Addressing Mercury Bioaccumulation with Whole Foods
What do dental fillings, fish and a variety of environmental contaminants have in common? They can all contain mercury, a heavy metal that finds its way into the tissues of the body where it gets stored through a process known as bioaccumulation. While mercury (or Hg, to use its chemical name) is a naturally occurring heavy metal, the increase in sources of this known cytotoxin from manmade products and behaviors can lead to increased levels in the body—even with only low-dose exposure. The result is a depletion of reduced glutathione (a powerful antioxidant and an essential component of the detoxification pathways) in the cells, causing oxidative damage to DNA (with the kidney and central nervous system most susceptible to this oxidative damage) as well as inhibition of immune system functioning.

Identifying and, as much as possible, avoiding the most common sources of mercury (see sidebar: Sources of Mercury) is the first step in reducing the amount of bioaccumulation that occurs. For example, given that recent evidence in animal and human studies demonstrates a significant contribution of silver amalgam upon the total body burden of mercury, with mercury vapor possibly released just by the act of chewing, you might opt for composite bonding, inlays or onlays the next time around.
But given the current level of environmental contaminants combined with the presence of mercury in a variety of items and processes, a more active approach is required to remove the mercury presently in the body's tissues and prevent further bioaccumulation.

Internal defense mechanisms
Some people have a heavy metal tolerance that allows them to survive in an environment with a high concentration of metals or to accumulate high concentration of heavy metals without dying or experiencing severe damage (such as neurological trauma). This condition can be due to healthy functioning of their inherent endogenous detoxification mechanisms (Phase I and II detoxification), and/or because they ingest foods and herbs that acquire these cytotoxins and pull them through and out of the body.
Think of foods and medicines that have these powerful sequestering (chelating) properties function as “heavy metal trash collectors.” They retain the heavy metal ions either through passive absorption or by forming complexes with the toxic elements, so that they can be eliminated from the body by the Human Detoxification System--usually through the intestinal tract or the skin. A diet rich in these biosorbents can help nullify the damaging effect of mercury contamination.

Prevention and detoxification
So what can you do to foster a highly functioning Human Detoxification System? Start by increasing your intake of heavy metal biosorbents such as Chlorella, Chlorophyll and Selenium.

Chlorella and Chlorophyll
The distinctive cell wall structure1 of the algae Chlorella pyrenoidosa, contains compounds (most likely cellulose and polysaccharides) that adhere to and remove heavy metals such as cadmium, lead and mercury from the bod2,3 as well as accelerate the removal of dangerous chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides from the body.4,5 In a scientific experiment, chlorella was responsible for the detoxification of chlordecone poisoned rats, decreasing the half-life of the toxin from 40 to 19 days, with the ingested algae passing through the gastrointestinal tract unharmed, interrupted the enteric recirculation of the persistent insecticide, and subsequently eliminating the bound chlordecone with the feces.\

Chlorella pyrenoidosa also contains the uppermost level of chlorophyll (28.9 g/kg) of any known plant on earth.6 Chlorophylls and their derivatives also form molecular complexes with environmental toxins, inactivating them by preventing their binding to DNA and cellular receptors,7,8,9,10 and may also have an impact on the Phase I cytochrome P450 enzymatic pathway (a key detoxification pathway in the body, found in nearly all cells) that is responsible for the activation of some cancer-causing toxins.11
In addition to chlorella’s notable levels of chlorophyll that successfully bind to and support the removal of environmental toxins, this single-celled algae contains additional properties that function synergistically with chlorophyll to enhance the liver detoxification pathways. Specifically, chlorella also contains glutathione, a key component of Phase II liver detoxification, which is found within Chlorella Growth Factor, a complex of nutritive and functional compounds demonstrating a variety of medicinal properties.

