21 replies to this topic

[Johann]

About 4 or 5 years ago I purchased some NAC and tried it and felt a very discomforting
thing. Not sure how to describe it but it was probably either lung capillary pressure change or
something to do with the heart. I am pretty certain it was the former seeing as how the event
happened within an hour or so of taking it.

I am familiar w/ what the supp. does for the mucous of the lungs. I am also familiar on the
study out of some university on mice indicating a possible increase in pulmonary arterial hypertension. And I realize that there are possibly hundreds of studies that show NAC to be safe.

The question, is anyone here knowledgeable enough to tell me if it is safe to take? Maybe a smaller dose? I was taking maybe 600 mg. The other day, after four years, I bought some more and tried it again -- same results but I also noticed heart heavier beating.

What I liked about NAC was that it completely removed some little bits of impending doom feelings in the brain and it eradicated any little bit of OCD and things along that nature.

What should I do? Take very low doses once or twice a week? Will 50 mg accomplish the brain changing effects? I also like that it banishes lung congestion.

Thoughts?

[aikikai]

NAC fools the body into thinking that it has an oxygen shortage, and can create hypertension in the lungs.

[Johann]

NAC fools the body into thinking that it has an oxygen shortage, and can create hypertension in the lungs.

Anyone else?

[rwac]

NAC mimics hypoxia, but transient hypoxia may have a beneficial effect.

Transient Hypoxia Stimulates Mitochondrial Biogenesis in Brain Subcortex by a Neuronal Nitric Oxide Synthase-Dependent Mechanism


I take 600mg myself, for a few different reasons. NAC also reduces biofilm formation by a number of bacteria.

Sorry, I haven't noticed anything like that myself.

[niner]

NAC fools the body into thinking that it has an oxygen shortage, and can create hypertension in the lungs.

Pulmonary hypertension is bad. I know a young woman who died of it.

[FNC]

I was considering NAC, from my research, I came to the same conclusion as the above posters.
Ultimately though, it seemed that the good outweighed the bad.

The studies regarding hypoxia and such were enough to make me rethink it though.

[bacopa]

Dude my friend overdosed on acedomeniphen or Tylenol and they give you high high doses of N-acetyl-cystine every 4 hours, he said, 17 times as precautionary measure! Each dose is some huge amount more than the 100-600 mg you get...so in short...yes it's safe!

Actually I just remembered he told me each vial had 30 ml at 200 mg of the stuff per ml.. so 6 grams x 17 times.

Edited by dfowler, 06 December 2009 - 02:27 PM.

[maxwatt]

Dude my friend overdosed on acedomeniphen or Tylenol and they give you high high doses of N-acetyl-cystine every 4 hours, he said, 17 times as precautionary measure! Each dose is some huge amount more than the 100-600 mg you get...so in short...yes it's safe!

Actually I just remembered he told me each vial had 30 ml at 200 mg of the stuff per ml.. so 6 grams x 17 times.

Just because it is acceptable for acute administration, does not make it safe for chronic use.

[niner]

Dude my friend overdosed on acedomeniphen or Tylenol and they give you high high doses of N-acetyl-cystine every 4 hours, he said, 17 times as precautionary measure! Each dose is some huge amount more than the 100-600 mg you get...so in short...yes it's safe!

Actually I just remembered he told me each vial had 30 ml at 200 mg of the stuff per ml.. so 6 grams x 17 times.

Just because it is acceptable for acute administration, does not make it safe for chronic use.

Particularly when it's being used to prevent a bad outcome, like, y'know, dying... Medicine is about risk reward tradeoffs.

[LivingWell]

NAC has been used for years in emergency medicine for acetaminophen overdose, and it works by raising glutathione. I agree that more studies need to be done regarding regular daily usage to be sure of it's long term safety, since there are supplements on the market advocating daily usage now. I saw the same study you did on PubMed about PAH and that concerned me.

Are you taking NAC in order to raise your glutathione, or for another reason? I am new to this forum, and I found you on a google alert for glutathione. I am a glutathione educator, and there are some indicators that glutathione's function as an antioxidant plays a key role in the aging process. I found Dr. Wulf Droge's "Avoiding the First Cause of Death- Can We Live Longer than 120 Years?" to be a fascinating read on the subject of glutathione, oxidative stress, autophagy, and aging. Quite technical, but it sounds like those on this forum have done their homework and might enjoy it.

Best Regards,
LivingWell

[bacopa]

/Sorry, I guess I jumped the gun on this one. Yes I would imagine long term use could very well be different, and probably will be...I think my point was it SEEMS relatively safe in large doses, over a very short term, of course.

