Mastering Nutrition

Latest Episodes:

How much vitamin C should I take with collagen? | Masterjohn Q&A Files #76 Mar 04, 2020

Show notes

Question: How much vitamin C should I take with collagen?

There's no evidence that you need to take vitamin C with collagen. There is a study by Keith Baar, who showed that 15 grams of gelatin, not collagen, but I suspect the collagen is exactly the same, 15 grams of gelatin but not 5 grams, the dose is important, with 50 milligrams of vitamin C taken before exercise improved collagen synthesis in the tendons. They included 50 milligrams of vitamin C because it's made for collagen synthesis, but they don't show that you needed the vitamin C. They just had the vitamin C in there. I don't know if it even matters in that context whether you need the vitamin C. I also have no reason to think that you need 50 milligrams instead of 10 or that 100 milligrams wouldn't work better because they didn't test the different doses. They tested the different doses of gelatin. I see no reason to think a high dose of collagen is any different in this respect.

Let's assume that it's the same. What that means that I'm very confident that you need 15 grams instead of 5 grams when you take it before exercise to increase synthesis of collagen in tendons if that's what you care about. I have no confidence about how much vitamin C you need if you need any. But if you want to do what they did, then I do feel confident that 50 milligrams is enough to get some effect. I just don't know if it's enough to get maximal effect and I don't know if it's necessary at all or in that dose to get that effect.

If it's for joint health and if it's taken before exercise, the timing is important because what you're trying to do is leverage the exercise to get more blood flow of the nutrients to the joints. That's why the timing matters. In that case, you take the vitamin C with the collagen, 50 milligrams is the dose we know works. We don't know if it's necessary, and we don't know if it's optimal. We just know that it works. If you're not taking it for joint health and you're not taking it specifically before exercise, you still need vitamin C. But the timing doesn't matter and pairing it to the collagen doesn't matter.

This Q&A can also be found as part of a much longer episode, here: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/podcast/2019/03/30/ask-anything-nutrition-march-4-2019

If you would like to be part of the next live Ask Me Anything About Nutrition, sign up for the CMJ Masterpass, which includes access to these live Zoom sessions, premium features on all my content, and hundreds of dollars of exclusive discounts. You can sign up with a 10% lifetime discount here: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/q&a

Access the show notes, transcript, and comments here.

Chris Masterjohn, PhD, is the Founder and Scientific Director of the mitochondria test Mitome.

Are liver capsules as good as eating liver? | Masterjohn Q&A Files #75 Mar 03, 2020

Show notes

Question: Are liver capsules as good as eating liver?

Liver pills are mainly for people who are not going to eat liver. That's the first thing. The second thing is, there are advantages to taking the dosing schedule of a little bit of liver every day.

Probably the ideal thing would be to have 10 to 20 grams of fresh liver every day. But the number of people who are going to do that are even smaller than the number of people who are going to eat the fresh liver. What the liver pills do is, number one, they give people who don't eat liver that frequently to get the nutrients that have absorption caps that are better off gotten in small doses at a time to get those every day. It gives people who are not going to eat liver at all a way to get liver in. I don't know. I mean, it's a tradeoff. Probably almost no one is going to eat 10 to 20 grams of liver every day. If you don't, are you better off taking the capsules or are you better off taking liver once a week? You're probably better off taking half and half, like take three capsules every day and still eat liver once a week. It's probably the best thing to do in that case.

I don't recommend anyone who would otherwise eat liver stop eating liver and take the capsules, but I do recommend the people who won't eat liver take the capsules. I think it's a nice thing to do. If you eat liver but take the capsules anyway, then take that in a lower dose because you eat liver. Like I said, eat one serving of liver once a week or twice a month and take two, three, or four of the capsules instead of six; two, three or four capsules every day. I think that's a happy medium that can have best approximates the best thing which is the 10 to 20 grams of liver a day.

This Q&A can also be found as part of a much longer episode, here: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/podcast/2019/03/30/ask-anything-nutrition-march-4-2019

Access the show notes, transcript, and comments here.

Chris Masterjohn, PhD, is the Founder and Scientific Director of the mitochondria test Mitome.

Should I take 3 grams of leucine per meal? | Masterjohn Q&A Files #74 Mar 02, 2020

Show notes

Question: Should I take 3 grams of leucine per meal?

Leucine is metabolized into a leucine metabolite that is the signal of protein synthesis. It's the thing that tells your muscles whether they should be synthesizing protein. But do you synthesize more protein when you upregulate all the factors of muscle protein synthesis? Well, that is entirely dependent on the amount of amino acids you have supplied. Think about it this way. Why is leucine used as the marker to determine how much muscle protein to make? Because usually when you get leucine, it's with high-quality protein that has all the other amino acids that you need to make muscle protein.

