Fats cannot be transformed into sugars because the enzyme
pyruvate dehydrogenase transforming pyruvate into
acetyl-CoA is irreversible. Hence, acetylCoA from fat cannot be tranformed
into pyruvate, which is needed in the beginning of glyconeogenesis.
I understand this.
But in my notes it is also said that "without the burning of fat
there can be no glyconeogenesis" and some vague reference to an
enzyme called pyruvate carboxylase that transforms pyruvate into
oxaloacetate.
I know that Oxaloacetate is one of the last products in the Kreb's.
So maybe (?) in order to get this you need to run the Kreb's first and starting
it with the use of fats. Is this the reason why glyconeogenesis needs
the burning of fat? But if that is the case, why cannot the Krebs be
run by amino acids instead, creating oxaloacetate - thereby bypassing
the need to use the burning of fat?
I don't know if you understand me. My English is not the best.
What I wonder about is in bold. Thanks! : - )
pyruvate dehydrogenase transforming pyruvate into
acetyl-CoA is irreversible. Hence, acetylCoA from fat cannot be tranformed
into pyruvate, which is needed in the beginning of glyconeogenesis.
I understand this.
But in my notes it is also said that "without the burning of fat
there can be no glyconeogenesis" and some vague reference to an
enzyme called pyruvate carboxylase that transforms pyruvate into
oxaloacetate.
I know that Oxaloacetate is one of the last products in the Kreb's.
So maybe (?) in order to get this you need to run the Kreb's first and starting
it with the use of fats. Is this the reason why glyconeogenesis needs
the burning of fat? But if that is the case, why cannot the Krebs be
run by amino acids instead, creating oxaloacetate - thereby bypassing
the need to use the burning of fat?
I don't know if you understand me. My English is not the best.
What I wonder about is in bold. Thanks! : - )