Sibiriak Posted September 16, 2019 Report Share Posted September 16, 2019 (edited) Quote maybe the units in the Hollenberg et al. article are wrong. Or maybe your Lacueva et al analysis is wrong. The Hershey Co. funded study cited above shows non-alkalinized cocoa powder yielding 30mg/g flavanols. (see posted graph), close to the Comer Lab Navitas numbers posted by Ron Put. And look at the 2014 Consumer Lab test results for various cocoa/cacao powders with flavanol content well over 20 mg/g posted here: https://www.crsociety.org/topic/11013-cadmium-contamination-in-cacao-products/?page=3&tab=comments#comment-29455 Quote that quantity would surely fall into the toxicity domain. But in terms of flavanols, 900mg/day has been used in studies such as the one cited by Dean Pomerleau (funded by Mars Co.!) , which I linked to above. Dean Pomerleau Posted March 27, 2016 Here is a new study [1] posted by Al (thanks Al!) showing the benefits of cocoa flavanols on vascular stiffness. Once again it looks like chocolate is good for you, at least if not taken with too much dairy or sugar... --------- [1] Impact of cocoa flavanol intake on age-dependent vascular stiffness in healthy men: a randomized, controlled, double-masked trial. Heiss C, Sansone R, Karimi H, Krabbe M, Schuler D, Rodriguez-Mateos A,Kraemer T, Cortese-Krott MM, Kuhnle GG, Spencer JP, Schroeter H, Merx MW,Kelm M; FLAVIOLA Consortium, European Union 7th Framework Program. Free full text:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4444618/http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4444618/pdf/11357_2015_Article_9794.pdfAbstractIncreased vascular stiffness, endothelial dysfunction, and isolated systolichypertension are hallmarks of vascular aging. Regular cocoa flavanol (CF)intake can improve vascular function in healthy young and elderly at-riskindividuals. However, the mechanisms underlying CF bioactivity remainlargely unknown. We investigated the effects of CF intake on cardiovascularfunction in healthy young and elderly individuals without history, signs, orsymptoms of cardiovascular disease by applying particular focus onfunctional endpoints relevant to cardiovascular aging. In a randomized,controlled, double-masked, parallel-group dietary intervention trial, 22young (<35 years) and 20 elderly (50-80 year) healthy, male non-smokersconsumed either a CF-containing drink (450 mg CF) or nutrient-matched,CF-free control drink bi-daily for 14 days. The primary endpoint wasendothelial function as measured by flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD).Secondary endpoints included cardiac output, vascular stiffness, conductanceof conduit and resistance arteries, and perfusion in the microcirculation.Following 2 weeks of CF intake, FMD improved in young (6.1±0.7 vs. 7.6±0.7%, p < 0.001) and elderly (4.9±0.6 vs. 6.3±0.9 %, p < 0.001). Secondaryoutcomes demonstrated in both groups that CF intake decreased pulse wavevelocity and lowered total peripheral resistance, and increased arteriolarand microvascular vasodilator capacity, red cell deformability, anddiastolic blood pressure, while cardiac output remained affected. In theelderly, baseline systolic blood pressure was elevated, driven by anarterial-stiffness-related augmentation. CF intake decreased aorticaugmentation index (-9 %) and thus systolic blood pressure (-7 mmHg;Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01639781). CF intake reverses age-related burden ofcardiovascular risk in healthy elderly, highlighting the potential ofdietary flavanols to maintain cardiovascular health. Edited September 16, 2019 by Sibiriak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Put Posted September 17, 2019 Report Share Posted September 17, 2019 On 9/16/2019 at 7:36 AM, mccoy said: Are those mg/serving or mg/g? It would seem it's the former It says per g. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sibiriak Posted September 18, 2019 Report Share Posted September 18, 2019 (edited) Mccoy, recall the Miller et al. 2008 study (funded by Hershey Co.) discussed previously in your Kuna thread: Impact of alkalization on the antioxidant and flavanol content of commercial cocoa powders. Quote [...]natural, nonalkalized powders had the highest ORAC and total polyphenols and flavanols (including procyanidins). These chemical measurements showed a linear decrease as the extractable pH of the cocoa powder increased. Likewise, the flavanol monomers, oligomers, and polymers all showed a linear decrease with increasing pH of the final cocoa powder. When brown/black cocoa powders were compared to red cocoa powders, similar decreases in flavanols were observed with increased alkalization. The average total flavanol contents were 34.6 +/- 6.8 mg/g for the natural cocoas, 13.8 +/- 7.3 mg/g for the lightly processed cocoas, 7.8 +/- 4.0 mg/g for the medium processed cocoas, and 3.9 +/- 1.8 mg/g for the heavily processed cocoa powders. And hot of the Al Pater press, a new meta-analysis (funded by Nestlé): Dose-response relationship between cocoa flavanols and human endothelial function: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials (2019) Quote An inverted U-shape relationship can be seen between total flavanols, (−)-epicatechin, and (+)-catechin with FMD, with a maximum vascular effect for 710 mg total flavanols (FMD 2.5%), 95 mg (−)-epicatechin (FMD 3%) and 25 mg (+)-catechin (FMD 2.5%). A physiologically relevant effect size of 1% increase in FMD could be achieved with doses ranging from 150 to 1000 mg of total flavanols, 40 to 140 mg of (−)-epicatechin, or 15 to 38 mg of (+)-catechin. The curve for total flavanols without (−)-epicatechin depicted a different shape, suggesting that (−)-epicatechin content could be responsible for an important part of the relationship with FMD. Altogether, the results indicate that the (−)-epicatechin dose in the different interventional products plausibly drives the biological effect over the vasculature. Quote Acute clinical trials demonstrating improvement in FMD outcomes with other high-polyphenol-containing foods described an inverted U shape relationship similar to that observed with cocoa polyphenols in