Edited by dfowler, 06 December 2009 - 06:37 PM.

[Johann]

NAC has been used for years in emergency medicine for acetaminophen overdose, and it works by raising glutathione. I agree that more studies need to be done regarding regular daily usage to be sure of it's long term safety, since there are supplements on the market advocating daily usage now. I saw the same study you did on PubMed about PAH and that concerned me.

Are you taking NAC in order to raise your glutathione, or for another reason? I am new to this forum, and I found you on a google alert for glutathione. I am a glutathione educator, and there are some indicators that glutathione's function as an antioxidant plays a key role in the aging process. I found Dr. Wulf Droge's "Avoiding the First Cause of Death- Can We Live Longer than 120 Years?" to be a fascinating read on the subject of glutathione, oxidative stress, autophagy, and aging. Quite technical, but it sounds like those on this forum have done their homework and might enjoy it.

Best Regards,
LivingWell

Welcome to the board.
Yes, glutathione was the major reason. Secondary was for the brain effects. Not sure how it works but IIRC NAC causes a small release of glutamate. Not sure if that is good or bad but
for me it seemed to make social situations less phobic.

[Johann]

http://www.springerl...3746nj71604523/

Received: 15 October 2005 Accepted: 25 October 2005 Published online: 22 December 2005
Abstract
Rationale Dysfunction of glutamatergic neurotransmission has been implicated in the pathophysiology of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and recent clinical reports suggest that some glutamate modulating agents are efficacious in the treatment of this disorder. N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is a readily available amino acid compound that is thought to attenuate glutamatergic neurotransmission. NAC may be useful in treating psychiatric disorders involving glutamatergic dysfunction such as OCD.
Objectives To examine the efficacy of augmentation with NAC in a patient with serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SRI)-refractory OCD.
Methods A patient with SRI-refractory OCD was treated with an off-label use of NAC augmentation of fluvoxamine over several weeks.
Results NAC augmentation of fluvoxamine resulted in a marked decrease in Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BBOCS) score and a clinically significant improvement in OCD symptoms.
Conclusions NAC augmentation was effective in treating SRI-refractory OCD in this single case. Further research is warranted to investigate the use of NAC and other glutamate modulating agents in the treatment of OCD.

Edited by Johann, 06 December 2009 - 08:39 PM.

[LivingWell]

NAC has been used for years in emergency medicine for acetaminophen overdose, and it works by raising glutathione. I agree that more studies need to be done regarding regular daily usage to be sure of it's long term safety, since there are supplements on the market advocating daily usage now. I saw the same study you did on PubMed about PAH and that concerned me.

Are you taking NAC in order to raise your glutathione, or for another reason? I am new to this forum, and I found you on a google alert for glutathione. I am a glutathione educator, and there are some indicators that glutathione's function as an antioxidant plays a key role in the aging process. I found Dr. Wulf Droge's "Avoiding the First Cause of Death- Can We Live Longer than 120 Years?" to be a fascinating read on the subject of glutathione, oxidative stress, autophagy, and aging. Quite technical, but it sounds like those on this forum have done their homework and might enjoy it.

Best Regards,
LivingWell

Welcome to the board.
Yes, glutathione was the major reason. Secondary was for the brain effects. Not sure how it works but IIRC NAC causes a small release of glutamate. Not sure if that is good or bad but
for me it seemed to make social situations less phobic.

Johann;

Thanks for the welcome. If you are still concerned about the potentially toxic side effects of NAC, you may want to consider trying a bonded cysteine supplement called Immunocal. I am an independent consultant for this product, and am thus partial, so I would suggest that you research this supplement independently if you want to consider taking it. It sounds like you are familiar with PubMed. You can go there and type in "Immunocal" and see the published studies that span over 30 years on this product. Immunocal will raise and sustain your glutathione in every cell of your body, crosses the blood-brain barrier, has been studied for long term safety, and does not have the potentially toxic side effects associated with NAC usage.

You can also learn more about this on the Wikipedia page for glutathione under "supplementation." Many have seen good results with glutathione up-regulation when it comes to chemical imbalances in the brain. If you need any further information, please let me know, I am a colleague of Dr. Jimmy Gutman, who is the world's most published author on the subject of glutathione, and I have written an educational website all about glutathione that you can access from my profile. There is a page there called "How to Raise Glutathione" that also covers other precursors such as melatonin, alpha-lipoic acid, milk thistle, and others. Also look for the "glutathione side effects" page. Others have used IV glutathione with success. The information is based on Dr. Gutman's book.