Now, the question is, is meat better than isolated protein? The research is pointing in the direction that at least some whole foods are just better than protein supplements, number one. Perhaps as a general principle, perhaps whole protein foods are better than protein supplements, number two. Number three, taking leucine or the leucine metabolite that regulates muscle protein synthesis is not going to be better than getting whole proteins even from protein supplements when you get enough protein to provide that leucine because the leucine and its metabolite don't actually achieve peak muscle protein synthesis unless you supply the protein with it. If you supply the protein with it, you do get the leucine.

There probably are questions that can still be worked out about this, but it's probably going to wind up being that it's a waste of time to take the leucine if you're getting enough protein, and it's stupid to take the leucine and not get enough protein. You should just eat a lot of protein is where I think this is going.

This Q&A can also be found as part of a much longer episode, here: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/podcast/2019/03/30/ask-anything-nutrition-march-4-2019

Access the show notes, transcript, and comments here.

Chris Masterjohn, PhD, is the Founder and Scientific Director of the mitochondria test Mitome.

What are your thoughts on root canals? | Masterjohn Q&A Files #73 Feb 28, 2020

Show notes

Question: What are your thoughts on root canals?

Before Weston Price embarked on his journeys that led to the publication of Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, which is an epic pioneering work in nutritional anthropology, before he did that, he spent 25 years as the first research director for what became the American Dental Association, researching in laboratory science and clinical science what were the causes of tooth decay and the consequences of tooth decay.

Price's argument was that no matter what you do to get the infection out of the main areas of the teeth, you are never going to get it out of the nooks and crannies of the dental tubules. If you basically try to get rid of the infection and then you stuff something in there and make sure it never comes out, you create a hypoxic environment that basically causes whatever is in there to mutate in worse possible form.

George Meinig wrote a book called Root Canal Cover-Up. He was a root canal guy, an endodontist. Now, the endodontists say that Price's work was discredited a long time ago and that this is complete BS.

Now, the problem is I have no idea to what degree modern science has adjusted to this. Now, I can't even ask Meinig to what degree has the evolution of endodontal techniques since you wrote the book, to what degree had they changed how we should view this, because he's not alive anymore, and I don't know anyone who can fill his shoes. Look, if you want a personal story on how conflicted I feel about this, I literally have two root canals in the same teeth on each side of my mouth that were the legacy of my veganism.

My suspicion is I wish I could give you a black and white answer. I know that it's not that useful to have an answer that's just nothing but gray zones. But I'm very skeptical of how good root canals are. I'm not so terrified that I'm highly motivated to get the other one taken out even though it probably is the last thing in my life that I should do more research on what to do about. I'm sorry, I can't give you a better answer than that. All I can say is yes, it is justified to be worried about the risks of root canals. I can say this totally unambiguously. What you should absolutely definitely not ever do is make your decisions about something that has any potential to be a root canal situation without a dentist.

The whole point of Price's work was they're serious from whole body health. Price was a pioneer in so many things. This is another one. Now, there's increasing evidence that inflammation in your mouth and decay in your mouth is tied to other diseases. Like periodontitis is tied to heart disease for example. Price was the pioneer of saying that the infections in your mouth are causing other diseases in the rest of your body.

This Q&A can also be found as part of a much longer episode, here: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/podcast/2019/03/30/ask-anything-nutrition-march-4-2019

Access the show notes, transcript, and comments here.

Chris Masterjohn, PhD, is the Founder and Scientific Director of the mitochondria test Mitome.

What does it mean when histamine intolerance and blood sugar dysregulation occur together? | Masterjohn Q&A Files #72 Feb 27, 2020

Show notes

Question: What does it mean when histamine intolerance and blood sugar dysregulation occur together?

Well, if his blood sugar is no longer as stable and he has histamine intolerance, then that drug probably interferes with vitamin B6 metabolism. Let me try to take one minute to see if I can find quick information on this. I can't. I can't find it quickly.

My instinct is to say that the drug is affecting vitamin B6 metabolism on the basis that 80% of the vitamin B6 in the body is used for glycogen metabolism in liver, which is the thing that stabilizes your blood sugar between meals. If your blood sugar is not stable between meals any longer, then yeah, it could be a hormonal thing. What it really probably means is that there's something wrong with the liver's ability to store glycogen or to access the glycogen when it's stored because your blood sugar is stabilized between meals exclusively by the liver's glycogen metabolism.

How does that relate to histamine intolerance? They're both caused by B6 deficiency. That's my take. I'd measure his blood levels of pyridoxal 5'-phosphate. Off the top my head, I believe LabCorp has a test for that. It would be helpful to look at his excretion of xanthurenate, kynurenate, and quinolinate in organic acids test. The Genova ION has all three of those. I don't think the other one is available to have all three. But every urinary organic acids test has some of those. I would go from there.

