In a scientific study sure to qualify for the Hall of Fame of Counterintuitive Results, scientists in Germany and Boston have concluded that people who exercise to reduce diabetes risk ought to avoid antioxidants like vitamins E and C. 
 
Michael Ristow, a nutritionist at Jena University, Ron Kahn of the Joslin Diabetes Center and their colleagues published the mind-bending findings in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 

At the moment, “get more exercise” is just about the first thing that pops out of clinicians’ mouths when advising patients how to mitigate the risk of diabetes.

But exercise stimulates glucose metabolism in muscle cells and an unavoidable byproduct of this biochemical cascade is the release of oxygen-based free-radicals that damage normal tissue.

The damage, dubbed oxidative stress, accumulates with age and some posit it contributes to many deleterious cellular phenomena that are observed with increasing age.

Since human tissue has only a limited capacity to combat oxidative stress, antioxidant vitamins, which combat oxygen-based free-radicals, would seem to be a perfectly reasonable supplement.

Not so, say the scientists. They asked young men to exercise while giving half of them vitamins C and E and the others placebos. The scientists subsequently measured insulin sensitivity and several indicators of oxidative stress.

The team found that in the group taking the vitamins, insulin sensitivity did not improve and the body’s natural defenses against oxidative stress were not activated.

They suggest that’s because the vitamins destroy the free-radicals, thereby short-circuiting the body’s normal response to exercise.

“If you exercise to promote health, you shouldn’t take large amounts of antioxidants,” Ristow told the New York Times. “Antioxidants…inhibit otherwise positive effects of exercise, dieting and other interventions.”

Electricity powered cars not only run cleaner than their gasoline powered ancestors, they also run more quietly.

For inhabitants of noise-polluted cities, this might seem like a positive but there is growing concern that pedestrians and cyclists can’t hear the cool-running vehicles, thus increasing the risk of accidents. 

That’s why many believe it’s time to trick-out electric and hybrid cars with external sound systems.

In fact Congress is considering a bill that would establish minimum sound levels for non-gasoline powered vehicles so that the visually impaired and pedestrians can hear them approach. The European Commission is pondering a similar proposal.

What kind of sounds should electricity powered vehicles make? Perhaps they could beep as do some pedestrian crossings, or buzz like a power tool.

The work of Laurence Rosenblum and colleagues at UC California Riverside has convinced them otherwise. “People want cars to sound like cars,” he told the Economist. The sound needn’t be loud; just a slight enhancement of the current noise would suffice to improve safety substantially, he added.

Such external sound systems are already in the works. Lotus Engineering, for example, recently inked a deal with audio system maker Harman Becker to produce one. Their system also produces internal sounds that change with speed and use of the throttle, providing audible feedback to drivers.

This means carmakers will soon be able to create sounds that help with brand promotion. Drivers might someday even be able to select from a menu of engine sounds, perhaps downloading them like ringtones.

The Fisker Karma, for example, will be outfitted with a sound generator when the luxury electric hybrid goes into production late this year. It will be up to Fisker to decide how, exactly, a luxury electric vehicle should sound.