4.6 Review

Resveratrol: How Much Wine Do You Have to Drink to Stay Healthy?

期刊

ADVANCES IN NUTRITION
卷 7, 期 4, 页码 706-718

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.3945/an.115.011627

关键词

French paradox; therapy; human trials; liver; SIRT1; pharmacology; nanotechnology

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [SFB/TRR57 P13]
  2. Interdisciplinary Centre for Clinical Research (IZKF) within the Faculty of Medicine at the Rheinisch-Westfaelische Technische Hochschule Aachen University [E7-6]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Resveratrol is a naturally occurring stilbene endowed with multiple health-promoting effects. It is produced by certain plants including several dietary sources such as grapes, apples, raspberries, blueberries, plums, peanuts, and products derived therefrom (e.g., wine). Resveratrol can be isolated and purified from these biological sources or synthesized in a few steps with an overall high yield. This compound and its glucoside, the trans-polydatin piceid, have received worldwide attention for their beneficial effects on cardiovascular, inflammatory, neurodegenerative, metabolic, and age-related diseases. These health-promoting effects are particularly attractive given the prevalence of resveratrol-based nutraceuticals and the paradoxical epidemiologic observation that wine consumption is inversely correlated to the incidence of coronary heart disease. However, the notion of resveratrol as a magic bullet was recently challenged by clinical trials showing that this polyphenol does not have a substantial influence on health status and mortality risk. In the present review, we discuss the proposed therapeutic attributes and the mode of molecular actions of resveratrol. We also cover recent pharmacologic efforts to improve the poor bioavailability of resveratrol and influence the transition between body systems in humans. We conclude with some thoughts about future research directions that might be meaningful for resolving controversies surrounding resveratrol.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据