Wednesday, July 30, 2008

You ever wonder what makes u fat?

British and French scientists have identified several variants of a
single gene that boost the risk of obesity, according to a study
published Sunday in the British journal Nature.

The biggest
protein myth is that you can only digest 30 grams of protein at one
time. Find out what's wrong with this belief and just how much protein
you need. This is a common question. I also get variations such as, how
much protein can you digest at one time?

There are two ways to answer this, because there really two questions being asked.

1) How much protein can the digestive system physically absorb into the bloodstream from a meal?

And the MORE IMPORTANT QUESTION...

2) How much protein can you body actually utilize?

The answers...

1) About 95% and higher, unless you have some type of digestive system malfunction.

So
if you get convinced by supplement companies to drink a 42g protein
shake in 5 minutes, you'll still probably absorb at 38 or more grams of
that protein.

Your muscle growth is not limited by the amount of protein you can DIGEST or ABSORB.

Your muscle growth IS LIMITED by the amount of protein that your body can utilize for protein synthesis.

So the answer to #2...

2) A lot less than you think.

You
really don't need 40, or 30, or probably even 20g of protein per meal
to keep your protein synthesis humming along. See Nutrition Help Expert
Brad Pilon's post on "How Much Protein Do We Really Need"

Any
protein that your body can't use for growth will be shuttled into a
process where it is broken down (de-aminated: meaning the nitrogen is
removed from the molecule and it becomes a carbon skeleton) to be used
in energy pathways.

Now, there are benefits for eating extra protein (in my opinion) when dieting, mainly that it helps to suppress appetite.

But the bottom line to the question I am asked almost everyday is...

a) Your body can digest and absorb almost all of the protein you eat without problem.

b)
Your muscles can only do so much with protein...the muscle growth
process is RARELY, if ever limited by the amount of protein we consume.
Almost all of us can easily get enough protein for maximum muscle
growth without the need for eating 50g of protein 6 times per day.
Ronnie Coleman, Jay Cutler, and Gunter Schlerkcamp excluded, of course.

Overall,
I'd think twice about the need to slam down a 40-50g protein
shake...just think of the children and puppies you'll save by not
gassing them out with protein farts.

Real food should cover all your protein needs.

Craig
Ballantyne is a Certified Strength & Conditioning Specialist and
writes for Men's Health and Oxygen magazines. His trademarked Turbulence Training for Fat Loss Nutrition Guidelines have helped thousands of men and women with weight loss and fat burning in less than 45 minutes three times per week. More nutrition help and fat loss workouts show you how to burn fat without long, slow cardio sessions or fancy equipment. Craig's bodyweight for abs exercises help you lose fat without any equipment at all.

N.Y. Research Team Discovers How Antidepressants And Cocaine Interact With Brain Cell Targets

n a first, scientists from Weill Cornell Medical College and Columbia University Medical Center have described the specifics of how brain cells process antidepressant drugs, cocaine and amphetamines. These novel findings could prove useful in the development of more targeted medication therapies for a host of psychiatric diseases, most notably in the area of addiction.

Their breakthrough research, featured as the cover story in a recent issue of Molecular Cell, describes the precise molecular and biochemical structure of drug targets known as neurotransmitter-sodium symporters (NSSs), and how cells use them to enable neural signaling in the brain. A second study, published in the latest issue of Nature Neuroscience, pinpoints where the drug molecules bind in the neurotransmitter transporter — their target in the human nervous system.

“These findings are so clear and detailed at the level of molecular behavior that they will be most valuable to developing more effective therapies for mood disorders and neurologic and psychiatric diseases, and to direct effective treatments for drug addiction to cocaine and amphetamines,” says co-lead author Dr. Harel Weinstein, Chairman and Maxwell M. Upson Professor of Physiology and Biophysics, and director of the Institute for Computational Biomedicine at Weill Cornell Medical College. “This research may also open the door to the development of new therapies for dopamine-neurotransmitter disorders such as Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, and anxiety and depression.”

To make their observations, the research team led by Dr. Jonathan Javitch, senior author of the Molecular Cell study and contributing author to the Nature Neuroscience study, and professor of Psychiatry and Pharmacology in the Center for Molecular Recognition at Columbia University Medical Center, stabilized different structural states of the neurotransmitter-sodium-symporter molecule that relate to steps in its function. This allowed the team to study how substrates and inhibitors affect the transition between these different states, and thus to understand the way in which its function is accomplished.

“Crystallography had allowed the identification of only one structural form of the molecule, but our experiments and computations were able to identify how this form changes and thereby add an understanding of the functional role of the different forms that the molecule must adopt to accomplish transport activity,” says Dr. Javitch.

The main surprise was the realization that two binding sites on the transporter molecule need to be filled simultaneously and cooperate in order for transport to be driven across the cell membrane. For these studies, the scientists used the crystal structure of a bacterial transporter that is very similar to human neurotransmitter transporters. They performed computer simulations to reveal the path of the transported molecules into cells. Laboratory experimentation was used to test the computational predictions and validate the researchers’ inferences.