I mean, if you want to save money, just trial a pyridoxal 5'-phosphate, which is the active form of B6. Trial a supplement of that to see if it helps. I would do that at, maybe start with 10 milligrams, but feel free to work up slowly over a few weeks to 100 milligrams. If a few weeks at 100 milligrams doesn't treat that and he's off the drug, then there's something else going on and I don't know what it is. But that would definitely be first line thinking for me. Thank you, Jennifer, for your question. I'm glad that was helpful.

This Q&A can also be found as part of a much longer episode, here: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/podcast/2019/03/08/ask-anything-nutrition-feb-23-2019

Access the show notes, transcript, and comments here.

Chris Masterjohn, PhD, is the Founder and Scientific Director of the mitochondria test Mitome.

If PTH is mid-normal, do I need a calcium supplement? | Masterjohn Q&A Files #71 Feb 26, 2020

Show notes

Question: If PTH is mid-normal, do I need a calcium supplement?

I'm assuming that by midrange you mean it's 30. If you mean it's 40, then no, you're deficient or you're probably deficient. You need to test how you respond. But what I would say is, it would still be good for you to try increasing that and see if the PTH goes down anymore. Because my baseline for where I suspect that someone's PTH is maximally suppressed is 30. But the evidence that it's maximally suppressed is that it doesn't get suppressed by more calcium and vitamin D. If it goes down in response to calcium and vitamin D, then it wasn't maximally suppressed. Where you want to be is not 30 to 20. It's the point of maximal suppression.

Then the final thing is magnesium deficiency can compromise your ability to make PTH. I don't think that the average person in our society is deficient enough in magnesium for that to be relevant on the basis that population-wide most people have too much PTH. That contributes osteopenia and osteoporosis. But the big caveat here is if you are magnesium-deficient, then that might invalidate most of what I said if you're deficient enough to affect PTH. If your PTH is around 30 and not higher than that, you're probably fine. But it's good to know your magnesium status because if it's really bad, that could change that interpretation. It's also good to know if adding more calcium suppresses your PTH further, because if it does, that's probably calcium that you need.

This Q&A can also be found as part of a much longer episode, here: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/podcast/2019/03/30/ask-anything-nutrition-march-4-2019

Access the show notes, transcript, and comments here.

Chris Masterjohn, PhD, is the Founder and Scientific Director of the mitochondria test Mitome.

What to do about sky-high pyroglutamate? | Masterjohn Q&A Files #70 Feb 25, 2020

Show notes

Question: What to do about sky-high pyroglutamate?

Pyroglutamate, its other name is 5-oxoproline. It is something that is primarily produced when you are synthesizing glutathione, but you do not have enough of the second step in glutathione synthesis to keep up with the first step.

Maybe you need more glycine, but your glycine isn't low enough to cause orders of magnitude higher pyroglutamate. It's almost certainly the case that you have a glutathione synthetase deficiency, unless you have extraordinary levels of oxidative stress. I think that would be easy to test for because I just can't imagine that your glutathione levels -- I guess it's not that easy to test for because if you have a glutathione synthetase defect, you're going to have bad glutathione levels. If you have a tremendous amount of oxidative stress, you're also going to have low glutathione levels. If you have low glutathione levels, that's going to cause a tremendous amount of oxidative stress. I think if it's not a glutathione synthetase defect, then it becomes a lot harder to figure out what it is because it probably means you have massive oxidative stress from somewhere and there's a lot of things that could cause that. That would be a potential Pandora's box of questions that would come out of that. But definitely the first step would be to look at glutathione synthetase. This Q&A can also be found as part of a much longer episode, here: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/podcast/2019/03/30/ask-anything-nutrition-march-4-2019

Access the show notes, transcript, and comments here.

Chris Masterjohn, PhD, is the Founder and Scientific Director of the mitochondria test Mitome.

In hemochromatosis, why would ferritin be low but transferrin saturation high? | Masterjohn Q&A Files #69 Feb 24, 2020

Show notes

Question: In hemochromatosis, why would ferritin be low but transferrin saturation high?

Ferritin is your long-term iron storage. Transferrin is your short-term iron storage. The problem with hemochromatosis is that usually in a normal functioning system, there is a hormonal regulatory system that prevents you from absorbing iron from food when you have enough iron that when you have too much iron, shuttle the iron into ferritin which is protective both against pathogens eating the iron to grow and against oxidative stress, which free iron causes, which if you don't know the details about can be thought of as wear and tear on your tissues over time.

In hemochromatosis, normally the way you judge how much iron you have is in the circulating transferrin pool, which is your short-term storage. How full is it? The defect in hemochromatosis is that when the short-term storage, transferrin, starts getting fuller than usual, you don't notice it, so you don't stop absorbing iron from food that makes the transferrin saturation go up even further. But you don't shuttle the iron into ferritin. That makes ferritin lower.

