#102

** 5. Conclusions**

Overall, our findings clearly show that with the use of the pasteurized form, there was no loss of therapeutic potency of A. muciniphila, compared to its live form.

In conclusion, the above our outcomes displayed that A. muciniphila improved body weight, plasma biochemical and inflammatory markers, and morphology of vital tissues. The administration of both alive and pasteurized A. muciniphila , significantly promote gut, adipose, and liver health by modulating immune response and lipid metabolism as well as intestinal homeostasis by improving gut barrier functions and intestine microbiota composition in the study groups. According to better health effects of pasteurized A. muciniphila , use of the pasteurized form as a new strategy seems to be a valid, safe, and potentially more cost-effective medication to improve the host’s health and reduce the risk of metabolic disorders.

Both are mouse studies.

1 Like
#103

I just don’t understand how dead bacteria can have beneficial effects. I thought the mechanism of benefit comes from the metabolism of the live bacteria in the gut. I am definitely missing something here.

4 Likes
#104

Sorry. I am not a scientist, so I am not qualified to explain. Neither do I want to hazard a speculative explanation. I am just quoting the results and conclusions of scientific studies.

My point in quoting, is that if both are effective, there is no need (for me) to choose. With respect to purchase choices of others, it boils down to a matter of preference.

1 Like
#105

My turn to apologize, because I didn’t mean to point that question at you as if you are the advocate. I was just surprised while reading this thread of the multiple references to dead bacteria potentially showing a benefit. I’d be interested in trying pasteurized bacteria if I understood the mechanism of benefit. To me a pasteurized probiotic is an oxymoron, so I’d truly learn something if I could wrap my head around the concept.

1 Like
#106

I assume with the live form you are good as long as they are well fed, with the dead form you have to keep buying and swallowing to get the benefits.

1 Like
#107

When people talk of the “dead” form, is it really dead or just dormant? If it is really dead then how can it have any beneficial effect?

2 Likes
#108

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2022.934695/fullhttps://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2022.934695/full

It is known that the impairment of homeostasis and the integrity of the intestinal barrier result in the development of metabolic and gastrointestinal disorders (18, 19). The intestinal mucosal barrier has evolved to maintain a balance between the absorption of essential nutrients and the prevention of pathogen translocation (20). The integrity of the intestinal epithelium is maintained by tight junctions (TJs), adherens junctions (AJs), and desmosome complexes of the epithelium, whose expression can be increased by probiotics or compounds produced by them, such as extracellular vesicles (EVs) or outer membrane microvesicles (OMVs) in the case of Gram-negative bacteria (21–23).

Interestingly, several studies have indicated that the outer membrane compounds of A. muciniphila , or pasteurized bacteria, have greater therapeutic potential for metabolic, inflammatory, and autoimmune diseases than live A. muciniphila (36–38).

So it is not the bacterium itself that provides the benefits, but its outer membrane. So live or pasteurized does not affect its ability to provide health benefits.

A caveat about live akkermansia

Although A. muciniphila is a common component of the human and murine gastrointestinal tracts and has a beneficial role for the integrity of the intestinal mucosa, when intestinal dysbiosis occurs, the colonization by A. muciniphila can exacerbate the inflammation (11, 33).

It seems that one can get akkermansia from kombucha.

We found that all nine kombuchas also contained varying levels of enteric bacteria including Bacteroides thetaiotamicron , Escherischia coli , Enterococcus faecalis , Bacteroides fragilis , Enterobacter cloacae complex , and Akkermansia muciniphila .

5 Likes
#109

I just saw this, but have yet to investigate it
 anyone heard of it or looked into it?

The supplement:

1 Like
#110

Supplement facts

White mulberry leaf extract 250 mg
Lemon extract 250 mg
“Glucose Goddess” proprietary antioxidants 100 mg
Cinnamon bark extract 85 mg

Per two capsules. So cost is $130 per month.

Poke around, Prices of the individual ingredients are cheap.

3 Likes
#111

It was mentioned in this briefly.

1 Like
#112

It’s a bias against stupid social media handles I admit, but I wouldn’t buy water from this lady if my hair was on fire.

5 Likes
#113

@RapAdmin Here’s a review of the glucose goddess supplement. [hint: it’s not good]

3 Likes
#114

Watched a few of her videos (the vinegar hack). She’s got the looks. I would cast her in a rom-com (no acting ability needed).

1 Like
#115

Any particular reason that you linked to this? The internet is full of marketing schemes and people looking to capitalize on the health craze
why this? And is there any connection to Akkermansia other than glucose control?

#116

The key mechanism that has been proposed for acarbose and canagliflozin is the reduced spike in Post prandial glucose, so if this supplement was effective it might have the same effect.

1 Like
#117

I’m note sure about her supplement, but I heard a post cast with here a year or so ago and she had a lot of principles (how to sequence foods, when and how to add post meal movement, etc) that actually ended up working for me when I tried them.

So there might be valuable learnings from her - as someone who has devoted years to find approaches to modulate glucose spikes.

2 Likes
#118

Back on the subject of akkermansia, if one is hoping that the Pendulum product will ‘take’ after a few months and you can discontinue, the study they did to show effectiveness seems to imply that’s not likely to happen.

This chart shows the frequency of detection at baseline, and 4, 12, and 16 weeks. (16 weeks is 4 weeks after end of study.)

WBF-011 is the arm that had akkermansia in the formulation. AMUC is akkermansia. Per the plot, only 20% of the participants had any detectible level 4 weeks after study end.

akk trial dissipation

The study: https://drc.bmj.com/content/8/1/e001319.full

3 Likes
#119

Yep. 20%. That’s the bet.

1 Like
#120

Something I don’t understand is that it seems like that same panel in the graph is saying that zero percent had any Akk bacteria before the study began?

Did they have that as an inclusion criteria?

Otherwise something seems off or to be normalized in some way


For example, in both my pre Pendulum GDX and Viome microbiome tests Akk bacteria were detected (though GDX provided levels and they were low). More generally, my understanding was that a much greater part of the population has Akk with supplementation than the zero level in that chart


1 Like
#121

From the section following the (qPCR) chart:

image
image1081×450 83.5 KB

So it seems gene sequencing found a lot more participants with akk at baseline than what is plotted in the chart.

My A1c was 5.4 in October, I started GC end of December, and my Feb 2 A1c was 5.1. Will test again in a couple weeks and see if the trend continues.

Per Thorne, I already had some akk at baseline as well.

4 Likes