You also need to be sure you are taking the necessary co-factors as well along with your chosen form of glutathione up-regulation.

It's a pleasure to know you, and that you have found out about this amazing protein and are benefiting from it, however you choose to do so. Good health to you!

Best Regards,
LivingWell

[bobman]

About 4 or 5 years ago I purchased some NAC and tried it and felt a very discomforting
thing. Not sure how to describe it but it was probably either lung capillary pressure change or
something to do with the heart. I am pretty certain it was the former seeing as how the event
happened within an hour or so of taking it.

I am familiar w/ what the supp. does for the mucous of the lungs. I am also familiar on the
study out of some university on mice indicating a possible increase in pulmonary arterial hypertension. And I realize that there are possibly hundreds of studies that show NAC to be safe.

The question, is anyone here knowledgeable enough to tell me if it is safe to take? Maybe a smaller dose? I was taking maybe 600 mg. The other day, after four years, I bought some more and tried it again -- same results but I also noticed heart heavier beating.

What I liked about NAC was that it completely removed some little bits of impending doom feelings in the brain and it eradicated any little bit of OCD and things along that nature.

What should I do? Take very low doses once or twice a week? Will 50 mg accomplish the brain changing effects? I also like that it banishes lung congestion.

Thoughts?

I also do not think it is particularly safe. Just an fyi, it interferes with glutamate transmission via inhibition of Na+ signalling, and can probably cause cognitive side effects like those associated with lamictal. I've used it and noticed definite cognitive dulling, along the lines of my lamictal use. Note that I am probably hyper-sensitive to it because I developed some allergy to lamictal, and still suffer from some of the cognitive side-effects. If you do take it I wouldn't take 600mg. That is a fairly high dose. I know that CerefolinNAC or whatever that is called uses 5.6mg methylfolate, 600mg NAC, and ~2mg methylcobalmin for what it is worth. If you take that as a "balanced" product, I would recommend you lower your NAC supplementation significantly.

Edited by bobmann, 06 December 2009 - 10:41 PM.

[mdc]

Just a footnote here,
NAC is a kind of popular medcine in the cold month in Germany(yes,we have many).It is OTC and the task is to loosen up the heavy slime in your resperatory system,if you got a cold.
It is around at least 10 years,usually comes as efferescent tablets(200/400/600mg).It is generic,so you have a lot of different brands,but all of them not really cheap.
The "Rote-Liste 2008"(the german physicians/pharmacists medcine reference book) consider it safe for children 6 years and above.It is said that there are seldom some minor side-effects like allergic reaction,rushes,vomiting and low blood pressure.Their only real concern is to combine it NOT with an antitussitive agent(like codeine i.e.),because than all this loosened liquid wont get out of your lungs.
I know we are talking here about people taking it only over a short time in winter,and not all year long.Still the German health laws and many of the doctors/pharmacists are really tight assed and overprotective(not so our pharma industry).
Thought this might be of interest.

Edited by mdc, 07 December 2009 - 03:29 AM.

[FNC]

Given the above replies, I believe the conclusion which we can make is that
- NAC can have potential ill-effects
- Long term use of NAC has not been tested or analyzed as such
- NAC is not exactly 'fatal'
- NAC should be used with caution (i.e. on/off, perhaps not daily)

[zorba990]

NAC fools the body into thinking that it has an oxygen shortage, and can create hypertension in the lungs.

Proven in humans at any reasonable dose? I don't think so. I'm still using NAC sustain
from Jarrow and not encountering any adverse effects. I run and lift weights. These days
I'm taking 1200 mg twice a day. More on workout days post workout. Of course I also take
4-6 grams of vitamin C and 1600IU of E half as gamma-e. I generally follow Colgan's
recs from Optimum Sports Nutrition and believe more anti-oxidants = less injuries.

I think there is an underlying agenda to demonize effective supplements these days.
Waiting for CoQ10/Ubiquinol to be demonized next LOL, been taking that for nearly 20 years.


http://www.raysaheli...ylcysteine.html
http://www.recomp.co...hread.php?t=123

[Jacovis]

NAC mimics hypoxia, but transient hypoxia may have a beneficial effect.

Transient Hypoxia Stimulates Mitochondrial Biogenesis in Brain Subcortex by a Neuronal Nitric Oxide Synthase-Dependent Mechanism


I take 600mg myself, for a few different reasons. NAC also reduces biofilm formation by a number of bacteria.

Sorry, I haven't noticed anything like that myself.

offtopic but the below article talks about research which suggests that moderate sleep apnea (as opposed to no sleep apnea at all or severe sleep apnea) may actually contribute to higher survival rates in the elderly. The adaptive influences of intermittent hypoxia (lack of oxygen) are suggested to be a reason for this.