Chlorella Growth Factor and Glutathione
Chlorella Growth Factor (CGF), comprising roughly 5% of the Chlorella pyrenoidosa species of green algae, is thought to be concentrated in the nuclei of the algae, and appropriately is comprised of nucleic acid associated substances, peptides, proteins, amino acids, vitamins and sugars. Of particular interest with respect to detoxification is the presence within the Chlorella Growth Factor of the peptide glutathione12 -- a potent detoxification molecule that plays a critical role in the Phase II detoxification pathway.
Exposure to environmental toxins depletes the body’s stores of glutathione, while whole foods such as chlorella reverse the depletion of glutathione preserves induced by toxic chemicals in the body.13

Selenium
Selenium, an essential trace element known to address mercury exposure, is thought to have several mechanisms of action: it forms a complex with mercury that is a higher molecular weight and renders the complex inactive, it competes for binding sites with mercury, it protects against free radical damage caused by mercury exposure and it converts mercury to a less toxic form.14,15

Foods rich in selenium serve as biosorbents and are also rich in other antioxidants that support the Human Detoxification System by increasing glutathione levels among other processes essential for detoxification. This is why I recommend consuming selenium rich foods or alternatively supplementing with a natural selenium product such as selenium-rich yeast.16

Brazil nuts are an excellent source of selenium (3 nuts provides 200 mcg of selenium). Other sources include mushrooms, egg yolks, kidney, liver and muscle meats, garlic, onions, broccoli, asparagus, tomatoes and others. However, keep in mind that the amount of selenium in the vegetable sources is dependent upon the level of selenium and other nutrients found in the soil they were grown in. So chose organic produce since it is more likely to have higher levels of selenium.

Part Two of your mercury collection-and-removal process focuses on facilitating the removal of these mercury-biosorbent complexes via the Human Detoxification System. This is akin to keeping your body’s internal “heavy metal trash collectors” tuned up and ready to roll.

Low-potency chemicals, in combinations that would naturally occur, support the complex network of enzymatic reactions that drive the Human Detoxification System, thereby reducing the mercury overload and improving the health of the whole body. Cruciferous vegetables (see sidebar: Cruciferous Choices) along with beet root and leaf are rich in phytochemicals that support the detox process.

The Role of Cruciferous Vegetables
Cruciferous vegetables cause a coordinated metabolic induction of many of the Phase II liver detoxification enzymes (Glutathione transferases, NAD(P)H, quinone oxidoreductase, glucuronosyltransferase, and epoxide hydrolase), thus reducing the susceptibility of cells to carcinogenic substances. Phase II enzymes inactivate carcinogens in one of two ways: either through the destruction of the reactive centers of the compounds, or, more often, by conjugation with endogenous ligands, thereby counteracting the toxic properties associated with the carcinogen, and quickening their elimination from the body.

Principal inducers of Phase II liver detoxification enzymes, isothiocyanates (along with sulfate and other products) provide a natural defense response to predatory and other destructive influences. Found in cruciferous vegetables, they are formed when water-soluble secondary metabolites known as glucosinolate compounds or glucosinolates are chewed, crushed in the presence of water, or otherwise injured. This allows the glucosinolates to be converted by endogenous enzymes called myrosinase, or thioglucosidase into isothiocyanates.

Sulforaphane and sinigrin are two isothiocyanates that protect against, and oftentimes reduce, the severity of lung, colon, stomach, liver, and breast cancers.17 Sulforaphane supports the enzymatic activity that takes place in Phase I liver detoxification and assists the liver in carrying out the Phase II conjugation pathways.

Sinigrin complements the activity of sulforaphane by also stimulating the Phase II detoxification system. In addition, sinigrin stimulates apoptosis, a process that naturally causes a damaged cell to fragment into membrane-bound particles that are then eliminated by phagocytosis.18

Organosulfur compounds such as dithiolethiones that are found in cruciferous vegetables are also considered putative detoxifying agents via their effect on Phase II enzymes.19,20

Two of the most common glucosinolate compounds found in cruciferous vegetables, and more frequently in Brassica vegetables, are alkylthioalkyl glucosinolates and indole glucosinolates.

