Second, given that all current essential vitamins and minerals are designated as such because their absence from diet will inevitably lead to severe if not fatal diseases (like scurvy), then this theory suggests there are other potential nutrients (bioactives) whose absence from diet is not marked by any immediate disease or disorder, but who nonetheless do have a positive biological function in reducing oxidative stress and otherwise preventing aging. Triage theory terms these compounds, which are not classified as essential nutrients, as “longevity vitamins,” i.e., they don’t have any immediate survival functions but their presence or deficiency in diet has an effect on aging and risk of certain diseases like cancer, diabetes mellitus, dementia and more.
This all sounds very nice on paper, but it is impossible to test it given the practical restrains of the real world, something the proponents of the theory readily admit. I will acknowledge that this theory of aging and disease provides a compelling biological pathway and explanation for much of the complexity and variability seen in studies into human health and nutrition, but at the same time I also retain a large dose of wariness. Especially since this theory can be attached to any compound that seems like it might have a biological effect, and fits in well with a long line of snake-oil salesmanship of food and supplements.
To double back again, ergothioneine has a stronger case for being such a “longevity vitamin” than most of the candidates proposed by Triage theory. The fact that ergothioneine is preferentially concentrated in body tissues exposed to high oxidative stress offers at least some evidence for antioxidant function in vivo (in vitro studies have already established ergothioneine is a powerful antioxidant, but many compounds that are antioxidants in a test tube do not end playing much of a role at biological concentrations or are not absorbed through metabolic processes intact). Despite the fact that no animals or plants are capable of synthesizing it, ergothioneine is present and retained in the tissues of nearly all animals, which strongly indicates that the compound has to have to some kind of benefit for such a widespread adaptation, which includes a specialized cell membrane transport protein. Ergothioneine has been shown in laboratory tests to have powerful antioxidizing effects in conditions mimicking those found inside the human body, and a study involving rats with the OCTN1 gene (the specialize transport protein for ergothioneine) “knocked out” showed a greater tendency to oxidative stress and related health issues. This then correlates with the aforementioned connections between ergothioneine as a health marker and mushroom consumption as correlating to a lower risk of cognitive and macular diseases.
The issue is squaring the compelling evidence with the lack of controlled studies and the still unclear mechanisms for ergothioneine’s function in the human body. There is no evidence or study for what specific diseases ergothioneine can prevent or treat and how it does so, nor any dosing guidelines. In the case of supplements, I strongly feel we should know first what the safety profile is for consuming ergothioneine in vastly higher concentrations than those found in nature. Bad science can still be good business, but I would rather do good business with good science.
In that context, the jury is still very much out on ergothioneine. In my opinion, ergothioneine is extremely interesting; I feel like there is at least a plausible and compelling argument with a modicum of scientific grounding for the compound’s benefit in diet, paired with ample evidence that, at least in the case of regular consumption of mushrooms, there aren’t any notable risks associated with it. This ticks off the cardinal rule of “do no harm”, much like with beta-glucans.
Promoting Ergothioneine
Ergothioneine, just like beta-glucans, offers an excellent exotic mushroom-specific marketing tool if done right, in that compared to regular button mushrooms oyster mushrooms, shiitake, maitake and other exotic wood-decaying varieties of mushroom have much higher concentrations of ergothioneine (and beta-glucans) than button mushrooms. That makes it very tempting to try and plug these two points, (over other things like vitamin D, B-vitamins, selenium content or potassium content), as a way to create more demand for exotic mushrooms as a health-conscious food source.
This brings me back to the title, which was not entirely humorous. How do you market something that nobody can even remember how to pronounce correctly, much less a word that seems like it would be a late-stage question for the American national spelling bee. How do you deal with the huge information gap between say, a grower who is passionate about fungi and nutrition, and the average consumer who doesn’t even know how mushrooms grow? There are also other antioxidant compounds like glutathione present in high concentrations in mushrooms, but if you just slap the antioxidant label on your marketing, well, then congratulations, you’ve joined nearly every other food and drink producer in the Western world in the past 30 years in telling people your product is rich in antioxidants. And the average consumer also doesn’t really know what the heck an antioxidant is either, only that it’s supposed to be healthy for you, maybe.