What people get confused by is that historically, we have only paid attention to hemochromatosis when it's too late, when the person has been suffering for it from 30 or 40 years and they need organ transplants. What happens at that point is that the ferritin is very, very high. Why is the ferritin high? Not because you had too much iron. The person without hemochromatosis has the ferritin go up when they have too much iron. The defect in hemochromatosis is that you do not stop absorbing from food when you have enough, and you do not put the iron into ferritin when you have too much.

The reason that ferritin is high in someone who's had hemochromatosis for 30 or 40 years is not because they have too much iron. It is because they have oxidative stress and damage caused by that iron. Oxidative stress and damage cause ferritin to go up no matter how much iron you have. So does infection, no matter how much iron you have. Essentially, what you have is ferritin is not the fireman that he should be to put out the fire as it starts, and the smoke detectors go off. Ferritin hemochromatosis is the cleanup crew who got to the fire after the house burned down.

This Q&A can also be found as part of a much longer episode, here: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/podcast/2019/03/30/ask-anything-nutrition-march-4-2019

Access the show notes, transcript, and comments here.

Chris Masterjohn, PhD, is the Founder and Scientific Director of the mitochondria test Mitome.

Does folic acid act differently in the body than natural folate? | Masterjohn Q&A Files #68 Feb 21, 2020

Show notes

Question: Does folic acid act differently in the body than natural folate? | Masterjohn Q&A Files #68They don't really. Everything that is said bad about folic acid is sort of true to an extent but has been completely exaggerated in some circles. What happens is you have an enzyme called dihydrofolate reductase, or DHFR. Its purpose is not to metabolize synthetic folic acid obviously because that folic acid molecule doesn't exist in the food supply. Its normal purpose is that every time that you use folate to participate in processes outside of methylation, such as DNA synthesis, you wind up producing dihydrofolate as a byproduct. DHFR recycles that and turns it into tetrahydrofolate, or THF. Tetrahydrofolate is what has the methyl group added to make methylfolate.

The question is, does that synthetic folic acid, we call that unmetabolized folic acid, does that cause harm? There are scientific hypotheses that it might, and it might, but there's no conclusive evidence of that. That's one side of the argument against synthetic folic acid. The other side of the argument is now that you are giving the DHFR enzyme more work, that means that might be detracting from the work that it has in recycling dihydrofolate that came out of the DNA synthesis reactions to make tetrahydrofolate.

People think that they just cut out white flour and therefore they're better off. No. You cut out white flour, now you need to do more work to make sure that you are actually getting your nutrients from whole foods because if you were eating six pieces of white toast that you didn't have to worry about getting nutrients from whole foods and now you do.

This Q&A can also be found as part of a much longer episode, here: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/podcast/2019/03/30/ask-anything-nutrition-march-4-2019

Access the show notes, transcript, and comments here.

Chris Masterjohn, PhD, is the Founder and Scientific Director of the mitochondria test Mitome.

Can frozen vegetables be trusted for folate? | Masterjohn Q&A Files #67 Feb 20, 2020

Show notes

Question: Can frozen vegetables be trusted for folate?

You absolutely cannot trust frozen vegetables as a source of folate ever. That's because folate is extremely unstable in the freezer, and you have no idea how old the vegetables are. If they were fresh-frozen yesterday, they'd probably have plenty of folate. But if they were fresh-frozen three months ago, they may seem completely fresh and yet they don't have any folate in them.

I'm not a fan of frozen vegetables mainly on the folate issue, on the basis that many people believe they are getting folate from their vegetables. If they're eating frozen vegetables, they may not be. I'm very worried that there are a lot of people out there who believe that they are doing something good by cutting out refined flour from their diet and starting to eat lots of vegetables. But when they come as frozen vegetables, you may be cutting out a lot of folate from the form of synthetic folic acid added to the enriched flour that you had been eating and cut out of your diet and then not getting anything from the frozen vegetables, and that's a recipe for folate deficiency.

There are a lot of people out there who think folic acid is some kind of toxin. It's not a toxin. It's effective at treating folate deficiency. It is effective at preventing neural tube defects. That's why it's added to flour. It is not the ideal form of folate. There's no question about that. But this is like calcium. People are saying that calcium supplements are bad. Well, not as bad as not getting any calcium. It's the same thing with folic acid. Folic acid is not the ideal form of folate, but it's a lot better than a folate deficiency.

This Q&A can also be found as part of a much longer episode, here: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/podcast/2019/03/30/ask-anything-nutrition-march-4-2019

Access the show notes, transcript, and comments here.

Chris Masterjohn, PhD, is the Founder and Scientific Director of the mitochondria test Mitome.

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected