The Peter Attia Drive - #140 - Gerald Shulman, M.D., Ph.D.: A masterclass on insulin resistance—molecular mechanisms and clinical implications
Episode Date: December 7, 2020Gerald Shulman is a Professor of Medicine, Cellular & Molecular Physiology, and the Director of the Diabetes Research Center at Yale. His pioneering work on the use of advanced technologies to analyz...e metabolic flux within cells has greatly contributed to the understanding of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. In this episode, Gerald clarifies what insulin resistance means as it relates to the muscle and the liver, and the evolutionary reason for its existence. He goes into depth on mechanisms that lead to and resolve insulin resistance, like the role of diet, exercise, and pharmacological agents. As a bonus, Gerald concludes with insights into Metformin’s mechanism of action and its suitability as a longevity agent. We discuss: Gerald’s background and interest in metabolism and insulin resistance (4:30); Insulin resistance as a root cause of chronic disease (8:30); How Gerald uses NMR to see inside cells (12:00); Defining and diagnosing insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes (19:15); The role of lipids in insulin resistance (31:15); Confirmation of glucose transport as the root problem in lipid-induced insulin resistance (40:15); The role of exercise in protecting against insulin resistance and fatty liver (50:00); Insulin resistance in the liver (1:07:00); The evolutionary explanation for insulin resistance—an important tool for surviving starvation (1:17:15); The critical role of gluconeogenesis, and how it’s regulated by insulin (1:22:30); Inflammation and body fat as contributing factors to insulin resistance (1:32:15); Treatment approaches for fatty liver and insulin resistance, and an exciting new pharmacological approach (1:41:15); Metformin’s mechanism of action and its suitability as a longevity agent (1:58:15); More. Learn more: https://peterattiamd.com/ Show notes page for this episode: https://peterattiamd.com/geraldshulman Subscribe to receive exclusive subscriber-only content: https://peterattiamd.com/subscribe/ Sign up to receive Peter's email newsletter: https://peterattiamd.com/newsletter/ Connect with Peter on Facebook | Twitter | Instagram.
Transcript
Discussion (0)
Hey everyone, welcome to the drive podcast. I'm your host, Peter Attia. This podcast,
my website, and my weekly newsletter all focus on the goal of translating the science of longevity
into something accessible for everyone. Our goal is to provide the best content in health and
wellness, full stop. And we've assembled a great team of analysts to make this happen.
If you enjoy this podcast, we've created a membership program that brings you far more
in-depth content if you want to take your knowledge of this space to the next level.
At the end of this episode, I'll explain what those benefits are, or if you want to learn more
now, head over to peteratiamd.com forward slash subscribe.
Now, without further delay, here's today's episode.
My guest this week is Dr. Gerald Shulman. Jerry's a professor of medicine and cellular
and molecular physiology at Yale. He's also the co-director of the Yale Diabetes Research Center.
In 2018, he received the Banting Medal for Scientific Achievement, arguably the most
prestigious award one can win in this field. He's pioneered the use of magnetic resonance
spectroscopy combined with mass spec to non-invasively examine cellular glucose and fat
metabolism. Now, you may ask, why does that matter? And we get to that right at the outset of this
interview. If you want to understand insulin
resistance, if you want to understand hyperinsulinemia, type 2 diabetes, non-alcoholic
fatty liver disease, you have to understand the movement of glucose and fat. A way to think about
this is to think about it this way. If you go and get a blood test, even the most fancy blood test imaginable. You're basically looking at a
picture, a snapshot, a moment in time. What these techniques that Jerry and his collaborators have
developed over many years are basically allowing you to watch videos. You can see the flux. You can
see the movement of glucose. Furthermore, they've been able to see those things as they
happen inside even human cells. So I'm going to, I guess, maybe make an apology at the outset of
this and say that this is about as technical an interview as I probably have done in a while.
There are probably only a few interviews that I've done on this podcast that get into more
technical weeds than this one.
But unfortunately, that is the price one has to pay if they want to understand arguably the most
important pathologic condition in our species. And I get into what I mean by that in the interview,
so I won't elaborate on that further. We talk a lot about what it is to be insulin resistant.
This term gets thrown around with such ubiquity that you'd think everybody knows what it means,
and yet to define it is very complicated.
But I think by the end of this interview, you will undoubtedly understand how to define
insulin resistance.
And I think you will have a very good sense of where it begins and what it means in a subclinical versus a clinical state and what the sequence of events are that lead to a condition in the muscle, ultimately affecting the liver, ultimately affecting the whole body.
I'm not going to promise you that you'll get that on the first listen.
I think that might require more than one listen, and it probably requires going through the show notes, which will be littered with fantastic figures.
In fact, as Jerry and I did this interview over Zoom for, I don't know, I would say maybe half to two-thirds of the interview, he was sharing slides as we were doing it.
And keep in mind, I'm quite familiar with these concepts.
So for someone who's less familiar with these concepts, I think it will be only that much more valuable. One really nice little bonus
thing that came out of this is a beautiful discussion at the end of Metformin where I
actually learned something really profound that was incredibly relevant to my understanding of
Metformin in my ongoing interest around the question of Metformin's suitability as a longevity
agent. I could say
more about this, but I think it's just one of those things where I ask you to sort of take a
leap of faith with me that this is important, even if it feels a little bit like drinking your cough
syrup at times. But if you really want to understand longevity, you're going to have to
sort of figure out what insulin resistance means. So without further delay, please enjoy my very
in-depth conversation with Dr. Gerald Shulman. Jerry, thank you so much for making time to sit
down virtually with me today. As I said before we hopped on, this is a topic that is near and dear to my heart. And frankly,
all roads seem to point to you. And that goes back to, I don't know, at least for me, probably 2011 when I became really fascinated by this topic. And there aren't a lot of topics where I've
personally experienced the following problem, which is the more I think I understand it,
the less I do.
So now when someone says to me, Peter, what's insulin resistance? You know, I can sort of give
glib answers to that question, but the reality of it is I don't think I fully understand what it is.
And I don't know that I can represent to the listener that by the end of this, they will
fully understand what insulin resistance is. But what I think they'll understand is how
maybe we can think about it through the lens of different tissues and what may or may not be going
on. And in large part, I think that's due to the incredible work you've done over your entire
career. I guess I'd like to kind of just start with a little bit of background. You did an MD
and a PhD and you're trained as an endocrinologist, correct? Yeah, that's correct. And then I did
residency in medicine at Duke, a fellowship in endocrinologist, correct? Yeah, that's correct. And then I did residency in medicine at Duke,
fellowship in endocrinology at the Mass General Harvard.
And then I've always been interested
in metabolism, diabetes.
I guess probably my father was a diabetologist,
went to summer camp.
He was the doctor for type one diabetics.
At an early age, I was exposed to problems, type 1 diabetes in my peers.
I was just a camper and saw my peers getting hypoglycemic or getting into issues with
ketoacidosis. So I think I was exposed to metabolism at an early age. I'm sure it left
an impression on me. My father wanted me to become a radiologist because my physics background, but
I ended up staying in metabolism and doing endocrinology. I'm sure you would have done great things in radiology,
but I also think we're far better off for the contributions you've made in this field.
When did this particular question of understanding what insulin resistance meant and actually
starting to differentiate between some of these phenotypes of what is the fate of
glucose in a person with normal metabolism versus what is the fate of ingested glucose in someone
with type 2 diabetes? When did that question begin to obsess you? And specifically, now that's a sort
of change from the patients that you grew up with with type 1 diabetes. Studying as an undergraduate
medical school, I was always interested in biochemistry, physiology. I had an experience, I was visiting a medical student at Vanderbilt in the 70s and
got interested in in vivo metabolism, doing study metabolism in awake animals, looking specifically
at glucose and fatty acid turnover, using tracers to actually measure how fast things are being
made, glucose is made,
how fast fatty acids are being made in the body and metabolized. In medical training, you go back
to medical school, you learn how to become a good doctor, take care of patients. But then in your
fellowship years, you're back in the lab. And I really wanted to get back to understand metabolism
by looking inside the cell. So everything I had done prior to then, and most
people studying biochemistry, physiology would, to understand. So diabetes, metabolic disease,
I was interested in this question. It's an important disease, leading cause of blindness,
end-stage renal disease, leading cause of non-traumatic loss of limb. The cost to
U.S. society is huge impact, and now it's becoming a global problem as they adapt to
westernized diets and things. And I wanted to look inside the cell, metabolism inside the cell. And
so that took me into the world of nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and actually brought me
down to New Haven, where they were just setting up methods, this technique to actually look inside
living yeast cells. I said, gosh, this we can adapt this to to actually look inside living yeast cells. I said, gosh, this, we can
adapt this to humans and look inside metabolism in humans, in liver and muscle and other organs.
To specifically get at your question, I think it's such an important metabolic disease,
the most common metabolic disease. And so someone who's interested in metabolism,
it's a natural segue. I sometimes describe it to patients as the foundation upon which the major three
chronic diseases sit. So you described some ways in which patients with type 2 diabetes die,
specifically through amputations or complications of amputations such as infections and obviously
through end-stage renal disease. But I would argue that the majority of the mortality through
diabetes comes not so much through diabetes, but through its amplification of atherosclerotic disease, cancer, and dementia, all of which are force multiplied in spades by
type 2 diabetes. So the way I explain it to people, and I hope that by the end of this,
you'll help me refine this because it may not be accurate, but I describe to patients that there
is a continuum from hyperinsulinemia to impaired glucose disposal
to NAFLD and NASH to type 2 diabetes. And that continuum makes up a plane upon which all chronic
disease get worse. If we're going to be serious about the business of delaying the onset of death,
we have to be serious about the business of delaying the onset of chronic disease.
And if we want to do that, we must fix our
metabolisms. That's my thesis. Total agreement. You're spot on. So insulin resistance is the
main factor which leads to type 2 diabetes, but it also, and again, this is give credit to Jerry
Riven, who in his 1988 Banting lecture first got everyone's interest in basically saying insulin resistance
is not only leading to diabetes, but as you say, atherosclerosis, basically hyperlipidemia
associated with inflammation, high uric acid, polycystic ovarian disease.
Now we can kind of add to that. Now we can talk about NAFL, or I prefer the term metabolic
associated fatty liver disease, MAFLD. That, or I prefer the term metabolic associated fatty liver
disease, NAFLD. That's going to be the most common cause of liver disease, liver inflammation,
end-stage liver disease, and liver cancer. And finally, another arm, you know, for Jerry's
circle of insulin resistance and all these arms budding off of them, heart disease, as we talked
about, high uric acid, high triglycerides, and high cholesterol,
is cancer. So we're now, as you know, seeing huge increases in many forms of cancers, which are
associated with obesity, breast cancer, colon cancer, pancreatic cancer, liver cancer. And
by the bed, it's insulin resistance that's driving the increase in all of these cancers. Now, it's
not causing them necessarily, but it's promoting the growth. all of these cancers. Now, it's not causing them necessarily,
but it's promoting the growth.
And again, we have very strong preclinical evidence
for this in animals.
You can take animals, Rachel Perry,
who was in my group and now starting her own lab,
has taken breast cancer models,
human breast cancer models, colon cancer,
put them into mice and just giving them insulin,
putting in insulin pumps.
It's simply, and that rate of tumor growth
is accelerated and you treat them with an insulin sensitizing agents and you can slow down
tumor growth. So I think you're spot on, Peter. Insulin resistance is driving a lot of disease
and you're also spot on in that that's what's killing our patients with type 2 diabetes. It
is heart disease. These other things are the chronic complications of hyperglycemia, the blindness, the end-stage renal disease, and the small vessel
disease leading to non-traumatic loss of limb, also hyperglycemia. But insulin resistance,
which is very common, it's probably one quarter of our population, more than half of our population
has it perfectly asymptomatic. You don't know you have it. We can test for it using
sophisticated tools that we can talk about, but it's a very common phenomenon.
So before we launch into what I think is an important discussion around the fate of glucose
under normal conditions, which is the backdrop against which I think everything we are going
to talk about has to be laid out. I'd like you to spend
a moment doing something you're probably not asked to do often, which is at least explain to some
extent what the NMR technique allows you to do. Because so much of what we're going to talk about
today requires either a leap of faith that you know what you're talking about, or at least some sense of how a scientist is able
to actually look at substrates and substrate utilization and substrate movement in the ways
that we have to be able to talk about them at a molecular and cellular level to make sense. So
I know it's a bit complicated, but because it is such a cornerstone of your work, can
you explain what labeling means and how you can measure those labeled molecules in vivo?