Indole glucosinolates form unstable isothiocyanates when hydrolyzed by myrosinase. This reaction gives rise to compounds such as 3,3’-diindolylmethane, indole-3-acetonitrile and indole-3-carbinol. These compounds represent weak inducers of Phase II detoxification enzymes, although as documented in most in-vivo studies with indole-3-carbinol, there is a reported chemoprotective role for this compound.21,22 It is important to note, however, that metabolic derivatives of indole glucosinolates also induce select cytochrome P-450 enzymes that can result in the formation of procarcinogens. However, this is offset by the fact that the compounds also induce Phase II detoxification which metabolizes the intermediate procarcinogens.

The alkylthioalkyl glucosinolates, such as glucoraphanin, glucoiberin and glucoerucin, form the isothiocyanates sulforaphane, iberin and erucin. These compounds are significant inducers of the Phase II detoxification enzymes, and they do not induce Phase I detoxification enzymes, as do the indole glucosinolates.23

Staack et al.24 examined the effects of a mixture of glucosinolate breakdown products from Brussels sprouts on the induction of liver detoxification enzymes in rats. The mixture (full strength, 60%, and 20%) elevated levels of cytochrome P450 1A (CYP1A), glutathione-S-transferase (GST), quinone reductase (QR), glutathione reductase (GR), and glutathione (GSH) in a dose dependant manner, supporting the hypothesis that glucosinolates found in green vegetables are important in the regulation of hepatic detoxification.

The following Brussels sprout glucosinolate breakdown products and amounts were used in the mixture:

• Indole-3-carbinol (I3C; 56 mg/kg)
• Iberin (38 mg/kg)
• Phenylethylisothiocyanate (PEITC; 0.1 mg/kg)
• Cyanohydroxybutene (crambene; 50 mg/kg)

The amounts reflect the proportionate amounts of each glucosinolate compound found in Brussels sprouts standardized to 50 mg crambene/kg (induces glutathione without toxic effects).

It is important to note that in this study the individual glucosinolate breakdown products were also tested. While indole-3-carbinol (I3C) was the only glucosinolate in the mixture to significantly increase enzyme activity, the glucosinolate mixture containing I3C was considerably more effective, supporting a synergistic mechanism of action between the compounds. This suggests that bioactive molecules ingested as part of a naturally-occurring nutritional complex may be considerably more effective than the isolated active principles used alone.

Glutamine as a Synergistic Component Found in Vegetables that Support Detoxification
Glutamine is the most abundant amino acid in the blood stream (30-35% of amino acid nitrogen in plasma) and fills a number of detoxification-associated biochemical needs in the body.25 The main metabolic fuel for enterocytes of the small intestine, lymphocytes, macrophages, and fibroblasts, it plays a major role in the first line of immune defense in the intestine as well as in the body as a whole. Research suggests that glutamine is essential to the health and maintenance of the intestinal tract, a vital organ of detoxification.26,27 In fact, the intestine is the greatest user of glutamine in the body

It is a conditionally-essential amino acid, in that the human body produces it endogenously. Deficiencies are prevalent however, primarily as a result of impaired detoxification mechanisms, cancer, physical injury or illness, chronic protein catabolism and excessive exercise,28,29 Studies show that the level of stored glutamine drops significantly in humans following surgery, trauma, or burns, as well as during sepsis,30,31,32 which then causes a state of imbalance of beneficial organisms in the intestinal tract.

A glutamine deficiency has been implicated in immune dysfunction (a condition also associated with impaired detoxification mechanisms), because it serves as a main precursor of nucleotide synthesis and also as an energy source for rapidly dividing cells, such as immune cells following an immune threat.33,34,35

Interestingly, this supportive nutrient is found in particularly high concentrations in two vegetable sources recognized for their detoxifying properties: cabbage and beets.36-40

Prevention of Microbial Translocation
Glutamine’s positive effect on the GI tract appears to be due to its use as a food source by both intestinal immune cells (lymphocyte-rich Peyer’s patches) and mucosal cells.41 When levels of glutamine drop, intestinal epithelial cells and lymphocytes begin to lose function, compromising the integrity of the epithelium and leaving the intestine vulnerable to microbial translocation (passage of bacteria or toxins into the bloodstream via the intestinal wall).42-47

