so-called washout. Then half the group, now in cold turkey wit[h]drawal, is now put back on a similar drug to what they had 10 days earlier, and the other group gets to continue their Cold turkey withdrawal.

The fact that these studies are just testing relief from abstinence symptoms by taking a similar drug, could explain why there is no effect in children and young adults.

Most people don’t realize that we are talking about statistical significance, and not clinical significance. The so-called significant difference between drug and placebo is approximately two points on the Hamilton depression scale. The difference has to be at least three for either patient or therapist to notice a difference.

According to this study (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23357658), changes of three points or less on the HAM-D correspond to ratings of “no change” on clinician‐rated global symptom severity.

What this study has confirmed is that antidepressants can create a totally insignificant difference compared to a placebo pill. The placebo pill is often combined with attention and close follow up with a professional, and this has a very positive effect.”

A study of gene-environment interactions

March 7, 2018March 31, 2020 gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Epigenetics, Neurochemicals, Serotonin, Stress Antidepressants, DNA methylation, Neural plasticity, Psychotropic medication

This 2018 Hungary/UK study used Bayesian analysis to better understand gene-environment interactions that produce depression:

“Most genetic studies do not consider the effect of stressors which may be one reason for the lack of replicable results in candidate gene studies, GWAS [genome-wide association studies] and between human studies and animal models. Animal models of depression usually imply environmental factors, such as chronic unpredictable stress or learned helplessness.

Relevance of functional polymorphisms in seven candidate genes previously implicated in animal and human studies on a depression-related phenotype given various recent stress exposure levels was assessed with Bayesian relevance analysis in 1682 subjects.

Our data support the strong causative role of the environment modified by genetic factors, similar to animal models.”

From the Methods and Materials section:

“In order to identify recent negative life events (RLE) we used the List of Threatening Experiences questionnaire which queried problems related to illnesses/injuries, financial difficulties, problems related to intimate relationships, and social network occurring in the last year. Based on corresponding items the number of RLEs was counted for each subject, and categorized (low = 0–1, moderate = 2, high = 3/more).”

One item from the findings, and two from the cited references were:

“5-HTTLPR [serotonin transporter], the most extensively investigated polymorphism with respect to interaction with life events, showed only very low relevance.

Compared to heritability which accounts for 37–42% in the variance in general population samples, influence of environmental effects is estimated at 63% in depression.

Etiologically relevant distal and proximal stressors are relatively common, and while frequency of severe life events is estimated to be one in every 3–4 years, depression is triggered in only about one fifth of those with acute stress exposure.”

The methods of this study bypassed problems with GWAS and provided evidence for the lasting effects of “Etiologically relevant distal..stressors.” This was another way of saying that traumatic experiences beginning from the earliest parts of our lives can affect our lifelong biology and behavior.

As mentioned in Changing an individual’s future behavior even before they’re born, GWAS:

“Focuses on the average effect of alternative alleles averaged in a population.”

What this methodology often missed was:

“When phenotypic variation results from alleles that modify phenotypic variance rather than the mean, this link between genotype and phenotype will not be detected.”

The problems found in GWAS may also be found in epigenome-wide association studies. Researchers conducting DNA methylation analyses in particular may benefit from changing their approach if what they’re doing follows the GWAS paradigm.

Using twins to estimate the extent of epigenetic effects summarized three studies’ methods that showed:

“The epigenetic effects of each of our unique experiences of our non-shared environment predominately determine our individual physiology.”

This study’s approach should be considered, given the almost 2:1 relative impacts of environmental over genetic factors in influencing our biology and behavior. It’s especially indicated when human studies don’t replicate animal studies’ findings from strictly controlled experimental environments.

It wasn’t the study’s purpose to evaluate effective treatments for depression. Yet the abstract ended with:

“Galanin-2 receptor, BDNF and X-type purin-7 receptor could be drug targets for new antidepressants.”

The researchers were very careful to document the benefits of using a different approach to a problem. I hope that in the future, they will maintain their carefulness and independence in their approach to solutions, and not be influenced by:

“Consultancy, speaking engagements and research for Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Schering Plough, Janssen-Cilag and Servier..share options in P1vital..consultancy fees from Alkermes, Lundbeck-Otsuka Ltd., Janssen-Cilag Ltd and fees for speaking from Lundbeck.”

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-22221-z “Significance of risk polymorphisms for depression depends on stress exposure”