Posted by myco on March 10, 2009, at 13:13:31
In reply to Re: Inhibition of SULF1A3 = increase NARDIL bioavail? » myco, posted by Larry Hoover on March 10, 2009, at 7:45:44
So in your professional opinion Larry, do you think it best to abandon the study of this idea or take it extremely slow (very tiny doses) and 'watch' for negative response? I'm not superman here lol I have had a few mild bp food related issues. That being said though my interest in persueing this is very strong...but didn't curiousity kill the cat? lol
myco
> I've been thinking about this, and maybe it's not as benign as I first thought.
>
> The only enzyme binding phenelzine that I know of is MAO. That's why it creates the need for food restrictions, of course.
>
> These enzymes in the gut wall brush border are the first line of defense against ingested chemicals that could disturb the body's ability to self-regulate. If ingested dopamine got into the blood in high concentration, you could stroke out. The same with tyramine. Phenelzine just happens to be similar enough to those two in structure that it hits the same binding sites. It's not the gut enzymes that are the intended targets, of course. These are gate-keeper enzymes, not metabolic enzymes. MAO deactivates dopamine. Sulf enzymes add an extra blob onto the structure so that it can't fit into receptors. The sulphate blob also marks the molecule for excretion.
>
> Theoretically, if you block these enzymes, you can become vulnerable to other ingested chemicals. Tyramine, with MAO blocked. Maybe other chemicals with the Sulf family blocked. Just recognize what you're thinking of messing around with. Your article did identify a number of foods that inhibit Sulf, and I'm sure that happens all the time, whether you know it or not. I have no idea if that leaves you vulnerable or not.
>
> Lar
poster:myco
thread:884466
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20090304/msgs/884738.html