Additionally, glutamine increases intestinal glutathione synthetase activity,48 improving the antioxidant capacity of the gut.49 Gut-associated lymphoid tissue (GALT) requires glutamine for optimal function. GALT comprises the Peyer’s patches and lymphoid follicles scattered throughout the intestinal mucosa. It is in this tissue that B and T immune cells are primed against intestinal antigens, thus forming a “frontline” defense of memory cells that can be seeded in distant mucosal effector sites. Maintenance of immune function and a healthy intestinal tract is vital to supporting one’s ability to eliminate heavy metals from the body.

Cabbage: A Glutamine-Rich Food with Known Detoxification Properties
In addition to its rich glutamine content, there are other factors within cabbage that contribute to its inherent immunoprotective and detoxifying properties. Cabbage stimulates the production of tumor necrosis factor a (TNF) and interleukin-1 (IL-1), important players in antitumorial, antiviral, immunoregulatory, and inflammatory responses.50 Further, cabbage contains glucosinolates and their breakdown products that alter the induction of glutathione S-transferase (GST), NADPH, and Quinone oxidoreductase (NQO),51 thereby supporting detoxification in the body.

The GST family of detoxification enzymes are responsible for conjugating electrophilic compounds with glutathione, creating a more water-soluble, and usually non-cytotoxic compound to be excreted.

It appears that administering a vegetable that contains glutamine, in addition to other known tertiary compounds that serve to support detoxification mechanisms, would likely offer a greater effect than the sum of the individual components found within the food.52

Beta vulgaris (Beet Root)
A further example of a glutamine-rich food that contains complementary compounds that support the human detoxification system is beta vulgaris, commonly referred to as beet root. Beet root contains multiple constituents that function to support the human detoxification system via at least several known mechanisms.54

In addition to its known actions in supporting intestinal detoxification due to its glutamine content, animal studies have shown dietary beet root fiber to reduce serum and liver lipids,55-58 thereby supporting the integrity of a crucial organ of detoxification, the liver.

Protective properties of beet on the colon
Bobek et al59 examined the effect of red beet fiber on the development of hypercholesterolemia and carcinogenesis in the rat colon. The researchers showed that 15% red beet fiber in a hypercholesterolemic diet (0.3% dietary cholesterol) reduced serum cholesterol and triacylglycerol levels by 30% and 40%, respectively, and increased the fraction of HDL cholesterol.

Red beet fiber also caused a pronounced increase in the activities of superoxide dismutase, catalase, glutathione peroxidase, and glutathione-S-transferase enzymes in colon, liver, and erythrocytes, illustrating that beet fiber likely promotes Phase II detoxification function in the intestine, blood, and liver.60

These results coupled with the results of other similar studies suggest that beet root contains multiple low-potency chemicals that function synergistically to promote antioxidant activity in the colon, liver, and erythrocytes, most likely via improved Phase II detoxification mechanisms.

Summary
Given the heavy metal contamination of our environment and its subsequent effect on our bodies, appropriate detoxification and prevention techniques are essential. A successful whole food nutrition approach would concentrate on two main strategies:

• Administer biosorbents/chelating agents to render mercury inactive in the body and to prevent it from binding to receptor sites-several well-researched food sources include Chlorophyll-rich foods and in particular Chlorella, and Selenium-rich foods like Brazil Nuts, tomatoes, broccoli, organ meats.
• Support the Human Detoxification System to facilitate excretion of mercury complexes and protect the body from free radical damage brought on by mercury exposure-with the use of cruciferous vegetables (Broccoli, Kale, Cabbage), Glutamine-rich foods like Beet root and leaf and Cabbage

Using chelating agents and phytochemicals from food and herbal sources instead of isolated chemicals allows for synergistic actions that offer more comprehensive and long-term benefits. Additionally, given the pervasiveness of mercury and other environmental toxins, relying on food sources which can and should be ingested daily provides the body with ongoing weapons without the possible consequences inherent in man-made chemical formulations.