In metabolism, the traditional methods since going back to dates, maybe 50 years ago, when
you wanted to measure more than just concentration of a metabolite, you go to your doctor, you
measure blood sugar, cholesterol, and it of a metabolite. You go to your doctor, you measure blood sugar,
cholesterol, and it's a static concentration. And what we know is what's much more important
than just measuring concentration is flux. And that's basically production versus uptake by a
tissue and know where something's being made, where it's going. And the traditional approach
has been to put a label on that, whatever you're
interested in tracing, glucose. And so you're used to basically, with the advent of cyclotrons,
it really started in California. In Berkeley, they started, you know, had cyclotrons,
they're interested in nuclear theory. The side product is you can make isotopes. So you can
make carbon radio labeled, so it's an emitter,
and put that carbon onto a glucose molecule and then trace it. So for more than 50 years,
we've been able to buy radio labeled isotopes and put a carbon, C14, which is radioactive,
low dose radiation, or tritium, which is a form of hydrogen, and then give it to a person,
animal, and do blood sampling and actually measure
then turnover of that metabolite. So that's telling us very important information. Many,
many important studies have used this, and to date we still use this, to track production and
clearance of whatever we're labeling. What you can't get from that, though, is really what's
happening inside the cell, which is
really where I wanted to go.
So we've been measuring turnover of metabolites.
And again, that's what I did many years ago, where I first started my interest in metabolism.
To do that, you need to get inside and look at the cell.
So the approaches have been traditionally something called positron emission tomography,
which is now used clinically sometimes to track tumor growth because tumors take up
glucose. You can give a PET emitter of glucose and then see if the tumor's taking it up. That's
radioactive. And again, I'm a clinical physiologist. I'd prefer not to give radio-labeled
substrates, radioactive substrates, to volunteers who volunteer for my study.
The other approach was nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy.
There were two groups that were pioneering this kind of work. There was one group in George Rada at Oxford, and this was phosphorus NMR. And so what George was doing, so NMR takes advantage of
the fact that the nuclei of certain atoms have spin properties. And I won't get into all the
physics behind this, but they
make them behave like tiny bar magnets. And so when you put them in a strong magnetic field,
they tend to line up or against this magnetic field. And because they have spin properties,
they will actually precess in this magnetic field at a set frequency. If you pulse them at the
frequency that they're precessing, they tip out of this field. And then when they relax, they emit energy that you can pick up with an antenna and basically
get chemical information about where that label is within a molecule.
So everything I just said, all you need to understand is you can use this method to basically
measure the amount of the metabolite, more importantly, which,
for example, carbon atom within that glucose molecule is labeled. It has something called
chemical shift, experiences a slightly different magnetic field depending where it is within that
glucose molecule. So for the listeners, all you need to understand is using this method, we're able to get biochemical
information of not only measuring a metabolite, but then using the power of, for example,
C13 NMR, track the label as it's being metabolized inside the cell.
So that's carbon NMR.
So in our bodies, 99% of the carbon in our body is C12, which is NMR invisible, but 1% is C13, which is NMR visible,
has this precession properties. You can use a labeled, for example, C1 labeled glucose and
then track that C1 glucose as it gets into the, say, a muscle cell or liver cell and gets metabolized
and finds its way into glycogen. And then you can measure flux. You can
actually, for the first time in humans, non-invasively, without any ionizing radiation,
measure how much is going in through, measure intracellular pathway flux. Phosphorus NMR,
as getting back to George Roddick, George pioneered phosphorus NMR. There you don't have to give any isotopes. There you actually see P31, phosphorus 31 is 100% natural abundant. You see all the phosphorus
that's in solution in our bodies. So for example, when our volunteers go inside a magnet and we put
a leg or arm into the magnet, we can see all the high energy phosphates in, for example, ATP,
all the high energy phosphates in, for example, ATP, adenosine triphosphate. There are three phosphates. And you can actually see each one of those phosphates. You can see phosphocreatine has
a different chemical shift. You can see inorganic phosphate. And we develop methods, Doug Rothman
and others at Yale who I work with, we're able to develop methods to measure glucose 6-phosphate.
So we can actually look at a key intermediate, getting glucose from outside, inside. Another method
we developed was we can measure intracellular glucose inside human muscle non-invasively. So
by measuring these metabolites, measuring flux, we can actually then ask the very simple questions,
which this is how we started out in humans. As you say, you know, again, diabetes
is an abnormality of metabolism. Glucose is the metabolite. And we were able to basically ask very
simple questions when a person, a human, which is my favorite model because it's the one most
relevant to understanding diabetes and metabolic disease. When we ingest carbohydrate, how much of that carbohydrate ends up in glycogen versus
oxidation into carbon dioxide or gets converted to lactate through glycolysis? And then more
importantly, in the patient with or the volunteer with diabetes, how important is that pathway
glucose to glycogen accounting for their insulin resistance? This story is very short.
glucose to glycogen accounting for their insulin resistance. This story is very short.
Before you go there, let's demonstrate clinically a difference between these two people. So let's take the normal patient without type 2 diabetes, and then let's contrast them with a very similar
person of similar size who has type 2 diabetes. We will feed them both a high-carbohydrate meal in the evening.
Let's just assume that that meal contains 100 to 200 grams of carbohydrate. They will digest their
food. We won't really have much insight into what's happening overnight, you will tell us.
But at the next morning, we do a fasting blood glucose level on them. This is now 12 hours after their meal.
The patient who does not have type 2 diabetes might arrive with a blood sugar of 100 milligrams
per deciliter, which we will say is normal.
His counterpart with type 2 diabetes may actually at that time have a blood sugar of 200 milligrams
per deciliter, which is obviously abnormal and
consistent with the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. Now, of course, that only represents about an
extra five grams of glucose in the circulation that is the difference between the 100 and the
200 milligrams per deciliter, which is a small fraction of the, call it one to 200 milligrams,
pardon me, grams rather, five gram difference. So it's a small fraction of what, call it one to 200 milligrams, pardon me, grams rather, five gram difference.
So it's a small fraction of what was ingested the night before. What is the difference between those
two people? Why does one of them have such a hard time with that extra five grams of glucose?
What was the fate of glucose in the healthy person to begin with? How did the body treat it?
The body, when you take in, and again, this is what we were able to demonstrate by actually
measuring glycogen flux in liver and muscle, that ingested in a healthy individual ends up as mostly
liver and muscle glycogen. It takes up muscle and depends on the size of the meal and how it's
being administered, the proportionality between liver and muscle. But the meal and how it's being administered, the proportionality
between liver and muscle.
But the bottom line, it's 80, 90% is stored as glycogen.
In the diabetic contrast is there's two processes that have gone awry.
One is that the liver is geared up to make more glucose than it should be through a process called
gluconeogenesis, the conversion of non-glucose precursors like amino acids, alanine, and lactate
to glucose. And that process is accelerated. So the liver is making twice the amount of glucose
as it should. And then you have a block in the periphery where the glucose, same amount of insulin
is not causing the glucose to be taken up by the muscle.
Again, in terms of flux, what I care most about production is up and clearance or disappearance
is down.
And besides this, also, even in some diabetics, insulin is inappropriately low because we
know if we give more insulin, we can overcome these abnormalities.
And so the beta cell has also become abnormal in the established diabetic where it's not making
enough insulin. That can be secondary to these other issues, glucose toxicity and other factors
that have caused this beta cell impairment. Because we know most importantly, when we reverse
the insulin resistance, this is a very important study, is we've taken these type 2 diabetics and short-term hypocaloric feeding, 1,200 calories a
day. We basically can reverse all these abnormalities through reduction in ectopic lipid,
which we can get into molecular mechanisms and reverse their diabetes. And this has now been
shown by many, many other investigators. And most recently, Rory Taylor, my colleague who trained
with us, is now doing this in the primary care clinic back in the UK. But usually,
you've asked the question, usually when we talk about diabetes, actually, it may be easier to
understand when you start in the young, lean 20-year-old who already has insulin resistance.
These are the young, lean college students that we study.
It's actually easier, I think, for your listeners to understand if we start with just pure insulin
resistance, which we see is the most common thing. As I said, probably half the people in the U.S.
actually have insulin resistance, don't know it because they're asymptomatic.
And we even see this in young, lean 20-year-olds, Yale undergraduates who volunteer for our
studies, profound insulin resistance in muscle, no problems in liver, and then take you through
the progression from how you just go from insulin resistance in muscle to fatty liver
and insulin resistance in the liver, and then progress to type 2 diabetes.
That's something we can actually go through if that would be of interest.
It would, because it actually kind of fits with the way I was going to try to temporally split
this, which would look as follows. When we take a patient who has normal fasting glucose and normal
fasting insulin, and we challenge them with an oral glycemic load and then measure insulin and glucose in 30-minute
intervals, a lot of times we expose a problem that seems most easily explained by the muscle's
inability to assimilate glycogen. So a person shows up and they have a normal fasting insulin,
say it's five, and their fasting glucose is, say say 90, you challenge them with 75 to a hundred
grams of glucose, but say 30 or 60 minutes later, their fasting glucose is 200. Their insulin is 70.
We call that insulin resistance. And we impute from that, that something has broken down in
the pathway that prevents their muscle from taking in glucose.
Now, you've done very elegant work to examine all of the possible places that failure could
have taken place. Did it take place at the GLUT4 transporter or one of the mechanisms,
which we should discuss how the GLUT4 transporter gets across the cell membrane? Is it a problem
not of bringing glucose in, but really is the
problem downstream at hexokinase or glycogen synthase, things like that. So is that sort of
what you're saying, which is, can we start with postprandial hyperglycemia? Yeah, I think we're
not even hyperglycemia. This is before any abnormality, just insulin resistance. What I
like about the question you asked and how you pointed out, insulin resistance is the root cause for not only diabetes, but it's going to be the root cause for all these other abnormalities.
Fatty liver disease makes us prone, makes a lot of cancers worse.
Heart disease, and again, that's the number one killer in this country.
It's insulin resistance that's driving all these things.
And not even talking about, even though I'm a diabetologist, I, of course, care, I want to fix diabetes.
But even before blood sugar goes up, which is how we define diabetes, let's understand insulin
resistance. Because if we can understand insulin resistance, then that's going to be the best way
to fix diabetes, type 2 diabetes. Heart disease are going to make a big impact there, fatty liver
disease, and slow down cancers. So let's start with insulin resistance. Okay, what is insulin
resistance? So we define it by giving insulin, and we know insulin normally does some effects,
makes glucose being taken up by liver and muscle. And when that same amount of insulin is not doing
these things, we say there's insulin
resistance. So you need more insulin than to cause muscle to take up glucose or the liver
to turn off glucose production or take up glucose. And the same thing, again, in the fat cell. What
insulin does in the fat cell is it puts the breakdown of fat, and it's called atlipolysis,
or take up glucose to esterify fatty acids into glucose.
So these are the three key insulin responsive organs. And when insulin is not doing that
properly, we call that insulin resistance. And again, keep emphasizing, I think for your
listeners, this is probably every other person in this country or in Western Europe are insulin resistant.
Your doctor won't even know this unless they do careful, maybe, studies to assess insulin
resistance, because you won't pick this up as the simple plasma glucose test.
So what causes resistance?
Let's start with muscle.
And the reason I like to start with muscle is when we study our young volunteers, again,
I like them because they're perfectly
healthy. They're 20 years of age, 19 to 20. They're lean because we know everyone who's
overweight or obese probably has insulin resistance. There's so many confounding
factors that happen in overweight, obesity. These are lean 22, 23 BMI, lean. Non-smoking, so we screen out smoking. No medication, no drugs. And sedentary,
because we know people who exercise, we can reverse insulin resistance, and we can talk
about how that happens. So you give these young 20-year-olds, let's say you screen, we screen to
this date probably 1,000, but you get a distribution, given a drink of glucose tolerance, 75 grams,
you measure insulin and you can calculate insulin sensitivity index. It's a crude index, and it's kind of a bell-shaped curve. And you have people in the bottom quartile who are
insulin resistant, by definition, the top quartile. Then you ask, why are those people in the bottom
quartile insulin resistant? And you measure
glycogen synthesis using the methods we talked about briefly, carbon NMR, give C1 glucose,
measure flux into glycogen. And it's already down by 50% compared to the sensitive ones under
matched insulin and glucose concentrations. So they're resistant because they can't get glucose in the glycogen.
That's the major pathway. It's not glucose to lactate, not glucose oxidation. So that's your
pathway. Then you want to know where the block in that pathway is. With phosphorus NMR, we can
measure glucose 6-phosphate inside the cell. With a carbon NMR method, we can measure glucose inside
the muscle cell. The reason this is important is we can see where the biochemical block is. So your listeners all probably get
into a car and they're on the road. And if there's construction going on, we all know construction
piles up after that, wherever that roadblock is, where the construction is happening.
Biochemistry is the same thing. You have a roadblock and traffic builds up behind it.