this analysis. For instance, single consumption of several doses of blueberry drinks (from freeze-dried powder) showed a dose response with a maximum effect at 766 mg of polyphenols.39 Higher doses containing 1278 or 1791 mg of polyphenols did not show a higher impact on FMD values. Another study with different doses of cranberry juice demonstrated an improvement on FMD.40 An inverted U shape was observed with the dose containing 1238 mg of total polyphenols being the most effective. The idea that there is an optimal dose range of bioactives that would result in an optimal and physiologically relevant health effect could have large consequences for future dietary recommendations. In addition to the notion that higher concentrations do not always bring more benefits, the seasonal variation and the influence of processing on the polyphenol content in flavanol-rich foods could have significant impact on the health benefits that may be expected from the consumption of these foods. It is all the most important since, contrary to micronutrients (e.g. vitamins and minerals), these bioactives are not stored within the human body. Edited September 18, 2019 by Sibiriak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccoy Posted September 19, 2019 Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 (edited) Sibiriak, of course with all the other overwhelming evidence, probably the Lacueva et al. study is wrong, as I myself seem to have tacitly acknowledged a while back. But I do not remember all things I wrote, since I write so much during my work. The hard drive in my brain starts to be clogged. Need an external one!! Also, the 900 mg/d refers to (-)-epicatechin (do I remember well?) and, adopting a 2/3 conversion factor, it would mean 1350 mg/d flavanols, which would mean, at 30 mg/g, about 45 g unprocessed cacao powder per day, a much easier quantity to eat. Also, it's weird that the Lacueva et al. study, which seems so meticulously prepared with a wealth of analytical data, is one order of magnitude lower. Edited September 20, 2019 by mccoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd Allen Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 3 hours ago, mccoy said: Also, the 900 mg/d refers to (-)-epicatechin (do I remember well?) and, adopting a 2/3 conversion factor, it would mean 1350 mg/d flavanols, which would mean, at 30 mg/g, about 45 mg unprocessed cacao powder per day, a much easier quantity to eat. I think your calculation should be 45 g cacao per day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccoy Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 8 hours ago, Todd Allen said: I think your calculation should be 45 g cacao per day. Thanks, corrected! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccoy Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 (edited) w 12 hours ago, mccoy said: Also, it's weird that the Lacueva et al. study, which seems so meticulously prepared with a wealth of analytical data, is one order of magnitude lower. After a little thinking, it is all too reasonable to believe that, when analyses cite flavanols concentrations, they often imply all the flavanols group (total flavanols), which includes not only the single-molecule monomers (catechins, epicatechins) but also the dimers and higher-order molecules. There is a clear reference in regard in the wikipedia page: Quote The single-molecule (monomer) catechin, or isomer epicatechin (see diagram), adds four hydroxyls to flavan-3-ol, making building blocks for concatenated polymers (proanthocyanidins) and higher order polymers (anthocyanidins).[1] So, the flavanols would refer to the whole amount of monomers and polymers, whereas the term (-)-epicatechin refers to the single monomer-stereoisomer. When lacueva et al. cite 'flavanols', they actually mean flavanol monomers, since they only analyze catechins and epicatechins. Whereas, when the 900 mg/d epicatechin quantity is cited, that rises some doubts and perhaps is referred to total flavanols instead. Evidently, in the analytical practice, sometimes it is common to treat polymers as the equivalent amount of monomers. But biologically it is not the same, since we know that the monomers seem to be the most bioactive molecules. In a few words, it seems that it would be more useful to cite the epicatechin content of cacao rather than the total flavanols. On the other side, if the proprtions between monomers and polymers remain more or less constant, then we may use the terms interchangeably. Before being sure of the above I may have to re-read all the cited studies. Presently, I'm inclined to believe that the Kuna indians ingested an average of about 45 grams of unprocessed cacao powder per day, quantity which contains about 900 mg of total flavanols and about 90 mg of (-)-epicatechin. 45 grams of unprocessed cacao powder, given its pungency is not a small amount, but it is not an unreachable quantity, especially if added to other products. I myself have reached such quantity on occasions, although presently I'm more in the region of 30 grams per day. Edited September 20, 2019 by mccoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Put Posted November 7, 2019 Report Share Posted November 7, 2019 "... The lipids in cocoa butter, for example, are not as effi ciently or as rapidly absorbed as those in other vegetable fat because of the rather complex molecular confi guration of these fatty acids in cocoa triglycerides, which slows the time for overall metabolism and, in particular, slows intestinal absorption [4, 5] . With respect to the consumption of cocoa butter and its effects on serum lipids, the slower rate of absorption of the triacylglycerides in cocoa butter and the high polyphenolic content in cocoa actually have a salutary effect. In humans fed cocoa, plasma LDL cholesterol, oxidized LDL (so - called bad cholesterol components), and apo B (an important lipoprotein polypeptide critical to LDL function) are decreased, while plasma HDL cholesterol (so - called good cholesterol) is increased [6 – 8] ."http://cms.herbalgram.org/heg/volume9/files/Chocolate_Appendix10.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.