Nutritional detoxification programs are being recognized throughout the world as an effective means for naturally removing environmental toxins from the body, with nutraceutical agents offering a safe and gentle approach to health, without the unwanted side effects often associated with pharmaceutical drugs.

A successful nutritional detoxification utilizes whole foods that contain the cofactors as they naturally occur, combined at concentrations that do not typically produce any measurable effects if administered individually. Given the complexity and overlapping functions of the many arms of the human detoxification system, it is unlikely that a single nutrient is wholly responsible for the effects that foods such as broccoli, cabbage and beets impart on the body’s natural response to exogenous toxic chemical exposure. Instead, it is safe to assume that chemicals found in select foods traditionally used for detoxification function in concert to support the complex network of enzymatic reactions that drive the Human Detoxification System.

Sidebar: Sources of Mercury
Dental amalgam (fillings)
Contaminated fish
Off-gasses from contaminated soil and surface water
Occupational exposure to mercury-containing paints, fungicides and pesticides
Combustion of waste oils and other landfill waste such as thermometers, electrical switches, and batteries

Sidebar: Cruciferous Choices
Kale
Brussels sprouts
Radishes
Chinese cabbage
Bok choy
Cabbage
Turnips
Collards
Kohlrabi
Rutabaga
Cauliflower
Broccoli