As for N-Acetyl-Cysteine, there are other options for increasing Glutathione levels (though not as well researched) if it is not seen as something safe enough to take chronically. Cysteine Peptide (Cysteine Peption™) is one such option and other options include supplements popular for kids with Autism. These include:
- Enhansa Enhanced Absorption Curcumin Supplement see http://www.leesilsby...enhansamain.php
- OSR #1™ see http://www.leesilsby.com/osr.php

http://www.wellspher...ongevity/363120
Can moderate sleep apnea in elderly increase longevity?
Posted Sep 16 2008 7:11am
New research results suggest that sleep apnea – which has often been linked to increased rates of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality – may actually contribute to higher survival rates in the elderly. The findings by Technion-Israel Institute of Technology researchers were presented last Thursday at the bi-annual European Sleep Research Society Congress in Glasgow, Scotland.
Led by Prof. Peretz Lavie of the Faculty of Medicine, the study was conducted over a 4.5-year period, with researchers comparing mortality rates among elderly subjects diagnosed with sleep apnea to those of the elderly in the general population. Results were divided by to age, sex, and ethnic origin.
When mortality rates of 611 elderly patients with “light or no” sleep apnea, “moderate” sleep apnea, and “severe” sleep apnea were compared with the general population, those suffering from moderate sleep apnea had a mortality rate one-third of that of the general population. And mortality rates for the elderly with no sleep apnea, light sleep apnea and severe sleep apnea were on par with those of the general populace.
“These findings, when combined with new findings in scientific literature of the adaptive influences of intermittent hypoxia (lack of oxygen) in various clinical models, strengthens our hypothesis that sleep apnea activates defense mechanisms among the elderly that provide them with survival advantage,” said Lavie.
Although sleep apnea is more prevalent among the elderly than among the young and middle-aged, the geriatric medical implications are still not well known.
Affecting 10 percent of men and five percent of women, sleep apnea has been found to constitute a significant risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The findings from many studies – including some conducted at the Technion – show patients with sleep apnea are at a higher risk for mortality, particularly if they are overweight.
This sleep apnea research was conducted in the Lloyd Rigler Laboratory for Sleep Apnea Research at the Technion Faculty of Medicine (Newswise).

Editorial note - Even if further research proves that the biological stress of moderate intermittent hypoxia can somehow increase life span in the elderly, it will always remain in the advisory category of “don’t try this at home.” Certain kinds of bodily stress, including even certain dosages of whole body radiation, may activate resilience genes and boost longevity for some, but hypoxia and radiation are obviously too risky to be any common kind of treatment modality or strategy of preventivemedicine. Safe, healthy ways to activate your resilience genes include exercise (especially if you can achieve some degree of intensity), various fasting or calorie restriction protocols (such as every other day fasting), and consuming certain dietary polyphenols in significant amounts (for example, by eating blueberries or drinking pomegranate juice). Other strategies might include supplementing with resveratrol or its upcoming prescription derivatives (if they prove to be safe). To your resilience! - Dr. Z.

Edited by Visionary7903, 07 December 2009 - 12:49 PM.

[bobman]

NAC fools the body into thinking that it has an oxygen shortage, and can create hypertension in the lungs.

Proven in humans at any reasonable dose? I don't think so. I'm still using NAC sustain
from Jarrow and not encountering any adverse effects. I run and lift weights. These days
I'm taking 1200 mg twice a day. More on workout days post workout. Of course I also take
4-6 grams of vitamin C and 1600IU of E half as gamma-e. I generally follow Colgan's
recs from Optimum Sports Nutrition and believe more anti-oxidants = less injuries.

I think there is an underlying agenda to demonize effective supplements these days.
Waiting for CoQ10/Ubiquinol to be demonized next LOL, been taking that for nearly 20 years.


http://www.raysaheli...ylcysteine.html
http://www.recomp.co...hread.php?t=123

Not to rain on your love parade but I'm not sure that taking large doses of ascorbic acid is good for you. There isn't a lot of research pointing to the health benefits and bioavailability (beyond plasma concentrations) of synthetic vitamins. As for coq10 there is evidence against it's indescriminate use, search around. And I think people are less about "demonizing" and more about making qualified statements. Accuracy is the agenda, and biology is complicated. Saying "yeah take this it's great" because some rat study showed that a substance reduces reactive oxygen species isn't a smart move. What happens to reactive oxygen signaling? That's the same breed that states that "homocysteine" is bad(!) without realizing it's role in the metabolism of númerous compounds including sam-e, methylcobalmin, 5-methylfolate, choline, serine, and more. Keeping your body in harmony is a great idea, and that needs to be better defined and quantized. What we do know is just taking x substance because you think you need more antioxidants may not be the safest thing to do. When speaking of antioxidants, it would probably be bet to stick to those antioxidants found in nature, and derive them from good, organic sources. You may be fine taking coq10. Sure. But look what happened with selenium. It's connection to cancer became all the rage before it became known that supplementing selenium even in fairly moderate doses statistically increased cancer rates. Just because you're still alive doesn't mean it's a great thing to take.

