Effect of a novel dietary supplement on pH levels of healthy volunteers: a pilot study

Urinary Response to Consuming Plant-Based Meat Alternatives in Persons with Normal Kidney Function: The SWAP-MEAT Pilot Trial

BACKGROUND

Consuming excess animal meat may exacerbate kidney disorders such as urinary stone disease and chronic kidney disease. Plant-based meat alternatives imitate animal meat, and replace animal with vegetable protein, but it is unclear whether eating plant-meat confers similar health benefits as eating whole vegetables. We hypothesized that eating plant-meat when compared with animal meat decreases dietary acid load but increases dietary phosphorus and nitrogen.

METHODS

SWAP-MEAT was a randomized eight-week, crossover trial (NCT03718988) of participants consuming >2 servings/day of either plant-meat or animal meat for each eight-week phase. We measured urine sulfate, ammonium, pH, phosphorus, urea nitrogen, citrate, and creatinine concentrations, and serum creatinine and bicarbonate concentrations from stored participant samples from each phase.

RESULTS

At a single site, we enrolled 36 generally healthy participants (mean±SD age 50.2 ± 13.8 years, 67% women, and 69% White). Eating the plant-meat diet vs. eating the animal meat diet was associated with lower mean concentration of urine sulfate (-6.7 mEq/L; 95% CI -11.0, -2.4), urine ammonium (-4.2 mmol/L; 95% CI -8.2, -0.1), urine phosphorus (-9.0 mg/dL; 95% CI -17.5, -0.5), and urine urea nitrogen (-124.8 mg/dL; 95% CI -226.9, -22.6). Eating plant-meat compared with eating animal meat was associated with higher mean urine pH (+0.3 units; 95% CI 0.2, 0.5) and mean urine citrate/creatinine ratio (+111.65; 95% CI 52.69-170.60). After participants consumed a plant-meat diet compared with when they consumed an animal meat diet, mean serum creatinine concentration was lower (-0.07 mg/dL, 95% CI -0.10, -0.04), whereas mean serum bicarbonate concentration was not different.

CONCLUSIONS

Eating plant-based meat products, compared with eating animal meat, was associated with lower urinary excretion of sulfate, ammonium, phosphorus, and urea nitrogen and higher urinary excretion of citrate. Our findings provide rationale for examining whether plant-based meat will benefit patients with kidney disease.

NMR Precision Metabolomics: Dynamic Peak Sum Thresholding and Navigators for Highly Standardized and Reproducible Metabolite Profiling of Clinical Urine Samples

Metabolomics, especially urine-based studies, offers incredible promise for the discovery and development of clinically impactful biomarkers. However, due to the unique challenges of urine, a highly precise and reproducible workflow for NMR-based urine metabolomics is lacking. Using 1D and 2D non-uniform sampled (NUS) 1H-13C NMR spectroscopy, we systematically explored how changes in hydration or specific gravity (SG) and pH can impact biomarker discovery. Further, we examined additional sources of error in metabolomics studies and identified Navigator molecules that could monitor for those biases. Adjustment of SG to 1.002-1.02 coupled with a dynamic sum-based peak thresholding eliminates false positives associated with urine hydration and reduces variation in chemical shift. We identified Navigator molecules that can effectively monitor for inconsistencies in sample processing, SG, protein contamination, and pH. The workflow described provides quality assurance and quality control tools to generate high-quality urine metabolomics data, which is the first step in biomarker discovery.

The pH of Drinking Water and Its Effect on the pH of Urine

AIM

The aim was to determine whether urine pH changed or not with different pH values of drinking water. With the results obtained from animal studies, comments can be made about the effect of water with different pH levels that people drink on kidney stones.

METHOD

A total of 24 Wistar Albino rats were divided into three groups containing eight rats each: the first group was given water with pH 5.5, the second group was given water with pH 7 and the third group was given water with pH 8.2 in the same environment and conditions during 13 days. All rats consumed water in line with their natural feeding habits. All rats had urine pH measurements performed and recorded every day at the same time. The groups were later compared in terms of daily pH values.

RESULTS

When daily urine pH values were compared, there were statistically significant differences between pH measurements on the first, fourth and seventh day (p=0.02, p=0.017 and p=0.007, respectively). When first-day values are compared with post-hoc analyses, the urine pH in Group 2 was identified to be lower compared to Group 1 and Group 3 (p<0.001). When the fourth-day values were assessed, the urine pH of Group 2 was observed to be higher than Group 1 and Group 3 (p<0.001). On the seventh day, Group 3 had higher urine pH compared to the other groups (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The variation in drinking water pH does not directly change urine pH; however, it causes a change in the urine pH on different days.

Spot-testing urine pH, a novel dietary biomarker? A randomised cross-over trial

AIM

Spot-tests of urine pH are claimed to be an accessible biomarker of net acid excretion (NAE), and as such, they may be able to determine changes in an individual's intake of acid- or base-forming foods. To test this hypothesis, we aimed to determine if spot-tests of urine pH could index NAE and relay the consumption of a fruit and vegetable (F&V) concentrate whilst determining this concentrate's capacity to modulate NAE.

METHODS

In a double blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial, healthy adults (n = 13) were allocated by simple randomisation to receive a F&V concentrate or placebo for three days each, with diet standardised throughout. Measurements of 24-hour NAE, 24-hour urine pH and spot-tests of urine pH were taken throughout the study.

RESULTS

The 24-hour urine pH predicted 24-hour NAE (P = <0.0001). However, spot-tested urine pH displayed prediction intervals too wide to infer 24-hour NAE and inconsistent ability to reflect concentrate ingestion, despite 24-hour NAE and 24-hour urine pH decreasing (-25.8 mEq, 95% CI -44.3 to -7.4, P = 0.01, d = 0.94) and increasing (+0.51, 95% CI 0.25-0.79, P = 0.002, d = 1.3), respectively, following supplementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Spot-tests of urine pH are not a valid dietary biomarker of daily NAE and were unable to reliably track changes, despite a F&V concentrate clearly modulating the daily rate of NAE.