© COPYRIGHT 2006 Dr. Gina L. Nick

References

1. Pore RS. 1984. Detoxification of chlordecone poisoned rats with chlorella and chlorella derived sporopollenin. Drug-Chem-Toxicol 7(1):57-71.
2. Jensen B. 1987. Chlorella: Gem of the Orient. Bernard Jensen Publisher, Escondido, CA.
3. Travieso R O et al. 1999. Heavy Metal Removal by Microalgae. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 62:144-151.
4. Jensen B. 1987. Chlorella: Gem of the Orient. Bernard Jensen Publisher, Escondido, CA.
5. Travieso R O et al. 1999. Heavy Metal Removal by Microalgae. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 62:144-151.
6. Merchant R and Andre C..2001. Dietary supplemenation with Chlorella pyrenoidosaproduces positive results in patients with cancer or suffering from certain common chronic illnesses. JANA 4(2): 31-8.
7. Chung, W. et al. 2000. Protective effects of hemin and tetrakis(4-benzoic acid)porphyrin on bacterial mutagenesis and mouse skin carcinogenesis induced by 7,12-dimethylbenz[a]anthracene. Mutat Res 472(1-2): 139-145.
8. Dashwood R. and C. Liew. 1992. Chlorophyllin-enhanced excretion of urinary and fecal mutagens in rats given 2-amino-3-methylimidazo[4,5]quinoline. Environ Mol Mutagen 20(3): 199-205.
9. Hayatsu, H. et al. 1993. Porphyrins as potential inhibitors against exposure to carcinogens and mutagens. Mutat Res 290(1): 79-85.
10. Sarkar, D. et al. 1994. Chlorophyll and chlorophyllin as modifiers of genotoxic effects. Mutat Res 318(3): 239-247.
11. Yun C-H. et al. 1995. Non-specific inhibition of cytochrome P450 activities by chlorophyllin in human and rat liver microsomes. Carcinogenesis 16(6): 1437-1440.
12. Matsueda S et al. 1982. Studies on antitumor active glycoprotein from Chlorella vulgaris. Yajugaku-Zassh 102:447-51.
13. Nick G. 2001. Clinical Purification: A Complete Treatment and Reference Manual. Longevity Through Prevention, Brookfield, WI.
14. Whanger PD. Selenium in the treatment of heavy metal poisoning and chemical carcinogenesis. J Trace Elem Electrolytes Health Dis. 1992 Dec;6(4):209-21.
15. Schrauzer GN. Effects of selenium antagonists on cancer susceptibility: new aspects of chronic heavy metal toxicity. J UOEH. 1987 Mar 20;9 Suppl:208-15.
16. El-Bayoumy K, Richie JP Jr, Boyiri T, Komninou D, Prokopczyk B, Trushin N, Kleinman W, Cox J, Pittman B, Colosimo S. Influence of Selenium-Enriched Yeast Supplementation on Biomarkers of Oxidative Damage and Hormone Status in Healthy Adult Males: A Clinical Pilot Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002;11:1459-1465
17. Grubbs, C. J. 1995. Chemoprevention of chemically induced mammary cancinogenesis by indole-3-carbinol. Anticancer Res 15(3): 709-716.
18. Tavani, A. 1996. Food and nutrition intake and risk of cataract. Ann Epidemiol 6(1): 41-46.
19. Dringen R, Hamprecht B, Drukarch B.Anethole dithiolethione, a putative neuroprotectant, increases intracellular and extracellular glutathione levels during starvation of cultured astroglial cells.Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 1998 Dec;358(6):616-22.
20. O'Dwyer PJ, Szarka C, Brennan JM, Laub PB, Gallo JM. Pharmacokinetics of the chemopreventive agent oltipraz and of its metabolite M3 in human subjects after a single oral dose. Clin Cancer Res. 2000 Dec;6(12):4692-6.
21. Dashwood, R. H. 1998. Indole-3-carbinol: Anticarcinogen or tumor promoter in brassica vegetables? Chem Biol Interact 110(1-2): 1-5.
22. Staack, R. et al. 1998. A comparison of the individual and collective effects of four glucosinolate breakdown products from brussels sprouts on induction of detoxification enzymes. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 149(1): 17-23.
23. Zhang, Y. et al. 1992. A major inducer of anticarcinogenic protective enzymes from broccoli: Isolation and elucidation of structure. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89(6): 2399-2403.
24. Staack, R. et al. 1998. A comparison of the individual and collective effects of four glucosinolate breakdown products from brussels sprouts on induction of detoxification enzymes. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 149(1): 17-23.
25. Mackinnon, L. T. 2000. Chronic exercise training effects on immune function. Med Sci sports Exerc 32(7): S369-76.
26. Hickman, M. A. 1998. Interventional nutrition for gastrointestinal disease. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract 13(4): 211-216.
27. Castell, L. M. et al. 1994. The role of glutamine in the immune system and in intestinal function in catabolic states. Amino Acids (Vienna) 7(3): 231-243.
28. Calder, P. C. and P. Yaqoob. 1999. Glutamine and the immune system. Amino Acids 17(3): 227-41.
29. Walsh, N. P. et al. 1998. Glutamine, exercise and immune function. Links and possible mechanisms.Sports Med 26(3): 177-91.
30. Vinnars, E. et al. 1975. Influence of post-operative state on the intracellular free amino acids in human muscle tissue. Ann Surg 182: 665-671.