That being said, it does seem that antioxidants are good to take if you play a high impact sport, however please note it also has its downsides (like decreased muscle building) .

Edited by bobmann, 08 December 2009 - 04:10 AM.

[zorba990]

NAC fools the body into thinking that it has an oxygen shortage, and can create hypertension in the lungs.

Proven in humans at any reasonable dose? I don't think so. I'm still using NAC sustain
from Jarrow and not encountering any adverse effects. I run and lift weights. These days
I'm taking 1200 mg twice a day. More on workout days post workout. Of course I also take
4-6 grams of vitamin C and 1600IU of E half as gamma-e. I generally follow Colgan's
recs from Optimum Sports Nutrition and believe more anti-oxidants = less injuries.

I think there is an underlying agenda to demonize effective supplements these days.
Waiting for CoQ10/Ubiquinol to be demonized next LOL, been taking that for nearly 20 years.


http://www.raysaheli...ylcysteine.html
http://www.recomp.co...hread.php?t=123

Not to rain on your love parade but I'm not sure that taking large doses of ascorbic acid is good for you. There isn't a lot of research pointing to the health benefits and bioavailability of synthetic, crude oil derived vitamins. As for coq10 there is evidence against it's indescriminate use, search around. And I think people are less about "demonizing" and more about making qualified statements. Accuracy is the agenda, and biology is complicated. Saying "yeah take this it's great" because some rat study showed that a substance reduces reactive oxygen species isn't a smart move. What happens to reactive oxygen signalling? That's the same breed that states that "homocysteine" is bad(!) without realizing it's role in the metabolism of númerous compounds including sam-e, methylcobalmin, 5-methylfolate, choline, serine, and more. Keeping your body in harmony is a great idea, and that needs to be better defined and quantized. What we do know is just taking x substance becaus you think you need more antioxidants may not be the safest thing to do. When speaking of antioxidants, it would probably be bet to stick to those antioxidants found in nature, and derive them from good, organic sources. You may be fine taking coq10. Sure. But look what happened with selenium. It's connection to cancer became all the rage before it became known that supplementing selenium even in fairly moderate doses statistically increased cancer rates. Just because you're still alive doesn't mean it's a great thing to take.

That being said, it does seem that antioxidants are good to take if you play a high impact sport, however please note it also has its downsides (like decreased muscle building) .

Selenium is a metal with a well known toxicity.
I once knew a well known actor who started losing his hair from taking too much, but he
is still around now and so is his most of his hair - he figured it out with a little help.

I use liposomal vitamin c not ascorbic acid. Most of my family
takes high doses since we discovered it eliminates the yearly colds/flus
as well as normalizes cholesterol without side effects of note. I haven't been taking large
dose C as long because I never tolerated most types -- until liposomal arrived. If I
could spend all day eating fruits and vegetables within hours of picking then I
might get enough in my diet.

I don't believe taking anti-oxidants is detrimental to physical training. I DO believe many
people miss important co-factors (like taking loads of choline without enough B5) and
get diminishing results. Natural is a very misused word, but I do believe that many
food factors are important and some possibly as yet undiscovered. Thus supplementation
cannot replace a good diet. I think many studies are flawed because they don't run
long enough, miss co-factors, or fail to control for other factors (drug use, pill swallowing
compliance, degradation of the raw material in water, etc).

Hopefully the truth will prevail but in the meantime if you want to wait and be cautious by
all means do so. I experiment on myself and go with that. If something is not working for me then
I look for reasons and make a change. I think the evidence for NAC causing PAH in humans is
presently weak. Even LEF's NAC bottle still says 600mg 3 times a day as support for
"bronchial health" http://www.lef.org/V...l-Cysteine.html

[bdelfin]

There's an NAC supplement called Resbid that contains 500 mg. of time-released NAC. It releases over 4-6 hours, and I'm presently taking it twice a day. I personally wouldn't take any immediate-release formulation of NAC, because of concerns that include overloading the body's glutathione production. Just an option to consider...