• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

GlyNAC are folks here familiar with this combo?

nac glycine ghs

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 241
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 01 April 2021 - 12:04 PM


Here's another supplement combo that appears to be effective. I wish that I could get on a trial for something like this. Arthritis feels like punishment for an active life.

GlyNAC—a combination of glycine and N-acetylcysteine (NAC) as precursors of the natural antioxidant glutathione (GSH)—


Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News: Human Trial Finds Supplement Improves Age-Related Defects to Improve Cognition, Muscle Strength.
https://www.genengne...uscle-strength/

Edited by Lazarus Long, 01 April 2021 - 12:06 PM.

  • like x 1

#2 Oakman

  • Member
  • 1,199 posts
  • 1,531
  • Location:CO

Posted 01 April 2021 - 04:49 PM

Why bother with the trial, just buy it outright > https://www.celltrie...ight-on-glynac/

 

"GlyNAC (Glycine + N‐acetyl cysteine), found in Celltrient™ Cellular Protect, provides building blocks to help cells make the antioxidant glutathione in response to cellular needs. "


  • Good Point x 3

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for SUPPLEMENTS (in thread) to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 Phoebus

  • Guest
  • 727 posts
  • 172
  • Location:Upper Midwest, US

Posted 01 April 2021 - 06:39 PM

how is this any different than taking glycine and NAC at the same time? 


  • Good Point x 1

#4 Oakman

  • Member
  • 1,199 posts
  • 1,531
  • Location:CO

Posted 01 April 2021 - 08:58 PM

how is this any different than taking glycine and NAC at the same time? 

 

According to the label, it's 600 mgs each of the two ingredients. Easy peasie, I'd make my own, not pay >$1 capsule / 2 per serving.


  • Good Point x 1

#5 Lazarus Long

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 241
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 02 April 2021 - 11:35 AM

Thanks. I appreciate the perspectives. Is the third ingredient, glutathione included?

I had the impression from the article that it is.

#6 Oakman

  • Member
  • 1,199 posts
  • 1,531
  • Location:CO

Posted 02 April 2021 - 12:53 PM

Thanks. I appreciate the perspectives. Is the third ingredient, glutathione included?

I had the impression from the article that it is.

 

 No, the articles state they gave GlyNAC (as glutathione precursors) and that corrected glutathione deficiency in old adults.

 

https://www.genengne...uscle-strength/



#7 AlbertN

  • Guest
  • 37 posts
  • 6

Posted 03 April 2021 - 01:38 PM

According to the label, it's 600 mgs each of the two ingredients. Easy peasie, I'd make my own, not pay >$1 capsule / 2 per serving.

 

Dosages in the supplement don't match up with what was used in the study.  

 

From:  https://www.fightagi...d-inflammation/

 

"Per the papers, the daily intake of each supplement is large: ~100 mg/kg for glycine (~6 grams for a 60kg human) and ~130 mg/kg for N-acetylcysteine (~8 grams for a 60kg human), split into two doses."

 

I checked the actual paper (linked to below) and that is correct. 

 

https://onlinelibrar...0.1002/ctm2.372

 

 (1.33 mol of glycine is equivalent to 100 grams of glycine)


  • Informative x 3

#8 Oakman

  • Member
  • 1,199 posts
  • 1,531
  • Location:CO

Posted 03 April 2021 - 05:36 PM

Dosages in the supplement don't match up with what was used in the study.  

 

From:  https://www.fightagi...d-inflammation/

 

"Per the papers, the daily intake of each supplement is large: ~100 mg/kg for glycine (~6 grams for a 60kg human) and ~130 mg/kg for N-acetylcysteine (~8 grams for a 60kg human), split into two doses."

 

I checked the actual paper (linked to below) and that is correct. 

 

https://onlinelibrar...0.1002/ctm2.372

 

 (1.33 mol of glycine is equivalent to 100 grams of glycine)

 

Good find. To take that amt, I'd buy bulk powder, @Amazon lowest cost ~$20/kg for glycine, ~$75/kg for N-A. Cost would be ~$.75/day total, perhaps in a smoothie of some sort. Whether many peps would do that for 36 wks running, as per the study, is an open question.



#9 smithx

  • Guest
  • 1,272 posts
  • 395

Posted 07 April 2021 - 09:58 PM

It's not clear at all that those dosages are safe on a chronic basis.


  • Agree x 2

#10 AlbertN

  • Guest
  • 37 posts
  • 6

Posted 08 April 2021 - 12:54 PM

No question the dosage of glycine is safe.   We used to get that much from food when we ate the whole carcass of an animal rather than just the muscle meat.  Our current diets are usually very deficient in glycine,  especially if you get a lot of protein from animal sources.

 

Also from Alan Green at https://rapamycintherapy.com/

 

The dose for a 70 kilo man was 9 gram of cystine and 7 grams of glycine (about the amount of these two amino acids in 1.5 pounds of steak). 