Together, these procedures revealed a finely-tuned process in which two sodium ions bind and stabilize the transporter molecule for the correct positioning of the two messenger molecules — one deep in the center of the protein, and the other closer to the entrance. Like a key engaging a lock mechanism, this second binding causes changes in the transporter throughout the structure, allowing one of the two sodium molecules to move inward, and then release the deeply bound messenger and its sodium partner into the cell.

In the bacterial transporter studied, antidepressant molecules bind in the outer one of two sites, and stop the transport mechanism, leaving the messenger molecule outside the cell.

The second team of researchers, involving a collaboration of the Weinstein and Javitch labs with colleagues in Denmark (the labs of Ulrik Gether and Claus Loland), found that in the human dopamine transporter cocaine binds in the deep site, unlike the antidepressant binding in the bacterial transporter. Therefore, the researchers conclude that anti-cocaine therapy will be more complicated, because interfering with cocaine binding also means interference with the binding of natural messengers.

“This finding might steer anti-cocaine therapy in a completely new direction,” says Dr. Weinstein.

Molecular understanding at this level of structural and dynamic detail is rare in the world of drug development, the authors note. Only about 15 percent of all drugs have a known molecular method-of-action, even though the effects of these drugs within the body — after very stringent and controlled laboratory testing — are well understood pharmacologically.

Contributing authors to the Molecular Cell study include Dr. Lei Shi from Weill Cornell Medical College, who had a major role in the computational simulations; Dr. Matthias Quick from Columbia University Medical Center and the New York State Psychiatric Institute, who had a major role in the experimental component; and Dr. Yongfang Zhao from Columbia University Medical Center.

Lead authors of the Nature Neuroscience study are first author Dr. Thijs Beuming of Weill Cornell Medical College and senior authors Drs. Claus Loland and Ulrik Gether of The Panum Institute of the University of Copenhagen, Denmark. Additional co-authors include Drs. Julie Kniazeff, Marianne Bergmann and Klaudia Raniszewska of The Panum Institute of the University of Copenhagen; Drs. Lei Shi and Luis Gracia of Weill Cornell; and Dr. Amy Hauck Newman of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).

The NIH supported these studies, and it is noteworthy that both the Molecular Cell and the Nature Neuroscience study share an NIH funding source, a Program Project grant awarded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and directed by Dr. Weinstein, with Drs. Javitch and Gether each directing one of the projects. Additional support came from the Danish Medical Research Council, the Lundbeck Foundation, the Novo Nordisk Foundation and the Maersk Foundation — all in Europe.

Thursday, July 03, 2008

Researchers Create DNA Logic Circuits That Work In Test Tubes

A Caltech group led by computer scientist Erik Winfree reports that they have created DNA logic circuits that work in salt water, similar to an intracellular environment. Such circuits could lead to a biochemical microcontroller, of sorts, for biological cells and other complex chemical systems. The lead author of the paper is Georg Seelig, a postdoctoral scholar in Winfree's lab.

"Digital logic and water usually don't mix, but these circuits work in water because they are based on chemistry, not electronics," explains Winfree, an associate professor of computer science and computation and neural systems who is also a recipient of a MacArthur genius grant.

Rather than encoding signals in high and low voltages, the circuits encode signals in high and low concentrations of short DNA molecules. The chemical logic gates that perform the information processing are also DNA molecules, with each gate a carefully folded complex of multiple short DNA strands.

When a gate encounters the right input molecules, it releases its output molecule. This output molecule in turn can help trigger a downstream gate--so the circuit operates like a cascade of dominoes in which each falling domino topples the next one.

However, unlike dominoes and electronic circuits, components of these DNA circuits have no fixed position and cannot be simply connected by a wire. Instead, the chemistry takes place in a well-mixed solution of molecules that bump into each other at random, relying on the specificity of the designed interactions to ensure that only the right signals trigger the right gates.

"We were able to construct gates to perform all the fundamental binary logic operations--AND, OR, and NOT," explains Seelig. "These are the building blocks for constructing arbitrarily complex logic circuits."

As a demonstration, the researchers created a series of circuits, the largest one taking six inputs processed by 12 gates in a cascade five layers deep. While this is not large by the standards of Silicon Valley, Winfree says that it demonstrates several design principles that could be important for scaling up biochemical circuits.

"Biochemical circuits have been built previously, both in test tubes and in cells," Winfree says. "But the novel thing about these circuits is that their function relies solely on the properties of DNA base-pairing. No biological enzymes are necessary for their operation.

"This allows us to use a systematic and modular approach to design their logic circuits, incorporating many of the features of digital electronics," Winfree says.

Other advantages of the approach are signal restoration for the production of correct output even when noise is introduced, and standardization of the chemical-circuit signals by the use of translator gates that can use naturally occurring biological molecules, such as microRNA, as inputs. This suggests that the DNA logic circuits could be used for detecting specific cellular abnormalities, such as a certain type of cancer in a tissue sample, or even in vivo.

"The idea is not to replace electronic computers for solving math problems," Winfree says. "Compared to modern electronic circuits, these are painstakingly slow and exceedingly simple. But they could be useful for the fast-growing discipline of synthetic biology, and could help enable a new generation of technologies for embedding 'intelligence' in chemical systems for biomedical applications and bionanotechnology."

The other authors of the paper are David Soloveichik and Dave Zhang, both Caltech grad students in computation and neural systems.