So we measure G6P to argue, you mentioned about three steps, synthase, hexokinase and transport,
glucose transport. They had all been implicated to be the roadblock, the step response for the
insulin resistance. And so we were able to sort out which was rate controlling by measuring these intermediates. So if the block is at synthase, glucose 6-phosphate should build
up and glucose should build up. If the block is at hexokinase, you should basically have lower G6P
and a buildup of glucose. And if the block is at transport, there should be reductions in both
glucose 6-phosphate and glucose. Through a series
of studies, we found in not only these young lean insulin-resistant offspring, but obese insulin-
resistant individuals, as well as individuals with poorly controlled diabetes, G6P, glucose 6-phosphate
and glucose are both reduced in the muscle cell, in vivo, implicating transport that's where your biochemical block is
so the block is at transport that's your target to fix if you want to fix muscle insulin resistance
and the the corollary is these other steps are not good targets drug targets to go after to fix
insulin resistance in muscle this is the first abnormality we found in its transport and in these young,
healthy 20-year-olds. And then the question is, what's wrong with the transport mechanism?
That led us into the world of lipids. Again, it's been known for decades that obesity is associated
with insulin resistance. That's why virtually every obese adult or child have insulin resistance.
There are rare exceptions. And then we basically
found, we developed a method to measure fat inside the muscle cell. And that was the best predictor
for insulin resistance in the muscle and the splock and translocation. Let's give people a
quick primer on normal glucose disposal into a cell. So when the insulin molecule hits the insulin receptor on the surface,
I believe it autophosphorylates itself, correct? That then signals to insulin receptor substrate
one, IRS1, inside the cell. So that sends a signal inside the cell, which also leads to a phosphorylation, which then signals PI3 kinase. It upregulates PI3 kinase. And that basically leads to a glute
four transporter, which you can think of as like a big tube being shoved up to the surface of the
cell across its membrane. And that basically passively allows glucose in. It is not an active
transporter, correct? That's correct. Everything you said is spot on. Basically up until now,
we don't know where the breakdown is in that whole process. All we know is that something
is impaired in getting glucose in the cell. But in terms of, is it, there's not enough insulin
that hits insulin receptor? Is there something
wrong with IRS-1, with PI3K? Is there something blocking the transporter? We're going to have to
figure that out still, but you've already taken two thirds of this puzzle off the plate by saying,
we know it's not downstream of that. That's correct. If you fix the transporter,
that's where the roadblock is, and that's the target. The next set of questions
becomes, why isn't insulin causing, and as you point out, this translocation of the GLUC4
transporter to the membrane to allow glucose to come into the cell through facilitated transport
down a gradient. So that's what we can talk about next if you want to. That's perfect. Can I share
my screen with you at this point? You can. And what we will do, Jerry, is we are going to take
everything that you are sharing with me and we're going to turn these into show notes that will be
timestamped to this part of the discussion. Because while I guess people like you and I
do tend to picture these things in our head easily,
I think for many people it is going to be incredibly helpful to be able to actually
look at some biochemical drawings. I benefit from this greatly. It's still not purely second
nature to me. I like to think in pictures too. So as much as we can help the audience out with
graphics, I think it will be beneficial. So here's a cartoon.
I'll walk you through this and stop me if you have questions. This is a cartoon of a muscle cell.
We went through how insulin normally works. Insulin binds to the receptor and everything,
as you said, we're going to actually show this in this cartoon, binds to the receptor,
the receptor autophosphorylates, becomes a kinase. The key substrate for this kinase, this receptor kinase in muscle is insulin receptor substrate 1, which undergoes tyrosine phosphorylation, allows it to
bind and activate this other protein, PI3 kinase, which Lou Cantley discovered. And that's a required
step for translocation. So that's all been worked out. And somehow this is not working. This is broken
in the insulin resistant individual. And again, these young 20 year olds, the patient with diabetes,
the obese insulin resistant individual. And the question is, what's wrong? So I'm going to share
with you at least my view, which would explain insulin resistance in most situations of lipid
induced insulin resistance, which I think
accounts for, I would say, the majority of these patients I see who have type 2 diabetes or who
are obese and insulin resistant, or even these young, lean, insulin-resistant offspring. And so
this is the picture. So here, and it relates to fatty fat metabolism. Before I told you,
the other MR method that we developed is actually something
called proton NMR. And this is actually, most of your listeners are very familiar with. Everyone
knows about MRI, magnetic resonance imaging. This is, people go into a scanner and they get very
pretty pictures of an organ brain or some other organ for diagnostic reasons. And it's the same biophysical principles. You're basically
getting this NMR signal from protons. And protons are the most abundant NMR visible nucleus in the
body. And it's mostly water we're looking at. So when you're basically getting the same signal
from protons, and mostly protons are water and fat. And so an imager gives you this three-dimensional
reconstruction of proton density in water and fat, and that's what gives you the images. And again,
we're doing biochemistry, so we're taking that same kind of information, but actually looking
at individual carbon atoms or phosphorus atoms, or in this case, protons lining the carbons and
triglyceride. It's fat. So what I said, using
proton NMR to measure fat inside the cell. This is different from fat outside the cell. So if you
look at a steak and you see the marbling of fat in a steak, that's fat outside the muscle cell.
What you don't see if you look at a steak is the fat inside the muscle cell. And using NMR,
we can actually discern fat outside the cell versus fat inside the cell. And using NMR, we can actually discern fat outside the cell
versus fat inside the cell.
We can do this in many organs and muscle,
started in muscle.
And using this approach, we found fat inside the muscle
was the best predictor for this block and transport
in all of our volunteers, young people, old people,
children, sedentary individuals.
Sedentary individuals, fat inside the cells,
the best predictor for insulin resistance. And so this led us into the world of lipids.
We're keen to understand then if finding the lipid intermediate that might do this. And
in studies where we took healthy individuals, perfectly normal sensitivity, We gave them an intralipid infusion, just raised plasma,
fatty acids for three to four hours, and found that after three to four hours, we can make them
as insulin resistant as anyone with type 2 diabetes. And others had shown that in addition
to us. I mean, we weren't the first to show this, but what we were the first to show is it's due to
this block in glycogen synthesis, and it's the same block. It's that block in transport. Just to be clear, when you
deliver intralipid, that's intravenous lipid, as a triacylglycerol or diacylglycerol? No, this is a
triglyceride. This is an emulsion, a triglyceride emulsion. It's often given to patients for hyperalimentation when they can't eat.
You give this energy-rich infusion.
Just like TPN or something like that.
It's TPN.
It's used in TPN often.
But what we also do is just a little low dose of heparin to activate lipoprotein lipase.
So all of a sudden, then, you can artificially raise fatty acids twofold, something up to about one and a
half millimolar, and ask the question, what does this do? What does this have to do with,
does it ultra metabolism? And it has profound effects. So by increasing LPL expression.
Not expression, activity. I did not know that heparin activated LPL. So by activating LPL with
heparin, cool trick to know, I'll keep that
in mind, you're going to get more of that lipid into the muscle cell. You will raise fatty acids.
So what the heparin does is it causes activation of lipoprotein lipase, and that will then break
down the triglycerides to raise fatty acids and more deliver fatty acids to all cells in the body. Yeah. Okay. So this becomes basically a quick vehicle by which you can deliver lipid directly into the
muscle cell. Exactly. Where you can acutely change that. And again, you can't do this just by giving
fatty acids. Fatty acid turnover is so fast. You can't just infuse fatty acids to significantly
raise. So this is a way
we're able to raise fatty acids specifically in vivo, in humans, and we do this in animals.
And so it's a nice pharmacological way of asking the question, what impact does just simply raising
fatty acids for a few hours have on metabolism? And it's profound. It takes three to four hours
before you see this, and then boom,
you get very profound insulin resistance. And in our early studies, again, we showed
using the same methods I told you about measuring glucose 6-phosphate, measuring intracellular
glucose, measuring glycogen synthesis. We found simply raising fatty acids for three to four hours
blocks glycogen synthesis, profound insulin resistance, as I say, as anyone
with obesity or type 2 diabetes. And it's due to the same, an acquired block in transport,
insulin activation of transport, both G6P and glucose are down. So that to us was a very
important lesson because it basically changed the paradigm. Because prior to this, people,
workers, biochemists, you may know the name
Philip Randall, who did some pioneering studies in the 60s at University of Bristol, and was really
the first to say, hey, fatty acids may be toxic, may be causing insulin resistance, and did studies
in rat tissue, you know, cells, heart tissue, diaphragm muscles taken from rats in vitro,
incubated it with fatty acids,
and in vitro in the test tube induced insulin resistance. The mechanism that they postulated
was that it was altering basically oxidation, the TCA cycle citrate levels would build up and
lead to inhibition of phosphofructokinase, which is a key glycolytic enzyme. The prediction that
Randall made was glucose 6-phosphate should increase, leading to inhibition of hexokinase.
We were interested in that because we said, oh, fat in our hands is important. We're raising
fatty acids and causing resistance. And we see this really strong relationship between fat in
the muscle cell and insulin
resistance in all of our subjects, obese, diabetic, young insulin resistant individuals.
And so we wanted to see if his mechanism, Randall's postulate mechanism, translates to humans,
because these were all in vitro studies done in tissues taken from animals. So in a series of
studies, we took, again, the healthy individuals,
raised fatty acids through this triglyceride and little dose of heparin infusion, and found just
the opposite to what Randall predicted. They got insulin resistance, which is what he would have
said, but not through his mechanism. He said G6P should go up. We saw it go down, and we saw glucose
go down. So it wasn't through inhibition
of glycolysis, as he said, it's somehow interfering with the insulin activation of transport. So,
and again, same rate controlling step we saw in all of our diabetics and obese individuals and
pre-diabetic individuals. But just to be clear, Jerry, it caused hypoglycemia. The intralipid dropped glucose?
No. Raising the fatty acids caused insulin resistance, inability of insulin to stimulate
glucose transport. Okay. Okay. Yep. I may have misheard you, but okay.
I'm going to now fast forward. We then took these observations back to the bench. We're
able to replicate this in rodents, rats, and mice.
And the power, even though I'm most passionate about our human studies, I'm a clinical
physiologist, and I care most about understanding what's happening in humans.
The animal models allow you to really interrogate biochemical process.
There we can get tissue out.
In humans, I like to be non-invasive with our
MR methodology, but here sometimes you need to get tissues to measure activities, phosphorylation
events. And also you have the power of mouse genetics. You can knock genes in and out of mice
to really rigorously test hypothesis. I should tell you one experiment before I move to this
cartoon that we did in humans is we did biopsies in these humans when we raised fatty acids and found this block in
transport and asked the question, is a lipid intermediate fatty acid metabolite interfering
with insulin signaling cascade, which we just discussed, receptor and somewhere to PI3 kinase.
which we just discussed, receptor and somewhere to PI3 kinase. And what we found was indeed in healthy individuals, just give glucose and insulin, you get activation of PI3 kinase.
This is the step you mentioned. This is the required step for translocation. And in the
follow-up study, same individuals, we raise glucose and insulin and also raise fatty acids.
we raise glucose and insulin and also raise fatty acids. And then we totally abrogate insulin activation of PI3 kinase. That study basically in humans, in the model we care about, is saying,
yeah, somehow a fatty acid metabolite is leading to this block in insulin action somewhere between
PI3 kinase and the receptor. So we've narrowed it down to that. I'll walk you through
the steps that I think then are the biochemical metabolite that's mediating this, the lipid fatty
acid mediator that's leading to this, and then the biochemical mechanism. Does that sound good?
Yeah, that sounds fantastic.
Here we have a cartoon of a muscle cell. And my view, again, thinking about flux, it has to do
with relative imbalance. So basically doing focused lipidomics, we zeroed in on this metabolite,
fatty acid metabolite called diacylglycerol. And yeah, I heard you mention that before. It's the
precursor, it's the penultimate step in triglyceride synthesis, diacyl-2 fatty acids on a glycerol
backbone. This is a bioactive metabolite. It's been known for years to activate novel PKCs.
This is what we found tracked in our animal models with lipid-induced insulin resistance.
Do high-fat feeding in a mouse or rat, get muscle insulin resistance. And it was this metabolite that trapped with
insulin resistance. And then we did the lipid, same type of lipid infusion we did in humans,
simply raise plasma fatty acids by giving triglyceride and heparin. We saw acyl-CoAs go up.
We saw DAGs go up. Right when DAGs reached a peak, then we got activation of novel PKCs, PKC theta and epsilon
in the muscle. Then we link to this block in insulin action, which I'll show you in a second,
at the level of the receptor and one step downstream of the receptor. The concept that
I'd like to impart on you is it's this imbalance between fluxes. So fatty acids are
continuously being delivered to muscle cells. And we're going to do the same thing if we have time
to talk about the liver, because that's the other key insulin response of Oregon. But we'll start
with muscle. Fatty acids are being delivered either through fatty acids or even hydrolysis
of triglycerides through LPL, etheliobaric, delivering more fatty acids
to the muscle cell. When it's the flux of fatty acids into the muscle cell that exceeds the
ability of the mitochondria to oxidize the fat or store this fatty acids, acyl-CoA is triglyceride, you get net accumulation of diacylglycerol.
This is a very important point. Triglycerides are neutral. So I want to emphasize this. So
even though triglycerides often track with insulin resistance, we've dissociated it inside the muscle
cell and liver cell from insulin resistance. It's a marker for DAGs, typically tracks very well,
but it's an inert storage form of lipid. So triglycerides are not the culprit. We've
dissociated in liver and muscle, but it's a pretty good marker if you can't measure
the DAGs with mass spec. Let's go back to that for a second. I want to make sure people understand
what we're saying here. So triacylglyceride or triglyceride, those two we use interchangeably, has this three carbon glycerol backbone with three free fatty acids on it.
That's the way that we very, very efficiently store energy in the most energy dense hydrocarbon
in our body. The DAG by extension has only two of those free fatty acids. What typically sits on that third carbon?
And what is it about that confirmation that renders the DAG, in this case at least,
seemingly much more of a problem than the TG or TAG? Basically, it's a hydroxyl group,
a simple hydroxyl group. It's the two fatty acids of the DAG that sit into the bilayer, membrane bilayer, and then
the hydrophilic hydroxyl group sits in the cytoplasm, and that's what then will pull the
novel PKCs to the plasma membrane. So that's the troublemaker. That's the troublemaker.
Basically, then when you get this imbalance between fatty acid uptake
versus oxidation in the mito versus storage as neutral lipid, you get activation of these two
novel PKCs in muscle, theta and epsilon. Theta blocks insulin action at the level somewhere
between the receptor and IRS1 tyrosine phosphorylation.
And Epsilon, and we'll get into this for the liver, directly binds to the insulin receptor
and then hits the receptor kinase. If we have a chance, I'd love to share this with you and
your listeners because this, I think, has important evolutionary mechanisms behind it.
Why does this exist? And it's going to be very
important for survival during starvation. But nevertheless, when both of these NPKCs in muscle
are activated, you have reduced insulin tyrosine phosphorylation of IRS1, less PI3 kinase activation,
and as we talked about, then less GL translocation so to me the real culprit and
we've been able to just quickly really test this rigorously gene knockout we've been able to
inactivate isoforms npkc theta you get protection we've been able to block mito oxidation and you
make these animals prone to that build up insulin resistance. We block fat entry into the myocyte,
inactivate FAT4. They're protected. You overexpress lipoprotein lipase in the muscle,
more fatty acid delivery, muscle-specific insulin resistance. And then finally, if you rev up
mitochondrial fat oxidation, let's say through uncoupling, overexpress UCP3 in the muscle,
you get protection from insulin resistance.
And all these track with DAGs going up or down with the insulin resistance or protection from
insulin resistance. Let's talk a little bit about how we think this is different in an active versus
inactive person. Because the outset, you said, look, when we're trying to find this in the youngest
cohort of patients, these 20 year old, basically undergrads at Yale that we're going to study,
we screen on many things, but an important thing we screen for is sedentary behavior.
You mentioned that at the very outset, which leads me to believe that if you did a sampling
across the cross country team, the crew team, you wouldn't find this phenomenon. So what is it about
activity or the lack thereof that presumably points to this elevation of intracellular DAGs
that kicks off this cascade? Let me just show you. So this is where we talked about
Riven and his hypothesis of insulin resistance and how what we wanted was to build on it.
Because I'm going to answer your question about exercise, and I want to do two things. I want to
show you how exercise reverses this muscle insulin resistance. But I also want to show you
and your listeners why exercise in muscle actually will prevent fatty liver and liver insulin
resistance. I think that this is a useful
segue. And so this is from Jerry Reuben's Banting Lecture in 1988. And at that time, people were
still arguing whether insulin resistance was driving all these other things we see around
the circle, atherosclerosis, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, polycystic ovarian disease,
inflammation, or are these just common things
clustering together? So what we wanted to do was actually ask the question, what we see in these
young 20-year-olds, these volunteers, is the first thing we see is muscle insulin resistance, and
maybe that's driving atherogenic dyslipidemia, who is going to lead to heart disease, high triglycerides, low HDL, and
non-alcoholic fatty liver disease by changing the fate of ingested carbohydrate from glycogen to fat.
So this is the distribution I was telling you about. And healthy, young, sedentary individuals,
we're going to get into exercise in a second. We simply take the bottom quartile, one and four,
versus the top quartile, and we give
them two high carbohydrate meals. And we say, where's the energy going from that carbohydrate?
How is it being stored? Getting at the very first question you asked me. We can use our NMR to
measure changes in fat storage in liver and muscle, as well as glycogen in liver and muscle.
muscle, as well as glycogen in liver and muscle. And what we found then is you give them two high carbohydrate milkshakes, and there's virtually no difference in the plasma glucose concentrations
at this late breakfast and lunchtime high carbohydrate shake. But you can see it's
at the expense of severe hyperinsulinemia is what we talked about. So the reason these young
insulin resistant,
as well as every insulin resistant person is perfectly fine
is the beta cells are pumping out two to three times
the amount of insulin just to maintain new glycemia.
So these beta cells are just being whipped,
working really hard and that's why no one's diabetic.
You're insulin resistant.
That's why virtually every obese insulin resistant person
has normal glycemia because the beta cells are working so hard to maintain this.
And you can see that here.
The other thing I want to point out is the insulin levels are given number, you know,
so normal, maybe 100 at the peak and maybe 180 at the peak in the resistant individuals.
But this is in plasma.
The portal vein with the liver sees is three times this.
Liver seeing huge amounts of insulin in these insulin-resistant individuals just
to maintain normal glycemia.
We use carbon NMR to look at changes in muscle glycogen and liver glycogen.
You can see, again, young insulin-resistant 20-year-olds can't get glucose into muscle
glycogen due to a block in transport because they have increased
ectopic fat in the myocyte, DAGs are up, no problem in liver. And then you look at the changes in fat
and this carbohydrate, this is change in liver triglyceride, it's up two and a half to 0.3 fold.
You put some heavy water, stable heavy water into the milkshake to track de novo
lipogenesis. That's the conversion of glucose to fat. And that's also up greater than twofold.
Quick question there. There was a very famous experiment. It's been so long since I've read it.
I certainly know I spent many hours on it. It was by Mark Hellerstein, circa 94-ish. And he looked at this question of how much carbohydrate could
be converted to fat via de novo lipogenesis. And if I recall correctly, the answer was,
at least from that paper, was not that much. But also I believe one of the criticisms
of that was that he was looking at an insulin sensitive population. Am I remembering that
correctly? Because what you're showing here would suggest the opposite, which suggests that
an insulin-resistant person is capable of significant de novo lipogenesis.
Everything you've said is correct. When you're thinking about de novo lipogenesis,
two things is, again, what conditions are you studying this? Is it after meal ingestion?
Is it in a fasting state when a lot of people have measured this in the past?
It's minimal, and it makes sense.
It only gears up with substrate is taking in.
And then depending on the type of substrate, you can alter this quite a bit.
So it can be changed by simply putting more fructose, more glucose in the meal by increasing
the meal size. Mark's done beautiful work in the past. It is what it is. Those studies are what
they are. But clearly what we're learning here is just as you say, your DNL is significant. It's
not the majority of the fat. I think most investigators would agree the majority of
fat synthesis in liver is occurring through esterification, that is fatty acids
coming to the liver, getting incorporated into triglyceride. But there is a significant
importance for DNL. And again, especially if you track it chronically in patients who are
continuously high carb feeding, especially high sucrose, high fructose corn syrup, we want to get
into that. But fructose basically gets
funneled into the liver, into the DNL pathway. It's ubiquitous. You can push DNL to be significant,
and it is a significant contributor to metabolic fatty liver disease. And it's upregulated with
peripheral sensitivity. I think this is the major message I want to give here is when you have muscle insulin resistance, specifically,
it will drive the liver fat synthesis by DNL. When you have that, when your liver is making more fat through DNL, it makes more BLDL exports. So plasma triglycerides go up and HDL goes down.
So what I find interesting about this before you go further, Jerry, is this
is all from the 2007 PNAS paper by your wife actually, right? Kit Peterson. Yeah, Kit Peterson.
So what I find interesting about these data is that these patients were euglycemic. I mean,
that to me is the staggering piece of this. These patients are still potentially a decade away from seeing an
interference in glucose homeostasis. They're a decade away from their doctor saying, hey,
your glucose is a little higher than it should be post-prandially, nevermind even at the fast.
And yet they're already seeing an 80% increase in triglyceride, which I just want to sort of talk
a little bit about this clinically. Most laboratory assays will say a triglyceride level of 150
milligrams per deciliter is considered normal. Well, we don't say that. In our practice,
we view anything over 100 as abnormal. That's a red flag. And if your trigs are more than 2X your HDL cholesterol, that's a very big red
flag. Although most people would accept triglycerides of three or four, if not five times
above HDL cholesterol before the sirens would go off. And yet when you look at these patients,
again, euglycemic, you see a difference of approximately, you know, 100 to 105 of the trigs in the insulin resistant
to 60 in the insulin sensitive. So it's all kind of right here in front of you,
sort of in a way that unfortunately just doesn't get appreciated, but it's the more intense stuff
that's mind-boggling to me, which is the two and threefold difference we see in de novo lipogenesis,
and threefold difference we see in de novo lipogenesis, hepatic synthesis of fat, impaired hepatic glucose sensitivity. And I guess it speaks to the point you made earlier, Jerry, which is
when the portal vein amplification of insulin differences is as big as it is, it becomes
basically a magnifier of everything we're seeing in the periphery. Exactly. Yeah. And our normative
data, in my view, we need to reset.
What we consider normal is, to me, this is when we look at our insulin sensitive, that's what our
normal should be and guiding us. You asked about exercise and something we're quite passionate
about. And I want to kind of tell you how that fits in here. So again, conceptually, here we have
a normal person ingesting carbohydrate. First question, how is
this distributed? It's in glycogen. This is where you want to store your ingested carbohydrate.
It gets stored in glycogen and liver and muscle. And again, this is one quarter of our young,
lean, healthy volunteers are insulin resistant. And again, if you're overweight or obese,
you're there already because these are lean individuals. And that's still one quarter of the population. You can't get that ingested glucose into glycogen due to this block
in transport, due to the block in DAG PKC inhibition of insulin signaling. It's diverted to liver. You
have that insulin in the portal vein that's three times per if it's up to five, 600 microunits per mil.
That turns on SRIBP1C, the master transcriptional regulator of triglyceride synthesis, gears up all the DNL enzymes. So you have increased DNL. That leads to this increase,
we just reviewed plasma triglycerides, this reduction in HDL. This is going to set these healthy individuals up to
atherogenic dyslipidemia, heart disease in their 40s and 50s. With time, it's metabolic associated
fatty liver disease now, and again, most common cause of liver disease now in the world. It's now
leading cause of NASH, leading cause of liver fibrosis, cirrhosis, and stage liver disease,
and going to be liver cancer. So it's all going to be metabolic driven and from that hyperinsulinemia
in my view. So exercise, can we do anything about this? This hypothesis is right. We can test it.
And so you asked about exercise. So this is a study we did some years ago, published in the
New England Journal, took these young insulin resistant offspring, and this is with
parents with type 2 diabetes. And the Joslin group did a really nice study. They found
that if you have two parents with type 2 diabetes, and if you're insulin resistant, that single
parameter is the best predictor for whether or not you would go on to develop type 2 diabetes. So we've tried to study these individuals with our methodology extensively. And John Luca Persagan,
who did this study when he was a fellow with me, took these and just studied them in the basal
state, shown here that, you know, again, he's young, insulin resistant. Again, everyone here
is lean, non-smoking, no medications. They're in their 20s and 30s, BMI 23, 24 to factor
out obesity, confounding the factors of obesity, medication, smoking, other things. So young,
lean, healthy individuals, but just parents with diabetes, insulin resistant. You study them and
in the basal state, take up less than half the amount of glucose in muscle, and it's due to a
block in transport. So same
thing as I've gone on and on before in the diabetics and the obese individuals, this block
in transport. And we asked the question, does exercise, can we bypass this abnormality? And
the answer is yes. So here you can see this was after six weeks of being on a Stairmaster,
three 15-minute bouts at about 65% MbO2 max. And here we're normalizing
insulin-stimulated muscle glycogen synthesis. And we're usually measuring glucose 6-phosphate.
We've opened up that door of getting glucose into the myocyte. And I think molecular explanation
for this is this protein called AMPK, which we can talk about, gets activated with exercise. And that has been shown
to cause borer translocation independent, independent of PI3 kinase. And so we're kind
of short-circuiting that block with exercise. To test our overall hypothesis, does muscle
insulin resistance drive fatty liver and DNL and high triglycerides, we took these young insulin-resistant individuals,
and we showed, John Lucas showed in that New England Journal study, even a single bout,
45-minute bout, was sufficient to open up the door to glucose, cause that GLUT4 translocation.
And Rasmus Röbal, when he was a clinical fellow with me, did one single bout in these same
individuals I showed you before, insulin-resistant in muscle, the ones had high triglycerides, low HDL, and prone to
increased TNL. With a single bout, we were able to show that that same ingested glucose would lead
to more glucose deposition as muscle glycogen, and we got significant reductions in de novo
lipogenesis, significant reductions in liver
triglyceride. I just want to make sure I understand that. And it's relevant to another question I have
about the difference between insulin dependent and independent glucose uptake. So do we know if
that single bout of exercise, which particular piece of the pathway got released? Did it have some direct effect on the root cause, the DAG,
or some of the kinases downstream? Was it even further downstream at the very last step where
the transporter gets released? Where was the actual bottleneck alleviated with that single
bout of exercise? I can speculate. In these human studies, I can tell you that we
open up the door, we measure glucose 6-phosphate in them, and that goes up. So we open the door
for that defect in insulin-stimulating transport is now reversed. So glucose transporters are in
the membrane, glucose is coming in. What I can't tell you is whether or not we've altered DAGs and we're getting improved insulin signaling at the
level of the receptor and IRS-1, and or is it just AMPK causing this GLUT4 translocation? If I had
to speculate, I would think most of it is through the latter. We were simply with an acute bout
causing AMPK-induced GLUT4 for translocation which we know happens independent
of pediatric kinase that's established so we're short-circuiting we're just causing glute four
right at all the lower mechanisms to get to the membrane so we fixed the block in insulin action
i think though with chronic exercise therapy we're going to be doing both where we get melt away
the lipid and dags go down so we have improved insulin signal as well as more AMPK induced glucose translocation.
Yeah. I'll tell you just, I think I've even discussed this on a previous podcast.
I've had a couple of patients with type one diabetes that I've taken care of, not many,
but in the phenotype of patients with type one diabetes, where there is a significant amount of exercise, specifically sort of modest
intensity aerobic exercise. So a person who is, for example, doing brisk walking, very brisk
walking, sort of to the tune of four miles an hour, an hour to two hours a day. These patients
with type 1 diabetes can be virtually free of insulin and maintain reasonable glycemic control. So they
could walk around with a hemoglobin A1C of 6% using maybe 12 units of insulin a day and obviously
restricting carbohydrates. But again, it suggests, I say this having watched them change the intensity
duration of the exercise, that it seems that that exercise becomes a spigot
to how much glucose they can dispose in their muscle seemingly without insulin. It's almost
like a total bypass of the system, which again, I think to your point is chronic. I don't think
this is something we see acutely. I obviously can't comment on it. The first time I saw it,
which was probably about six years ago, it really sent a light bulb off, which is imagine now being able to maximize both insulin-dependent and insulin-independent
glucose uptake into a muscle that really becomes a powerful tool to combat all of this sort
of metabolic dysregulation.
That's what AMPK does is insulin-dependent glucose uptake.
And I can see in combination with reduced
carbohydrate consumption, less coming into the circulation and whatever little comes in
is taken care of through AMPK, insulin-independent GLUT4 translocation. So that fits.
Before we go to the liver, and I do want to actually talk about how all of this works in
the liver, I want to go back to one other thing that
you very briefly touched on, which is the evolutionary explanation for some of this.
That would be best done, if I might say, with the liver.
Okay, great. Let's do it because I want to understand this. Yeah.
That's kind of fun. So let's now turn. So I kind of walked you through at least my thinking about
insulin resistance,
why it's so important for not only diabetes, but so many diseases. I've shown you the physiological
cause for insulin resistance in muscle, can't get glucose in the glycogen. I've shown you that block
is a transport, and then I've given you a molecular understanding of how that insulin
resistance in muscle happens. My view is lipid disoglycerol
is blocked, leading to activation of a novel protein kinase C, epsilon, theta, blocking insulin
signaling. Okay. So let's now, and then I've shown you how muscle insulin resistance can lead to fat
accumulation in liver, atherogenic dyslipidemia, and fatty liver. Now we know fatty liver is what
then leads to insulin resistance in the
liver. And so I want to take you through the molecular basis for how fat and liver causes
insulin resistance. And it's pretty much what's nice now that you understand muscle, lipid-induced
muscle insulin resistance, it's pretty close to the same story in liver. So here's a cartoon of
the liver cell. But is the direction of causation, Jerry, in the order in which you're telling the story?
In other words, is the hyperinsulinemia as a result of muscle insulin resistance?
Let me clarify that.
Muscle insulin resistance, which leads to peripheral hyperinsulinemia, which is accompanied
by portal vein hyperinsulinemia, which leads to what you're
about to tell us. Is that the order in which you think this occurs?
I do. As I say, this is what we see in our volunteers as we march through the progression
in different stages. We don't see liver abnormalities in these young 20-year-olds.
It's all muscle and maybe a little bit of the fat cell, which we'll come to at the end, but
it's the muscle. There's no alterations in the liver until they get fatty liver. Once they get fatty liver,
then we see both insulin resistance in liver and insulin resistance in muscle.
A very important distinction between humans and rodents. We've studied both models quite
extensively. Rodents develop insulin resistance in the reverse direction. They get liver fat first, liver insulin resistance, and then muscle. Most of the studies are done in
rodents. It's a very important distinction in terms of the progression and very different humans
versus rodents. And we can talk about similarities and differences if you want, but we're going to
focus mostly on humans for this talk. And that makes total sense. So it is, again,
it's peripheral IR, hepatic IR, hepatic consequences, which then basically amplify it.
That's my belief, yeah. And again, leading to this beta cell compensation, compensation,
and then again, something when you get both muscle and liver insulin resistance and increased glucose
production by liver,
then something happens to the beta cell.
And that's when things really start to spiral
where you have very profound hyperglycemia,
fasting and postprandial.
Here's the cartoon of the liver cell.
And again, glucose transport is not rate controlling,
as you know, in the liver cell.
Glucose just diffuses in through GLUT2 transporters.
And the insulin, again, binds the receptor,
same thing, autophosphorylation. The key intermediate there in liver is IRS2,
undergoes tyrosine phosphorylation, use piyothrekinase, just as you did in muscle AKT2.
And in liver, what happens is you have a few things. One not shown here is glucokinase
translocation, and that we've recently
shown is probably very important for rate control, getting glucose into the hepatocyte.
You also get activation of glycogen synthase and more glycogen synthesis. And then you have
this phosphorylation of FOXO, which is a transcriptional regulator, and that then is
excluded from the nucleus and then down-regulates then gluconeogenesis through a transcriptional regulator. And that then is excluded from the nucleus and then down
regulates then gluconeogenesis through a transcriptional mechanism. And if we have a
chance, I'd like to come back to this because we have some interesting data that speaks to really
how insulin is inhibiting this key process. So let's now just focus on how lipid causes insulin resistance in liver. Same metabolite, it's the
diisoglycerols. They go to activate epsilon. That's really the major isoform of PKC, novel PKCs in
liver. And work by Varmin Samuel, when he was doing his PhD with me in a series of studies,
Varmin showed that epsilon binds to the insulin receptor and
directly inhibits the receptor kinase itself. And that then leads to downstream abnormalities.
What I want to share with you now, which I think, and again, gets into this evolutionary basis for
insulin resistance, which I think your listeners might find interesting, is how is epsilon
inhibiting the receptor kinase? We worked on this, Jesse
Reinhardt and Max Peterson, he was an MD-PhD student with me. We did untargeted phosphoproteomics.
And what I'm showing here is the catalytic domain of the insulin receptor. Yeah, I can just describe
it for the listeners. It's a loop. You can picture it as a door over the pocket for the
catalytic domain of the insulin receptor. And this door is closed. IRS-1, IRS-2 can't go into
the pocket for tyrosine phosphorylation. When insulin binds the receptor, these three tyrosines,
the 1158, the 1162, and the 1163 become phosphorylated, that opens the door,
that loop flips out, and then IRS1, IRS2 go into the pocket and undergo tyrosine phosphorylation
to get the rest of the cascade going. Using untargeted phosphoproteomics, we were able to
show Jesse Reinhardt, who is our collaborator in MassSpecMaven, identified using purified receptor, purified PKC epsilon,
that when you add activated epsilon to the receptor, you phosphorylate this threonine.
And that got us very excited because, golly, that's one amino acid away from these two
tyrosines that are required for activation receptors. Maybe doing something important.
And so the other thing that
got us excited about, and here's getting into evolution, is the sequence of the catalytic
domain for the receptor. And it's been conserved all the way from humans down to fruit flies.
Those three tyrosines, same position. And that threonine that sits right between the two tyrosines,
1158 and 1162, has been conserved all the way, again, from Homo sapiens down to Drosophila
through evolution. If something's important, it usually hangs around. That's a long time.
So to prove this, we very simply, we did some genetics. Again, that's what you can do is you
can knock a glutamic acid, replace that threonine with glutamic acid, mimic a some genetics. Again, that's what you can do is you can knock a glutamic acid,
replace that threonine with glutamic acid, mimic a phosphorylation event, and that kills the kinase
activity. You can mutate the threonine to an alanine so it can't get phosphorylated. And then
you have protection in vitro from epsilon-induced reduction in IRK activity. And then you can make
the mouse. And so here in this paper, we made mice where we
replaced the threonine in that key position, the 11, this is the mouse homologue, the 1150 is the
homologue for the 1116 humans. So all the threonines are instead alanines. And I won't
get into the data other than say the mice are perfectly normal, normal chow, normal insulin
sensitivity, nothing, normal size, normal growth. But when Max fed these mice a high-fat diet,
the wild-type mice get profound hepatic insulin resistance. And this we see, and everyone else
on the planet sees. You feed mice high-fat diet, even for three days, they get fat accumulation,
DAG accumulation, hepatic insulin resistance. Does it have to have sucrose in it as well or just fat?
Doesn't need to be. You can make it worse if you add a little sucrose. They like that in the
drinking water and they have even more fatty liver if you put sucrose in the drinking water. But
this is just with fat alone, but it's even more greater when you put sucrose or fructose or
whatever sugar you want in the drinking water. And here then you can see when you put sucrose or fructose or whatever sugar you want in the drinking water.
And here, then you can see when you simply mutate that 3-nutrient alanine, now you have perfectly normal hepatic insulin sensitivity as reflected by insulin's ability to suppress hepatic glucose
production. And this is despite the same amount of liver fat, same amount of liver DAGs in the liver.
despite the same amount of liver fat, same amount of liver dags in the liver. This tells us that that single amino acid is doing something very important in terms
of mediating lipid-induced insulin resistance.
And this actually just came out this last week, this paper now, just to summarize, where
we've now shown that there's different isoforms, we didn't get into this, of diisoglycerol, and it really matters which isoform it is
and what compartment it is.
Just to summarize this paper that just came out in Cell Metabolism, we were able to show
by measuring the three different stereoisomers of diisoglycerols, it's really the SN1-2 isoform,
and measuring these different isoforms in five different intracellular compartments,
the plasma membrane, the cytosol, lipid droplet, ER, and the mitochondria. It's really specifically
the SN1,2 isoform in the plasma membrane that's important. If you just measure total
DAGs, you may easily miss this. We learned that this recent study and that we showed both
that PKC epsilon is both necessary and sufficient for this process by doing the knock-in and
overexpression. But I just want to basically touch on the question you asked me about,
why do we have insulin resistance? Why should it exist? And the reason I think it exists is it's protective for us during starvation.
When you starve, this is true pretty much in all mammals, mice, rats, and humans. When we starve,
we get fatty liver. Here in this study, this is Rachel Perry's paper in Cell from a couple years
ago. Take rats, just starve them for 48 hours. You have increased lipolysis, more fatty acids
delivered to the liver, hepatic fat accumulation, DAGs we show go up, SN1,2, PKC epsilon translocation,
and insulin resistance in liver. And the main thing that insulin does in the liver is it promotes
glucose uptake and storage as glycogen. When you think about it,
that's what you want turned off during starvation because during starvation,
glucose is a very precious molecule and you want to preserve this in circulation for the CNS,
which is critically in need. It's really the major source of energy for the CNS. And so by promoting hepatic insulin
resistance, we're promoting glucose in circulation for basically the CNS to operate. And so that to
me is why that threonine is preserved all the way from humans to fruit flies. And I just wanted to
show you this cover of Nature, this Mexican cave fish. It's a fun story
because after our paper came out, this little fish made the cover of nature and what was so
fascinating about it is so these little fish, they live inside caves. They spend most of their life
starving. The only time they are able to eat is when something smaller than them swims in front of the cave and then they
can reach out and grab it and pull it back into the cave and gobble it up. And these workers who
studied this Mexican cave fish found this cave fish had a mutation in the insulin receptor,
had profound hepatic insulin resistance, and they also went on to say this was important to allow them to survive. In my view, insulin
resistance was a protective mechanism throughout evolution that allowed us to survive all species
during starvation, which was probably the predominant environmental exposure we've had
for the last many, many millennia. And it's only in recent years, recent decades that now we're in this toxic environment
of overnutrition. And it's when these same pathways now are going the opposite direction,
promoting disease by doing what they were at one time was protective. And now they're actually
being told metabolic disease that we just discussed. So I want to make sure I can unpack
this a little bit. So I want to make sure I can unpack this a little
bit. So I want to start in the muscle because I think it's easier. And again, we'll even talk
about it in humans, which means we can do it on a sort of different timescale because obviously
48 hours of fasting in a mouse is a seismic fast, a near fatal fast. But let's say 48 to 72 hours
of fasting in a human, we still would expect to see significant muscle insulin
resistance. And there would be a great reason for that evolutionarily, because you would want to
make sure that as much glucose as possible in that circulation, which by this point is all coming
through hepatic glucose output is not being quote unquote wasted in muscle glycogen synthesis. To your point, every gram of
gluconeogenic substrate that's going through the liver and then coming out the liver should be
preserved for the brain because even Cahill's studies showed that after 40 days of starvation,
humans were still getting about 40% of CNS energy from glucose, the remainder from ketones. So glucose never went away
as a substrate for the brain. So I think I have a handle on the muscle side of things. I'm still
struggling a little bit to understand the physiologic consequence of hepatic insulin
resistance and how that feeds into what I think should be an environment that
says, figure out a way to make as much glucose for the CNS as possible. Why does more fat
accumulation in the liver make it better served to protect the brain? So first of all, let me step
back. So both organs during starvation, both
liver, even though I focus here on liver, muscle will become insulin resistant also through
increased circulating fatty acids through the mechanisms. We talked about DAGs building up,
PKC theta. So insulin resistance in all organs are going to preserve glucose for the CNS. I was just
focusing on the threonine here in liver because that's where
epsilon was taking us. To understand the liver, I want to just take you to another cartoon because
you're asking a very important question about processes, about regulation, how insulin works
in liver. And I think to do this, let me just step back. The conceptual view,
again, this is a cartoon I always like to show. How does insulin work? This was from 20 years ago
when I was first studying it, maybe 30 years ago. Insulin binds the receptor, magic happens,
something happens, then you have an effect. And so even though insulin's been, since its discovery,
we're still trying to really understand what's happening in different tissues,
how it works, and getting surprises. So this is the canonical view we just went through of how
insulin works on liver. It binds the receptor. It activates the cascade to promote glycogen
synthesis and turn off gluconeogenesis. And what we're finding is this simple view doesn't explain many things and I think needs
modification, especially in terms of insulin regulating gluconeogenesis, this process that
is required to keep us alive during starvation. Without gluconeogenesis, we're not going to wake
up in the morning because it's gluconeogenesis that supplies glucose for the CNS while we're
sleeping and certainly during starvation without this process, we're in trouble.
I don't think that can be overstated, by the way.
Let's go back to what you just said.
We couldn't survive, by my calculation, Jerry, we'd have a hard time surviving 10 minutes
without gluconeogenesis as a species.
Well, I'll modify that a little bit.
As passionate, I'd love to hear you state the importance of
gluconeogenesis. No, we know clinically you can. And again, from the lessons learned from
Gene Knockout, you know, unfortunately, there are patients with inherited disease,
von Gehrke's disease. As you know, patients who don't have glucose 6-phosphatase, the last key
step getting glucose 6-phosphate out. We do know that can be compatible
with life. We have patients with glucose 6-phosphatase, and the way we keep them alive
is just continuously to feed them. Yeah, that's my point. Without continuous glucose feeding,
your lifespan would be measured in minutes to hours without gluconeogenesis to regulate
glucose homeostasis. It's critical for life function.
We're on the same page.
So let's just talk about then how it's thought to operate and regulate it.
It's also important to be able to modulate it.
So we eat a meal and we have to suppress gluconeogenesis.
Otherwise, glucose would go up to 400 or 500 after eating a carbohydrate meal.
So it has to be a process that's turned on,
turned off. And not turned on too much, you know, in terms of diabetes, because that's what drives fast in hyperglycemia. Traditionally, pretty much the major textbooks, physiology, biochemistry,
insulin is thought to be turned off gluconeogenesis through transcriptional
mechanisms. And again, this is this FOXO phosphorylation by AKT,
exclusion from the nucleus. Then you get downregulation of PEPCK, excuse me, and 6-phosphatase.
FOXO is the transcription regulator for these downregulation. The problem with this view,
and again, there's some beautiful molecular biology, And I don't want to deny this doesn't happen. But the problem with this being the predominant regulating mechanism
is threefold. One is you can knock out AKT or FOXO and give insulin to the mouse, and you can
still turn off gluconeogenesis in a fasted mouse, which is totally dependent on gluconeogenesis.
That speaks to
the fact you don't need these key insulin signaling pathways to regulate gluconeogenesis.
The second thing in terms of its role in mediating fasting hyperglycemia and diabetes is
we got liver from patients with poorly controlled diabetes. So when patients go in for Roux-en-Y or bariatric surgery,
the surgeon can take a little piece of liver under direct visualization, so it's very safe,
and give us enough liver so we can do actually protein measurements and enzyme measurements of
Pepsi K6 phosphates. Not just message, but actually the proteins themselves. And to my surprise,
I thought all these enzymes from everything I
was thinking about biochemistry and at least what I learned when I was a luxury medical student,
I expected Pepsi K and 6-phosphatase and fructose 1, 6-biphosphatase all to be upregulated two to
threefold in the poorly controlled diabetic that was undergoing through and bypass surgery compared to
the non-diabetic. And we found no relationship between protein expression of these enzymes,
gluconeogenic enzymes, and at least fasting glucose and insulin and history of diabetes.
Finally, when you develop methods, the flux methods we won't get into to actually quantify
this flux of gluconeogenesis,
which has not been easy to measure, by the way, but we have methods now. They're very good to
measure this flux. We can turn off gluconeogenesis within five minutes, and that's much faster than
you'd expect in transcriptional translational mechanisms. Just to kind of talk about how
gluconeogenesis, this is the gluconeogenic
pathway lactate to glucose, you can have transcriptional regulation, you can have
substrate regulation. So glycerol, we've shown from lipolysis, there is no rate control. The
more glycerol that comes from fat breakdown in the fat cell, that fluxes the liver, comes right
out as glucose. There's no rate control. It's just all substrate driven. Redox we've shown in the liver cell regulates gluconeogenesis. And
this, in a series of studies that Anila has done, that's how I think metformin works. And we can
talk about that if you're interested. But finally, I want to emphasize is this allosteric regulation
of gluconeogenesis by acetyl-CoA. This had been
known for decades to be a regulator of pyruvate carboxylase and had kind of been forgotten because
it was very hard to measure and no one looked at it in vivo because it's hard to measure in vivo
or especially in the diabetic situation. We said, well, wait a minute, let's go back and look at
acetyl-CoA. We developed the methods,
tandem mass spec methods, very sensitive, very specific, to do this in freeze-clamp
tissues from animals with varying degrees of diabetes hyperglycemia. The bottom line is found
a very robust relationship between acetyl-CoA, which is, as you know, the end product of beta
oxidation, take fatty acids and break them down through beta oxidation, the end product of beta-oxidation. Take fatty acids and break
them down through beta-oxidation, the end product is before it enters the TCA cycle.
And there's this very robust relationship, just all these different studies. But basically,
every study we do, we give insulin, we get suppression of acetyl-CoA. This explains how
insulin acutely suppresses gluconeogenesis.
When diabetic models, when you have increased gluconeogenesis, it's twofold increases in aceto-CoA, but it perfectly follows rates of gluconeogenesis, which we quantify, track
perfectly with concentrations of hepatic aceto-CoA content.
I just want to take you how insulin normally works in the liver cell and then how
it becomes dysregulated in diabetes. And this is going to answer your question about how do we
distinguish insulin promoting storage as glycogen yet keeping gluconeogenesis going for the brain.
So this is very important to answer that question. So in my view, insulin binds the receptor and it has direct effects through the receptor.
That is mostly to promote glucose uptake and storage as glycogen.
The effects on gluconeogenesis, the process that keeps us going during starvation, is
really mostly regulated not through the receptor in liver, but it's through its effect on the fat cell
in the periphery. In studies we've done in awake rats, and we're translating this to humans,
it's really insulin putting the brake on peripheral lipolysis, less fatty acid delivery to liver,
less generation of acetyl-CoA. and we've shown this, the more fatty acids that
flux the liver track almost perfectly with acetyl-CoA content, less pyruvate carboxylase
activity.
And again, there's about 10, 15% of this gluconeogenesis is simply coming from less
glycerol from lipolysis to liver through substrate push.
So you have two very different processes here.
One is glycogen synthesis.
That's what the receptor is doing in liver. Gluconeogenesis is mostly 90%, I would say. There may be a little
bit of intrapatic lipolysis regulation, but mostly through its effect to put the brake on
peripheral lipolysis. And this model, by the way, will explain, in my view, the explanation for all
the controversies of insulin action that have been
described through the last decades in mice, where you knock out AKT in the mouse, insulin still
works. You do things to the periphery fat cell and you affect glucose metabolism, gluconeogenesis.
All these studies that appear to be conflicting can be explained if you use this model as a template
to understand insulin action.
And again, I have short-term fast and long-term fast.
This is important species differentiation.
Mice, and as you pointed this out, Peter, even after an overnight fast, boom, all the
glycogen's gone.
Very different from humans.
Humans hold on to their glycogen like dogs, probably for two days.
We've done these measurements with starvation in humans. We've shown it. It takes about two days
to deplete liver glycogen. When you have glycogen in liver, it's really these direct effects of
insulin on liver will predominate. But as you move to the fasting state, so in a mouse after a 12-hour
fast or longer, and in a human probably have to go 24
or longer fast, then it's really insulin, these indirect effects will predominate.
And this will also explain all the controversies in dogs, Sherrington, Bergman, in terms of direct
and indirect. They've each published a dozen papers on going back and forth, which predominates.
This mechanism would explain, I believe, all of
those findings. And then I just want to now show you how I view the dysregulation in diabetes. So
now, typically on the background of obesity, which is what happens in most of our diabetics,
so you have lean individuals who also have this, you have expanded fat stores in the periphery, but now you have insulin resistance in the fat.
So insulin can't put the brake on lipolysis. And we can talk about that mechanism, which we're now
working on, but it's going to be very similar in terms of liver and muscle. But you also have this
component of inflammation. This has been described by many, many individuals. You get crown-like structures, macrophages move in,
they release TNF-alpha IL-6. And what we were able to discern, a lot of people would argue it was
inflammation. If you go back to the insulin resistance literature 10, 20 years ago,
everyone was discussing inflammation circulating cytokines, TNF-alpha IL-6 resistant RBP,
circulating factors that were released from
inflammation driving insulin resistance. What we found is, again, you can dissociate inflammation
from insulin resistance. That's what I spent the first three decades of my life doing, showing that
just ectopic lipid DAGs would drive insulin resistance independent of inflammation. But the transition from just
insulin resistance in liver and muscle to fasting hyperglycemia depends on inflammation. And it's
through this mechanism where now you have localized inflammation in the fat cell. TNF-alpha, IL-6,
I'm sure there's other things, will promote increased lipolysis in the fat cell.
More lipolysis, more fatty acid, delivery to liver. DAGs go up. Epsilon gets activated.
You block insulin action, so less glucose being taken up into glycogen. This is what happens in
virtually most patients with fatty liver disease. But again,
what takes you to fasting hyperglycemia is this, and that's where acetyl-CoA goes up. And again,
now your rates of lipolysis, when you measure turnover, not just fatty acid concentrations,
but turnover, palmitate turnover production and glycerol turnover it's up twofold this increases acetyl
coa concentrations twofold this activates pyruvic carboxylase activity and flux twofold
and then in addition your glycerol delivery to liver is up twofold and now your rates of
gluconeogenesis are increased twofold and this is now what's driving fasting hyperglycemia in every poorly
controlled type 2 diabetes. It's this gluconeogenic process that we've shown using many, many methods,
and others have shown this too. This is what now is driving hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetics.
Okay. I have several questions, Jerry. First, these adipocytes that are undergoing lipolysis,
these are peripheral adipocytes. Is that correct? Yes. You can have situations where even fat in the
liver is probably contributing to this, especially in the lipodystrophic individual that has no
peripheral fat cells. So under conditions, the liver fat is playing a role, but most of it,
in most of, you know,
I would say garden variety, what I see is going to be peripheral lipolysis.
So when we think about an insulin resistant obese person with metabolic syndrome, so this is what,
20% of the US population, maybe even more, we've clearly established they are insulin resistant in the muscle.
We've established that they are insulin resistant in the hepatocyte. They are obese. So would we
still say they are insulin resistant at the fat cell or would we say they are insulin sensitive
at the fat cell because they are correctly undergoing lipogenesis in the fat cell. They're
at least taking up esterified fat and they're presumably
impairing lipolysis, which is why they retain adipose cell mass. In other words, there's a,
the flux through the fat cell is negative. They're holding on to fat, correct?
Yeah. But I think, and this is a question, a very important question we're going to next.
I would still predict if you do careful studies of measuring
rates of lipolysis, my definition, they will have insulin resistance in the fat cell. And that's
because the reason they're doing everything you just said, they're holding on to fat,
they're not happy about it, the doctor's not happy about it, is because it's at hyperinsulinemia. So
their insulin concentrations are two to threefold. So again, their curve is right shifted. Insulin is doing the thing, but if you brought them down
to normal levels of insulin, then you might see more lipolysis and other things. So I think if
you were to do those studies, and they've been done, there is peripheral insulin resistance,
but then you superimpose in addition. And I'll just say, I'll share with your listeners,
we're finding actually the same mechanism that we have in liver and muscle. And I'll just say, I'll share with your listeners, we're finding actually the
same mechanism that we have in liver and muscle. And we're seeing this in many other tissues too.
In the fat cell, the diacylglycerol epsilon pathway is also accounting for this defect in
insulin action in the fat cell. So it's going to actually be a common mediator. And again,
most of the fat, of course, in the fat cells in the lipid droplet.
So again, the plasma membrane, disoglycerols that lead to epsilon activation in the membrane
of the fat cells.
And we're seeing the same thing.
And we see those same mice that I showed you before, the IRK knockin mice are protected
from lipid-induced fat insulin resistance.
On the fat topic, we've talked a lot about the intramyocellular lipid-induced fat insulin resistance. On the fat topic, we've talked a lot
about the intramyocellular lipid. You've distinguished it from, say, marbling or fat
between cells. One thing we haven't spoken about that clinically gets a lot of attention is visceral
fat. So you alluded to doing an MRI. So we do a T1- image of a person on an MRI gives us a beautiful resolution
anatomically of what's happening. And you can see the difference between a healthy person and an
unhealthy person. And one of the most glaring differences between people on that type of
proton imaging is the amount of fat that is inside the fascia. So you have subcutaneous fat that may not be aesthetically
pleasing, but more importantly, when you go inside the core set of fascia, you have some people that
will have a heavy ring of fat around their kidneys, their spleen, their liver. We call this visceral
fat and the association between this amount of visceral fat and poor health is very well understood,
whereas there seems to be very little association between subcutaneous fat and poor health is very well understood, whereas there seems to be very
little association between subcutaneous fat and poor health. How does that visceral fat
identification square with the intralipid myocellular component that you've described
so elegantly at a cellular level? In my view, and everything you said is correct, sub-Q,
if you're going to store fat somewhere,
that's the best place to store it. You certainly don't want to keep it inside liver and muscle
cells. In my view, and again, studies have been done to look at the visceral fat, and it's very
clear it is, again, a very apple-shaped people have visceral fats, a very good predictor of
insulin resistance. It's really more of a marker for intrapatic fat. So
anytime when you're doing your imaging, if you just look at the liver too, they're going to
correlate one to one, 99 out of a hundred times. So what you're really doing there is a marker.
Now it's the visceral fat will also pour fatty acids into the portal vein, presumably. And again,
fatty acid delivery portal vein is probably going to lead to increased acetyl vein, presumably, and again, fatty acid delivery
portal vein is probably going to lead to increased acetyl-CoA, you know, again, will contribute some
degree. To me, the major abnormality is really the fat inside the hepatocyte, more importantly,
this acetyl-CoA within the hepatocyte. I want to give one example that makes this point clearly,
at least to me, the lesson I learned,
and that's lipodystrophy. And as you know, that's a situation where there is no fat,
no sub-Q fat or visceral fat. These patients have no visceral fat, huge livers, hepatomegaly,
chock full of fat and liver, and again, diabetes through these mechanisms, acetyl-CoA driving
gluconeogenesis. And that's independent of visceral fat. So that shows again, diabetes through these mechanisms, acetyl-CoA driving gluconeogenesis.
And that's independent of visceral fat. So that shows you, you don't need the visceral fat at all
to drive this. It's fat in the hepatocyte. If I had to pick two molecules that are driving
metabolic disease, it's acetyl-CoA driving pyruvate carboxylase. And again, the diisoglycerols activating Epsilon. And again,
it's the Epsilon that drives insulin resistance, no diabetes, no hyperglycemia. Then it's this
accelerated gluconeogenesis through this mechanism that's taking you from just pure insulin resistance
to fast and hyperglycemia and diabetes. So let's again, pause there for a moment and unpack
something very profound.
If we've just established that the accumulation of liver fat is effectively the hallmark of
death to come, and you just said acetyl-CoA and DAGs are two of the biggest culprits.
Well, acetyl-CoA of course is abundance of nutrient on some level, which speaks to something you said earlier. You take a patient with type 2 diabetes, put them on 1,200 calories a day. By definition, that has to lower acetyl-CoA. That immediately is going to improve things, which it does, whether that's sustainable and definitely we can discuss.
definitely we can discuss. And of course, we've already established where these DAGs are coming from. Again, I want to pause for a moment on that because I think a listener of this right now is
going to say, guys, you've lost me, okay? They don't know the difference between PEPCK, GSK3,
AKT2, PI3 kinase. I don't think you have to know those things. I think what you have to understand
is that abundance of nutrient is a relative term. It's not an absolute
term. An athlete versus a sedentary person has a very different amount of what that abundance looks
like. I think we've also discussed that not all nutrients are created equal. You've alluded to
it already that sucrose and fructose disproportionately prime the liver for this.
And then of course we're dealing with carbohydrate metabolism.
This is perhaps an interesting time to also start talking about both the modifications that we can
make. Because again, when we start to think about, you've talked about Western diet and sedentary
behavior a lot. So there's no doubt that there is an R, environmental triggers contributing to
these epidemics, which largely
began here in the United States, but we have fabulously spread to the West of the world.
And then of course, there's a whole pharmacologic side of this. I would like to revisit the
metformin question. I think it's a very interesting question. Metformin works presumably by sort of
weakly poisoning the mitochondria at complex one, that would lead to a redox change
of NAD and NADH, which goes back to something you talked about. But as of this time, at least,
we don't really have many exciting compounds in the pipeline for NAFLD, which as you also alluded
to in about 10 years is going to, through NASH and cirrhosis, be the leading indication for
liver transplant in the United States. Something that when I was in medical school accounted for less than 2% of liver transplants.
Just 20 years ago, in 30 years, admittedly, with the advent of a cure for hep C,
it's now leapfrogged into the lead candidate for liver transplant. And yet, what are we doing for
it? Not a lot. That's a lot I want to unpack. And as much as you still have time to discuss it, let's proceed in any order you see fit. To add on to that, I just did a Zoom conference
for University of Pittsburgh, and they're a big liver center. And one of their big problems with
transplanting livers is living donors. They're limited by donors because they all have fatty
liver, which they will not transplant because they don't do well. So not only is it the problem in treating it in terms of at least this most commonly,
that's the most common thing that they do, but that's an aside. So what can we do about this?
If we can get our patients to lose weight, this of course is the best diet and exercise,
of course is the best thing. And that's the first thing I tell my patient. We really drill into them
how we can really fix everything that's wrong with them through this process. And that's the first thing I tell my patient. We really drill into them how we can
really fix everything that's wrong with them through this process. And unfortunately, as you
know and I know, it just doesn't work in the vast majority of our patients. So in terms of
pharmacology, my view, and here again, it's the liver. If I had to pick one organ to target,
it's the liver. As important as muscle insulin resistance is at the very beginning,
if we actually want to reverse the disease and make the biggest impact, if I had to pick one
organ, it's the liver. If you're going to target, probably the easiest organ to target.
The way I think about the liver is in terms of thermodynamics. It's a thermodynamic problem.
It goes back to my physics training. And it's really
energy in and energy out. The whole metabolic problem with the liver is this imbalance of
energy. Too much energy in relative to the ability of the hepatocyte, the liver, to oxidize the energy
and convert it to CO2 or export it. The one thing the liver is also able to do is export energy as a
form of VLDL triglyceride. If it's energy, how do we fix it? Well, one way, again, we said diet and
exercise, limit energy in, that works. And that we talked about, Kit Peterson did this 20 years ago
and it's shown many, many times. To get the patient to stay on this is challenging. Bariatric surgery
works, again, limiting energy in. We just saw a nice
study in the New England Journal. There's no magic to Roux-en-Y. It's simply if you pair-feed
individuals, lose same amount of weight, same effect. Everything the bariatric surgery is doing,
at least Roux-en-Y, is really through reducing through the weight loss. How can we do this
pharmacologically? Well, GLP-1 agonists are out there now. They're
becoming very popular. Their major effect is energy intake. Our patients eat less. Because
they eat less, they lose weight, induces nausea, mild nausea. Some people get into issues with
vomiting, nausea, mom, you have to cut back on the dose. But this is how the GLP-1 agonists,
I believe, are having its major effect is weight loss.
And they are what they are.
They do accomplish reversal fatty liver to some degree.
They don't normalize, but it does come down in the right direction.
Why do you think the GLP-1 agonists lead to reduced appetite?
I just think through working through a central mechanism,
all these gut peptides lead to nausea, vomiting.
Glucagon will do it. Somatostatin will do it.
All these things, if you give them a high enough concentrations, lead to some degree of nausea
and vomiting. To me, it's part of a spectrum. And if you just get it right, you just get people
less interested in food and they eat less. Metformin, that's the one agent we have that
lowers gluconeogenesis. I would just come back.
It's not complex one. I want to challenge you on that. We can talk about that. But to me,
it's complex one inhibition happens at millimolar concentrations, clinically not relevant. Our
concentrations of metformin in humans, metformin are about 50 micromolar, 40 to 50 micromolar,
not millimolar, which is what inhibits complex one. And I think it's
downstream. It does affect the mitochondria, does lead to the redox, but it's not through the
complex one. It's probably indirectly inhibiting mitochondrial glycerol phosphate dehydrogenase.
That's what leads to the redox, but we can come back to that if you want.
I'd love to. That's very interesting.
To focus then on other mechanisms, so GLP-1, limit food intake,
energy expenditure, SGLT-2 inhibitors cause glucose loss in the urine, 400 calories a day loss. So
they lose weight. Unfortunately, it seems to plateau after several weeks. And you get very
mild reductions in liver fat, unfortunately, not as much, but maybe in combination with other
things that might be certainly helping the right direction. My favorite target is to promote
mitochondrial inefficiency. And so one of the things we're working on now is to mitochondria
is where you burn the fat. That's the organelle that burns the fat through oxidation. If you can
promote, then the mitochondria be a little bit less
efficient, so they have to burn more fat to generate the same amount of ATP. This we've shown
in various forms, preclinical models, mice, rats with fatty liver and NASH, liver fibrosis. It
reverses fatty liver through these mechanisms, reverses NASH, reverses the insulin resistance
through reductions in DAGs, acetyl-CoA, reverses
diabetes and ZDF models. For the NASH world, it reverses the inflammation and will reverse
liver fibrosis. And so I'm very excited about this because I think it can be done safely.
More recently, we've done this in non-human primates and showed safety and efficacy of
this approach in non-human primates. So based on the mechanisms
I've described, I think it fits. And not only what I'm very gratified by is it actually reinforces
the mechanisms I've described here by reversing diabetes, insulin resistance by lowering DAGs and
acetyl-CoA, but it's also going to be heart healthy. And I want to emphasize this point because many drugs we have
now for NAFLA and NASH reduce liver fat, maybe reverse the fibrosis or slow down the fibrosis,
but they may lead to alterations of cholesterol in the wrong direction. Cholesterol goes up.
And again, I have to come back to a nice point you made is it's heart disease that is killing
not only our diabetic, but also fatty liver patients. It's the heart disease. So whatever we're doing to reverse fixed NAFL, NASH, liver
fibrosis, it has to be heart healthy. And so when you burn fat in liver through this mechanism,
you decrease VLDL export, you lower triglycerides, you raise HDL, and you actually have secondary
beneficial effects on the periphery. and you actually have secondary beneficial effects on
the periphery. So you actually will secondarily improve muscle fat, reduce muscle fat and muscle
insulin resistance. So this again fits into my conceptual view of insulin resistance and
would be, I think, a nice therapeutic approach that we're going after.
Now, does the uncoupling lead to excess ROS creation or anything else? Anytime I hear of
uncoupling in the mitochondria, which is a deliberately induced form of inefficiency,
you wonder, is this an unintended consequence potentially?
So uncoupling by definition, the biophysics of uncoupling, the energy has to go somewhere.
It's dissipated as heat. You're burning more fat and changes in the
energy is going to lead to a little bit of heat production. You will get energy production in the
form of heat, but because it's liver targeted, has no effect on body temperature, will not affect
whole body weight. It's interesting. I can just tell the story of uncouplers. Your listeners might
be interested in this. So they were first discovered actually in the early 1900s in the
munitions factories. Europe was getting ready. They knew a world war was coming. The munition
factories were all getting geared up. Some of the workers in the munition factories were getting
this dust, yellow dust on their hands and actually losing weight. They were just going home and
despite eating the usual amount, they're finding their weight was going losing weight. They were just going home and despite eating the usual
amount, they're finding their weight was going down and maybe they were sweating a little bit
more, a little diaphoresis. And they went to their doctors and told them about the weight loss
despite eating the same and it's a little bit more diaphoresis, more sweating. And the doctors
just said, what is this yellow dust on your skin? And why don't you just wear gloves, wash your hands and wear gloves? And they got better. This was dinitrophenol. This was a substance that was
used in the munition factories to make TNT. So dinitro-TNT. A physician, Tainter, in the 1930s
basically said, maybe this is good for weight loss. Actually introduced dinitrophenol as a weight loss drug.