31. Roth, E. et al. 1982. Metabolic disorders in severe abdominal sepsis: glutamine deficiency in skeletal muscle. Clin Nutr 1: 25-41.
32. Calder, P. C. and P. Yaqoob. 1999. Glutamine and the immune system. Amino Acids 17(3): 227-41.
33. Yaqoob, P. and P. C. Calder. 1997. Glutamine requirement of proliferating T lymphocytes. Nutrition 13:646-651.
34. Horig, H. et al. 1993. Exogenous glutamine requirement is confined to late events of T cell activation. J Clin Biochem 53: 343-351.
35. Juretic, A. et al. 1994. Glutamine requirements in the generation of lymphokine-activated killer cells. Clin Nutr 13:42-49.
36. Mack, G. 1998. Glutamine synthetase isoenzymes, oligomers and subunits from hairy roots of Beta Vulgaris L. var. lutea. Planta 205(1): 113-20.
37. Shive, W. et al. 1957. Glutamine in treatment of peptic ulcer. Texas State J Med November: 840.
38. Lohaus, G. and C. Moellers. 2000. Phloem transport of amino acids in two Brassica napus L. genotypes and one B. carinata genotype in relation to their seed protein content. Planta 211(6): 833-40.
39. Ochs, G. et al. 1999. Complexity and expression of the glutamine synthetase multigene family in the amphidiploid crop Brassica napus. Plant Mol Biol 39(3): 395-405.
40. IMC. 2000. Glutamine. Integrative Medicine Communications. http://www.healthandage.com/html/res/com/ConsSupplements/Glutaminecs.html.
41. Rogero, M. M. and J. Tirapegui. 2000. Current aspects of glutamine, pysical activity, and immune system. Revista Brasileira de Ciencias Farmaceuticas 36(2): 201-212.
42. Burke, D. J. et al. 1989. Glutamine-supplemented total parenteral nutrition improves gut immune function. Arch Surg 124(12): 1396-9.
43. Buchman, A. L. 1999. Glutamine for the gut: mystical properties or an ordinary amino acid. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 1( 5): 417-23.
44. Buchman, A. L. 1996. Glutamine: is it a conditionally required nutrient for the human gastrointestinal system? J Am Coll Nutr 15(3): 199-205.
45. LeLeiko, N. S. and M. J. Walsh. 1996. The role of glutamine, short-chain fatty acids, and nucleotides in intestinal adaptation to gastrointestinal disease. Pediatr clin North Am 43(2): 451-70.
46. Ziegler, T. R. et al. 2000. Glutamine and the gastrointestinal tract. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 3(5): 355-62.
47. Castell, L. M. et al. 1994. The role of glutamine in the immune system and in intestinal function in catabolic states. Amino Acids (Vienna) 7(3): 231-243.
48. Cao, Y. et al. 1998. Glutamine enhances gut glutathione production. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 22(4): 224-227.
49. Wu, D. et al. 1994. In vitro glutathione supplementation enhances interleukin-2 production and mirogenic response of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from young and old subjects. J Nutr 124: 655-663.
50. Komatsu, W., et al. 1997. Stimulation of tumor necrosis factor and interleukin—1 productivity by the oral administration of cabbage juice to rats. Biosci Biotech Biochem 61(11):1937-1938.
51. Smith, D. et al.1988. Human DT-diaphoruse, a potential cancer protecting enzyme. Its purification from abdominal adipose tissue. Cancer Let 42: 103-112.
52. Clapper, M. et al. 1997. Preclinical and clinical evaluation of broccoli supplements as inducers of glutathione S-transferase activity. Clin Cancer Res 3(1):25-30.
53. Peters EM. 1997. Exercise, immunology and upper respiratory tract infections. Int J Sports Med. 18(l 1):S69-77.
54. Fleming, T. (Ed.). 2000. PDR for Herbal Medicines, 2nd ed. Montvale, NJ: Medical Economics Company. 656-657.
55. Anderson, J. W. et al. 2000b. Cholesterol-lowering effects of psyllium intake adjunctive to diet therapy in men and women with hypercholesterolemia: Meta-analysis of 8 controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr 71(2): 472-479.
56. Klopfenstein, C. F. 1990. Nutritional properties of coarse and fine sugar beet fiber and hard red wheat bran. I. Effects on rat serum and liver cholesterol and triglycerides and on fecal characteristics. Cereal Chem 67(6): 538-541.
57. Kondo, K. et al. 1991. Induction of in vitro differentiation of mouse embryonal carcinoma (F9) cells by inhibitors of topoisomerases. Cancer Res 51(19): 5398-5404.
58. Mazur, A. et al. 1991. Apolipoprotein B gene expression in rat intestine. The effect of dietary fiber. FEBS Lett 284(1): 63-65.
59. Bobek, P. et al. 2000. The effect of red beet (Beta vulgaris var. rubra) fiber on alimentary hypercholesterolemia and chemically induced colon carcinogenesis in rats. Nahrung, 44(3): 184-187.
60. Klopfenstein, C. F. 1990. Nutritional properties of coarse and fine sugar beet fiber and hard red wheat bran. I. Effects on rat serum and liver cholesterol and triglycerides and on fecal characteristics. Cereal Chem 67(6): 538-541.