Muscle acidosis is real and it decreases performance significantly. However, Lactate is NOTthe reason for muscle acidosis.
Free thread depicting the role of lactate during hgh intensity exercise: 🧵😉 👇
During high-intensity exercise, skeletal muscle experiences a significant increase in protons (H⁺) concentration, leading to a decrease in intracellular pH and therefore increasing skeletal muscle acidosis. These protons come mainly from:
1) ATP hydrolysis is the primary source of H⁺during exercise. H⁺build up in the cytosol leading to decreased in muscle pH.
ATP + H₂O → ADP + HPO₄²⁻+ H⁺
2) Lactate formation from pyruvate receives ("buffers") one H⁺ from the oxidation of NADH to NAD+ during glycolysis. This step is the only possible step for the regeneration of NAD+ so that glycolysis can continue and REDOX status can be maintained. Hence, Lactate DOES NOT cause acidosis as it is NOT a source of protons (H⁺). The “acid” simply doesn’t exist.
Therefore, although most people (me included) commonly associate lactate with acidosis (like we still also talk about “anaerobic threshold”), the reality is that lactate is NOT the cause of muscle acidosis. Lactate is a “surrogate” or a “biomarker” of the rate of ATP hydrolysis and glycolysis (aka, exercise intensity). Therefore, when you see high levels of blood lactate it means that there is a high level of metabolic stress caused by a high rate of ATP hydrolysis and glycolytic activity.
Lactate has an amazing amount of autocrine, paracrine and endocrine functions highly and ubiquitously involved in health and disease; it is a “lacthormone”. Furthermore, lactate is also a preferred fuel for most cells in the body.
During exercise, lactate production is KEY for the continuation of glycolysis at high intensities, so it is GOOD. Lactate can only be oxidized back to pyruvate and then Kreb’s cycle via Acetyl-CoA in mitochondria. So, someone with high mitochondrial function will be able to clear lactate very well, taking advantage of a great energy source. If mitochondrial function is reduced, lactate will build up and won’t be able to regenerate NAD+ for the continuation of glycolysis.
Furhtermore, the reduced capacity to buffer H⁺ will cause a further accumulation of cytosolic H⁺ leading to: 1) inhibition of glycolysis by inhibition of the rate-limiting enzyme of glycolysis, phosphofructokinase (PFK) and 2) inhibition of calcium release from sarcoplasmic reticulum decreasing muscle contraction.
Furthermore, as an autocrine signaling molecule, we found that lactate decreases the activity of CPT1/2 which will affect fatty acid transport into mitochondria and that it also decreases the rate of ATP production:
(END)pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35308271/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Lactate is NOT the responsible for acidosis. Its production is intimately intertwined with mitochondrial function. Proper lactate clearance capacity ➡️ proper mitochondrial function➡️ metabolic health. 🧵👇
1) During high glycolytic flux, pyruvate is reduced to lactate via LDH to regenerate NAD⁺ by oxidizing NADH + H⁺, temporarily consuming a proton.
This is a redox-balancing step, not a proton dump.
2) That lactate is then transported into mitochondria via MCT1 as part of the Mitochondrial Lactate Oxidation Complex (mLOC), which mainly includes mitochondrial LDH, the mitochondrial pyruvate carrier (MPC), and MCT1
🧠On Alzheimer’s as a metabolic disease 👇
🧵 1) The more we learn about brain metabolism, the clearer it becomes: Alzheimer’s is not primarily a disease of amyloid plaques. It is a metabolic disease.
Let’s talk about what that means, and why the current paradigm must change:
2) The brain is the most glucose-demanding organ per unit volume. It’s a metabolic powerhouse of incredible efficiency…until it’s not.
When mitochondrial function declines, glucose metabolism falters and neuronal biogenetics fails, the stage is set for neurodegeneration.
3) The amyloid hypothesis, which has dominated Alzheimer’s research for decades, remains just that; a hypothesis which has failed to produce effective therapies. Meanwhile, the bioenergetic theory has robust scientific, mechanistic and clinical support.
For over a century, cancer’s metabolic hallmark has been clear: high glycolytic rates even in the presence of oxygen. Otto Warburg identified this paradox, which we now understand as a powerful adaptive mechanism, not a flaw.
👇Here’s a summary of how lactate lies at the center of cancer metabolism, signaling, and therapy 🧵
1/7 The Warburg Effect is more than an anomaly or a curiosity. It reflects a fundamental reprogramming of cancer cell bioenergetics. Cancer cells downregulate mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) and rely primarily on cytosolic glycolysis, funneling glucose into pyruvate and converting it into lactate, even when oxygen is abundant.
2/7 We call this process Lactagenesis. It is not metabolic overflow. It is a regulated shift that supports proliferation, survival, and invasion. Lactate is not waste product. It is a central player in tumor biology.
🧵Thread: They role of Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutations in cancer🧵
Some thoughts I tried to put together...
1) Although in 1923 Otto Warburg already suggested that mitochondrial function was key for cancer development. In the last decade, the Warburg effect has finally re-emerged in a very strong manner after being buried for many decades. Nowadays, it is a mainstream concept...
2) While it is great that finally the Warburg Effect is viewed by the scientific community as a key piece of the cancer puzzle, it has brought some significant misunderstanding and misinformation to the general population. Such as intellectually cheap and lazy concepts like “sugar causes cancer” (a very wrong way to understand the Warburg Effect) or that Cancer is purely a Metabolic Disease.
3) All diseases ultimately succumb to cellular metabolic and bioenergetics dysfunction. Hence, one could argue that all diseases are metabolic diseases because of this condition. However, we know that this is not right for many diseases.
In the case of cancer there is absolutely no doubt that genetic mutations play a significant role, although at the same time, metabolic dysfunction and reprogramming are also hallmarks of cancer. Hence, in the field of cancer, both genetics and cellular metabolism are intertwined, although it is very possible that we cannot affirm that cancer is neither solely a genetic nor a metabolic disease, but both. Until we don’t elucidate this transcendental question in cancer, we won’t be able to corner Cancer.
1/5 Our most recent study just upladed to bioRxiv for free download.
"Metabolic and Cellular Differences Between Sedentary and Active Individuals at Rest and During Exercise". biorxiv.org/content/10.110…
2/5 Our study investigates the metabolic and muscle bioenergetics underpinning the apparent health of sedentary individuals, considering the significant prevalence of non-communicable diseases associated with physical inactivity.
3/5 Using muscle biopsies and graded exercise testing, our research study delineated distinct variations in mitochondrial respiration, substrate oxidation capacities, and overall muscle bioenergetics between sedentary and moderately active groups.
1/9 The field of nutrition in oncology has become quite controversial in the last years. Mainly, because of misconceptions regarding cancer metabolism around the Warburg Effect... thelancet.com/journals/lanon…
2/9 The Warburg Effect is finally "mainstream" in oncology research but also a cause of misconceptions out there... The article is an interesting one about this controversy. In my opinion, in general, the article is well presented and I agree with most of it.
3/9 This is a figure from the article article summarizing some of the main controversies and misconceptions around the Warburg Effect and oncology nutrition...