It was available over the counter.
It wasn't a prescription.
So anyone could go like buying vitamins,
get some BNP for weight loss.
It actually worked.
So a lot of people, hundreds of thousands of people
took dinitrophenol for weight loss.
And it worked.
The papers published in very good journals,
JAMA by Tainter and others, really described its beneficial effects. Unfortunately, and a very big
unfortunately, is again one of the on-target effects we just talked about. When you uncouple,
you promote heat generation and this is in the whole body. DNP is going everywhere
and promoting heat generation.
Unfortunately, a handful of these people took too much.
They got into problems with hyperthermia, increased body temperature, and got very sick from that, and some died.
With the very first thing, a newly created FDA, 1937, the first act they did was actually
to pull DNP from the counters as an over-the-counter kind of drug or medication.
And the second act they had actually was thalidomide, which they pulled, and now it's
actually back in the clinic. That was always the problem with DNP, why, again, we say this is not
a good thing, this is a toxic drug and everything else, and as it is. It occurred to us that the
reason it's generating the heat is you're uncoupling all the
organs in the body. And what if we just picked one organ, i.e. the liver, where the fat is
accumulating? This is where the organ that's driving lipidemia, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes.
And if we could just melt the fat away within a liver-specific manner, maybe we can have
that beneficial effect without the toxicity.
And so in a series of studies, we were able to show proof of concept that by simply uncoupling
the liver, you could avoid hyperthermia and all the toxicities that have typically been associated
with the parent compound, DNP, and increase the therapeutic window. Every drug has a therapeutic window,
even aspirin and Tylenol, by a hundredfold. Based on this thinking, I think it can be done
very safely and be a treatment for very important metabolic diseases like NAFLA and NASH.
So the IND has already been filed for this. Is it in phase one human yet?
No, no. We're still exploring preclinical models, thinking potentially about first starting
out where there are no indications for things like lipodystrophy where leptin is not working.
So I think my thinking is I'd like to go slowly here. Hopefully within the next year or two,
we may be in humans. I think initially going after orphan diseases where there simply is no
other treatment, and that would be certain forms
of lipodystrophy where they get very bad diabetes, NAFL, NASH, and especially in conditions where
leptin is not working. Jerry, this has been, obviously, as I said, a pretty technical
discussion, even by the standards of our podcast. I think the show notes are going to be integral
because your figures, I think, frankly, are very helpful. As I said, I understand this content probably better than most, and yet I still find it very
helpful to be able to kind of go through schematics. So I'm going to encourage the
listeners to do that. You also have some fantastic lectures online. I think for the people who really
want to go deep into this stuff, I think, frankly, some of your review articles and some of your
recent publications are just a great place to go. As I said at the outset, I just think that this is the nexus from
which all diseases stand. And therefore, we are really making a mistake if we want to treat
chronic diseases in their silos and just think about atherosclerosis and just think about cancer
and just think about Alzheimer's diseaselerosis and just think about cancer and just think about Alzheimer's
disease without understanding how these diseases are fed. And unfortunately, that means rolling up
our sleeves and understanding insulin resistance. There's simply no getting around this. If this
topic were easy, you would have presented it in an easier manner. It's not easy. If I were to just
kind of leave you with sort of, we've talked about exercise,
we've talked about nutrition. Do you feel strongly about any form of dietary thinking? So for example, I have found clinically that carbohydrate restriction is a very effective way for patients
with insulin resistance to lose weight, not uniformly, but it's quite effective. It also seems to be easier
to adhere to than outright caloric restriction, though periodic fasting also seems to do a good
job. But have you observed anything similarly from a clinical perspective that fructose
restriction specifically or sugar restriction specifically as a vehicle to weight loss becomes a more
effective tool to ultimately produce what's understood to be efficacious,
which is some reduction of weight, either as the cause or effect of the improvement.
My thinking here is what I tell my patients is whatever works. Everyone is so different,
different likes, different dislikes. I say,
look at the scale, whatever works for you to lose weight. Because I know if you lose the weight,
your diabetes is going to get better. So I say, you find something, whatever works for you,
stick with it. That's the challenge because we're very successful in the short term getting
patients to lose weight. The unfortunate part is they're able
to get the weight off. And then three months later, six months later, they come back to the office
and they're right back where they started. So it's a matter of, I tell them, you have to find
something that works for you, get the weight off, but then you have to be able to stick to it.
And that's where the challenge, a lot of diets, people are able to get on, get the weight off,
and they just can't adhere to it for the
long term. And so it's a marathon. You have to find something you like, like it enough to be
able to stick with that. That's the most important thing because we've all seen that where people
lose the weight and then a few weeks, months later, right back to where they started. So
everyone has to find what works for them. I guess I want to come back to the metformin thing because it's so interesting. So you mentioned that the inhibition of complex one actually is probably
not taking place because you actually mentioned basically a thousandfold difference in concentration.
Say a little bit more about that and why you're then imputing that it's the impact of metformin,
presumably on NAD and NADH, which you could also get out of an inhibition of complex one,
but via some other mechanism, it sounds like. Studies that we've done, and we're still working
on this, clearly most of the literature, if you read on metformin, let's talk about the big
picture. So metformin lowers glucose in patients with poorly controlled
diabetes, mostly through inhibition of gluconeogenesis. I think most clinical physiologists
would agree with that. And so we've done studies quantifying gluconeogenesis, both by NMR,
heavy water, multiple methods, same individuals. And that's its major effect, not through
inhibition of glycogenesis, not through gut biome, it's gluconeogenesis. And that's its major effect, not through inhibition of glycogenesis,
not through gut biome. It's gluconeogenesis. And the other thing clinically is the more poorly
controlled diabetes, the greater the effect. You're not going to see much effect. There's
very confusing studies that have been published in non-diabetic individuals that find all kinds
of other things going on. I don't think that's clinically relevant. It's gluconeogenesis. So
then how does it do gluconeogenesis? So most of the literature,
if you read it, virtually all in animals, that study mechanism have implicated complex one.
And we've known about guanide inhibition. Metformin is a guanide, biguanide. Even before
metformin, we had fenformin and other guanides that have been studied, and they will
inhibit complex I, no doubt about it. And most have focused on complex I inhibition,
leading to either AMPK activation or buildup of a metabolite that inhibits gluconeogenesis,
or something. 99% of the mechanisms have talked about complex I inhibition.
99% of the mechanisms have talked about complex one inhibition. My issue with that is, again,
not very many studies have done careful measurements of this most commonly used drug on the planet. For your readership, guanides have been used for diabetes for hundreds of years.
The French lilac extracts have been used 300 years ago in description.
They didn't know what diabetes was at that time.
It wasn't defined, but patients with polyuria, polydipsia were overweight, treated with the extract, the French lilac, and their symptoms improved.
Most studies, if you look at, were used at millimolar concentrations.
And again, when they look at complex I inhibition, which has been implicated to then lower ATP,
raise ADP, and activate AMPK, it requires millimolar concentrations.
And so when you actually measure metformin in the patient who's taking one gram twice
a day, which is your maximal dose, pretty much the best efficacious dose, your levels
in plasma are about 30 to 50 micromolar. So you could say even,
you know, in portal vein, it's pills are taken orally, give it two to three times that. You're
still talking about maybe 100 micromolar, tenfold less than what all of these studies have been
doing, even both the in vitro studies in the literature and well, the in vivo studies,
giving levels that achieve millimolar concentrations.
So yes, you see things. Complex I is an important, it's an electron transporter. It's important for function and health. And you're going to see effects when you inhibit complex I at those
high concentrations. In my view, they're not clinically relevant. So the effects that I do
think are clinically relevant that we have observed at 50 and 100 micromolar of
metformin are really on the enzyme glycerol 3-phosphate dehydrogenase, the mitochondrial
isoform that is required to move the protons from outside to inside the mitochondria.
And when you inhibit this enzyme, NADH goes up, NAD goes down. When you have this increase in the cytosolic
redox, you can't get lactate to pyruvate and you can't get glycerol to DHAP. So if I'm right,
it's going to be substrate dependent inhibition of gluconeogenesis. Whereas if you inhibit complex
one and AMPK or whatever mechanism downstream, it should be gluconeogenesis
independent of substrate. And what we've shown both in vitro and in vivo, most importantly in
two or three different models, metformin at these clinically relevant doses and concentrations
only inhibit gluconeogenesis from glycerol and lactate. It doesn't inhibit it from alanine or DHAP or anything that does
not depend on the cytosolic redox state. This also explains why we rarely see clinically
hypoglycemia on patients treated with metformin, because there's these alternative gluconeogenic
substrates that can come in, alanine can keep coming out. So you never see, rarely,
unless they have another agent on top of metformin like insulin or SU, you rarely see it if ever.
And that's why also you see the lactic acidosis, which is a fortunate toxicity of metformin,
where again, it's specifically getting that lactate to pyruvate conversion, which is
dependent on the redox state. So that's the mechanism I believe is
clinically relevant. And now the last step is how is it inhibiting this enzyme? And I believe it's
actually through an indirect effect on this enzyme that we'll hopefully have ready for prime time in
the year. And do you think that in a healthy individual who's eating well, is of normal weight,
is insulin sensitive, and is exercising robustly,
metformin could actually be counteractive to benefit? That's a profound question. I don't
know the answer to that. And it gets into, I don't know if you're going to take me there,
in terms of the use of metformin for aging. Healthy people are taking it for aging now.
I think that's why it's so important to understand this mechanism, then understand the implications
of it.
It is redox.
Is that a good thing or not for longevity and health?
That's a question that remains to be answered.
I find myself very much on the fence with that question.
While in the insulin-resistant patient, even without diabetes, feeling that this is a very
net positive agent. But my personal
views on it, just based on clinical observation, is that in the person I described earlier, the
lean insulin sensitive, vigorously exercising individual, it may actually not provide benefit.
But again, there are studies in the works that are going to hopefully be able to provide some
fidelity to understanding that. It sounds like you're equally kind of undecided on that as well.
Yes. Well, Jerry, I can't thank you enough. Again, I say this to many people I interview,
but I really mean it here. It's not just for this discussion and the time you put into it,
but obviously much more importantly for the career and for this incredible body of work
that you've amassed through your pursuit and obviously remarkable
collaborations with so many people. I've enjoyed this discussion immensely. It's actually one of
the discussions I'm going to have to probably go back and listen to again. So I hope that a listener
isn't hearing this and isn't discouraged by the fact that you're at this point in the discussion
and you're thinking, oh my God, I might've only retained half of that. That's okay. I'm going to
be listening to this one and I just finished listening to it now and I'm going to listen
to it again. So thank you very much, Jerry, for that. Thank you, Peter. It's been a pleasure.
Thank you for listening to this week's episode of The Drive. If you're interested in diving deeper
into any topics we discuss, we've created a membership program that allows us to bring you
more in-depth exclusive content without relying on paid ads.
It's our goal to ensure members get back much more than the price of the subscription.
Now to that end, membership benefits include a bunch of things. One, totally kick-ass
comprehensive podcast show notes that detail every topic, paper, person, thing we discuss
on each episode. The word on the street is nobody's show notes rival these. Monthly AMA episodes or
Ask Me Anything episodes, hearing these episodes completely. Access to our private podcast feed
that allows you to hear everything without having to listen to spiels like this. The Qualies,
which are a super short podcast that we release every Tuesday through Friday, highlighting the
best questions, topics, and tactics discussed on previous episodes of The Drive. This is a great way to catch up on previous episodes without
having to go back and necessarily listen to everyone. Steep discounts on products that I
believe in, but for which I'm not getting paid to endorse, and a whole bunch of other benefits that
we continue to trickle in as time goes on. If you want to learn more and access these member-only benefits, you can head over to peteratiamd.com forward slash subscribe. You can find me on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook,
all with the ID peteratiamd. You can also leave us a review on Apple Podcasts or whatever podcast
player you listen on. This podcast is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute
the practice of medicine, nursing, or other professional healthcare services, including the giving
of medical advice.
No doctor-patient relationship is formed.
The use of this information and the materials linked to this podcast is at the user's own
risk.
The content on this podcast is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical
advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Users
should not disregard or delay in obtaining medical advice from any medical condition they have,
and they should seek the assistance of their healthcare professionals for any such conditions.
Finally, I take conflicts of interest very seriously. For all of my disclosures and the companies I invest in or advise, please visit peterottmd.com forward slash about where I keep an up-to-date and active list of
such companies. Thank you.