BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > Supplements
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Unread 05-17-2014, 01:09 PM
Primalkid Primalkid is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,239
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shady View Post
I'd be hesitant to take 1g+/day without checking LFTs. I do enjoy the tingles though.
Niacin isn't hard on the liver in healthy individuals. Part of the issue also stems from the fact that most aren't abusing niacin in its proper physiological state. In other words, most take niacin with a bunch of fat and then eat carbs afterwards. Complete opposite of its MOA and this leads to problems.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Unread 05-17-2014, 03:47 PM
shady shady is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 88
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Primalkid View Post
Niacin isn't hard on the liver in healthy individuals. Part of the issue also stems from the fact that most aren't abusing niacin in its proper physiological state. In other words, most take niacin with a bunch of fat and then eat carbs afterwards. Complete opposite of its MOA and this leads to problems.
Niacin is indeed hard on the liver in dose dependent fashion and substantially more when time released. A gram is probably fine in the majority of the population but it's not without risk. There's a reason we check lfts in people on chronic niacin therapy.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Unread 05-17-2014, 09:30 PM
Primalkid Primalkid is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,239
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shady View Post
Niacin is indeed hard on the liver in dose dependent fashion and substantially more when time released. A gram is probably fine in the majority of the population but it's not without risk. There's a reason we check lfts in people on chronic niacin therapy.
No it is not. Show me one study in healthy and lean individuals in which that is the case. Looking at niacin's basic mode of action, it becomes clear why fat hypercholesterolemic individuals suffer problems with it. However, when (ab)using it in a manner that takes advantage of its physiological effects within the body, there is no risk.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Unread 05-18-2014, 12:15 AM
shady shady is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 88
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Primalkid View Post
No it is not. Show me one study in healthy and lean individuals in which that is the case. Looking at niacin's basic mode of action, it becomes clear why fat hypercholesterolemic individuals suffer problems with it. However, when (ab)using it in a manner that takes advantage of its physiological effects within the body, there is no risk.
JAMA, 1994 vol. 271(9) pp. 672-7
A comparison of the efficacy and toxic effects of sustained- vs immediate-release niacin in hypercholesterolemic patients

52% had evidence of hepatotoxicity. As I mentioned, likely a culprit of the sustained release version but caution is warranted. There's multiple case reports of liver failure from niacin (presumably immediate release) as well. I'm not gonna spoon feed you those. And don't retort with "these people aren't 20 and pictures of health." That's not the target population of the drug and this isn't a phase 1 study. Don't ever claim something is completely benign, you're almost always wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Unread 05-18-2014, 11:11 AM
Primalkid Primalkid is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,239
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shady View Post
JAMA, 1994 vol. 271(9) pp. 672-7
A comparison of the efficacy and toxic effects of sustained- vs immediate-release niacin in hypercholesterolemic patients

52% had evidence of hepatotoxicity. As I mentioned, likely a culprit of the sustained release version but caution is warranted. There's multiple case reports of liver failure from niacin (presumably immediate release) as well. I'm not gonna spoon feed you those. And don't retort with "these people aren't 20 and pictures of health." That's not the target population of the drug and this isn't a phase 1 study. Don't ever claim something is completely benign, you're almost always wrong.
Do you not see that this was in sick people? I asked for studies in lean and healthy folk, because as I stated earlier, when niacin is (ab)used correctly there is no risk.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Unread 05-18-2014, 11:33 AM
shady shady is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 88
Default

So you're implying that elevated cholesterol makes you "sick" by your definition and suddenly your liver is prone to failure? Furthermore, you're recommending a potentially hepatotoxic supplement to a group of people who routinely practice polypharmacy. Find me a study saying it's safe in said population - exercise extremists, polypharmacy, high doses, whilst starving themselves. Your argument is ridiculous. All I said is acknowledge it's potentially hepatotoxic. Instead you rely on absolutes.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Unread 05-18-2014, 01:29 PM
Primalkid Primalkid is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,239
Default

Yes that is what I am saying. Studies show hepatoxicity in individuals who are already ill and whose bodies are different than a healthy and lean persons. In the later, niacin has not been shown to be problematic.

Edit to add: I'm not trying to be argumentative and if you have research showing me side-effects in healthy individuals then please share them and it would be much appreciated. Furthermore, if my statements seem backwards I encourage you to think of other compounds (such as ALA) which have different effects in obese and lean persons.

Last edited by Primalkid : 05-18-2014 at 01:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Unread 05-18-2014, 03:51 PM
noah_k noah_k is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 391
Default

^ +1

Cherrypicking studies and getting angry that someone would dare to ask for a test population of normal qualities and sample size is silly and doesn't achieve anything. This isn't debate class, we all benefit from knowing the full scope of things. Don't make it personal, shady.

I was curious about the discrepancies between IR, ER, and SR, IR seems to have no complications with normal doses since it is used / eliminated readily. Here's another study from 2007

http://www.lipidjournal.com/article/...096-7/abstract

Quote:
The mechanism of hepatotoxicity is unknown and a toxic metabolite of nicotinic acid has not been identified. Different nicotinic acid formulations produce different metabolite patterns due to nonlinear pharmacokinetics, but there is no evidence that these differences have any clinical importance.
And another which touches on said discrepancy (full text is same page) but ultimately just focuses on ER doses in the very sick http://ndt.oxfordjournals.org/conten...344.full#ref-9


So this isn't something I've studied, you both seem more familiar with its moa right off the bat. But the theoretical potential for hepatoxicity in an IR formula that hasn't been observed in a clinical setting (not something I'm sure of) is not the same as actual risk. Vitamin D toxicity is a very real condition but it's not a risk to be concerned of given normal sun exposure, food, and supplement intake.

Last edited by noah_k : 05-18-2014 at 04:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Unread 05-18-2014, 06:34 PM
Dezso's Avatar
Dezso Dezso is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 107
Default

before everyone jumps on the niacin hype train, you may want to check out Lyle's response in this thread:

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showt...ghlight=niacin

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
What do you think increasing GH 'by a ton' will do? Be specific.

Esp. given niacin's KNOWN role in inhibiting fat mobilization.
based on this, it may seem actually detrimental to fat loss.
__________________
huss huss huss
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Unread 05-18-2014, 08:55 PM
Primalkid Primalkid is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,239
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezso View Post
before everyone jumps on the niacin hype train, you may want to check out Lyle's response in this thread:

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showt...ghlight=niacin



based on this, it may seem actually detrimental to fat loss.
Re-read my OP. Niacin does indeed inhibit fat mobilization BUT this is only in the first 1.5-2 hours after pharmacological dosage intake. This is because it enhances glucose oxidation, and is why I take it with my LAST carbohydrate heavy meal of the day. It will help nutrient partitioning of said meal.

After this time, the body "rebounds" if you will and floods the blood with fatty acids, which inherently puts the body in "fat-burning" mode. Thus you don't want carbohydrates during this time because that will lead to diabetic issues, and again, this is why niacin is taken with the last carb-heavy meal. For most this may be dinner and then you go into sleep with a nice fat-burning boost. Indeed on my recovery days this is the case. On my training days, since I train in the mornings, my last carb-heavy meal is lunch and dinner is PRO/FAT, which won't interfere with niacin's MOA.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.