So the traditional belief that lactic acid causes exercise induced acidosis by releasing a hydrogen has been challenged a lot lately. Are anyone in the know on this debate? I haven't really been following it.
When you have no oxygen, pyruvate (C3H4O3) takes on 2 hydrogens (from NADH and H+ formed in glycolysis) an forms lactic acid (C3H6O3) this quickly forms LA- (C3H5O3-) and a hydrogen ion (H+)
If pyruvate didn't do this, then NADH wouldn't be "recycled" to NAD+ and glycolysis would come to a halt because there would be no NAD+ left.
But of course, this leaves us with hydrogen ions, which will cause acidosis when they accumulate to the point where the buffering system can't buffer them quickly enough. When the environment gets acidic, enzyme function becomes reduced and fatigue sets in.
Now of course, if it wasn't for pyruvate being able to form lactic acid, we would have to stop moving a lot sooner, so it really is a good thing.
Did that pretty much sum up the traditional stance? Or did I misunderstand something? If the traditional stance is wrong, then how is it really?
When you have no oxygen, pyruvate (C3H4O3) takes on 2 hydrogens (from NADH and H+ formed in glycolysis) an forms lactic acid (C3H6O3) this quickly forms LA- (C3H5O3-) and a hydrogen ion (H+)
If pyruvate didn't do this, then NADH wouldn't be "recycled" to NAD+ and glycolysis would come to a halt because there would be no NAD+ left.
But of course, this leaves us with hydrogen ions, which will cause acidosis when they accumulate to the point where the buffering system can't buffer them quickly enough. When the environment gets acidic, enzyme function becomes reduced and fatigue sets in.
Now of course, if it wasn't for pyruvate being able to form lactic acid, we would have to stop moving a lot sooner, so it really is a good thing.
Did that pretty much sum up the traditional stance? Or did I misunderstand something? If the traditional stance is wrong, then how is it really?