 

 



#11 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,592 posts
  • 673

Posted 08 April 2021 - 02:59 PM

I think the concern is with NAC. I use NAC and there is no way I would use 8 grams. 2 grams is questionably safe. Read about NAC and irreversible pulmonary hypertension. I'd tread cautiously with doses of NAC exceeding 1.8 grams max.

Edit: and I wouldn't take all 1.8 grams at once but stagger 3 doses of 600 mg throughout the day.

Edited by Hebbeh, 08 April 2021 - 03:01 PM.

  • Good Point x 1
  • Informative x 1
  • Agree x 1

#12 AlbertN

  • Guest
  • 37 posts
  • 6

Posted 08 April 2021 - 04:50 PM

 

Also from Alan Green at https://rapamycintherapy.com/

 

The dose for a 70 kilo man was 9 gram of cystine and 7 grams of glycine (about the amount of these two amino acids in 1.5 pounds of steak). 

 

This is wrong, at least for cystine.  1.5 pounds of steak has only 2.5 grams of cystine.  (https://www.myfoodda...stine-foods.php)

 


Edited by AlbertN, 08 April 2021 - 04:53 PM.


#13 Synbion

  • Guest
  • 3 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Houston, TX
  • NO

Posted 08 April 2021 - 08:16 PM

There have been a number of follow up studies to the Palmer study that found evidence of NAC-induced pulmonary hypertension in mice. From a 2015 study conducted at Stanford on cystic fibrosis:

 

"Our study commenced with an initial safety cohort to ascertain whether NAC at doses utilized in this trial could cause pulmonary arterial hypertension (PH) because Palmer and colleagues had previously reported that chronic, systemic administration of either NAC or SNOAC (S-nitroso-acetylcysteine) caused hypoxia-mimetic PH in a murine model."

 

"The Stanford cohort of 16 subjects served as an initial safety cohort to evaluate if long-term treatment with NAC was associated with the development of PH in subjects with CF. There was no evidence for the development of PH in these subjects by the following biomarker and clinical measurements: levels of plasma NAC, SNOAC, HIF-1α, VEGF, bFGF, cardiac echocardiogram and diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide. These indices were assessed at the first interim safety analysis by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) review of PH data after 8 subjects had completed week 8 visit. Review of the data revealed no evidence for the development of PH, thus the other sites began enrollment. A second interim analysis for safety performed after half of all subjects had completed 12 weeks of therapy similarly demonstrated no evidence that PH had developed in any study participant."

 

In my lab, we use NAC to break down mucin, so my first thought was what the impact of continually taking such large doses would be on the gut microbiome. It appears not much reaches the large intestines however, and I would think you would see an increase in inflammatory markers if gut integrity has compromised. Still, may make sense to slowly ramp up dose for those wanting to try this.



#14 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,592 posts
  • 673

Posted 08 April 2021 - 08:46 PM

What were the dosages trialed at the Stanford study?
  • Agree x 1

#15 AlbertN

  • Guest
  • 37 posts
  • 6

Posted 08 April 2021 - 10:54 PM

What were the dosages trialed at the Stanford study?

 

Not that large.  It looks like a total 2.7 grams per day in 3 divided doses (for 24 weeks).  See section 2.4 in the paper below.

 

https://herzenbergla...ions/lah563.pdf



#16 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,592 posts
  • 673

Posted 08 April 2021 - 11:31 PM

Not that large.  It looks like a total 2.7 grams per day in 3 divided doses (for 24 weeks).  See section 2.4 in the paper below.

 

https://herzenbergla...ions/lah563.pdf

 

2.7 grams (3 x 900mg) isn't terribly outside the 1.8~2 gram (3 x 600mg) window that I mentioned earlier but still a far cry from the 8 grams suggested originally.  Based on this study, I don't see any guaranteed redemption from the mouse pulmonary hypertension study to justify risking any dose in excess of the 2.7g tested and certainly not doses in the neighborhood of 8 grams.

 

But if anybody is feeling adventurous, it would be an interesting data point for the community and I would look forward to hearing the result.



#17 Synbion

  • Guest
  • 3 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Houston, TX
  • NO

Posted 09 April 2021 - 01:15 AM

Yeah, Stanford study used lower doses. By body weight I would need to take almost 10 g per day if replicating the Baylor study. Though interesting to note they are currently recruiting for two more clinical trials. I've emailed the PI to see if he would provide any clarification regarding how that dose was determined, or if lower doses could be effective. I mean, Baylor is a good medical school and the trial had to be approved, so I'm sure there is a good reason. Right?

 

Personally, if I try this, it will be at the lower doses (~3 g/d), but it should be noted that NAC is provided at > 10 g doses by IV when used for treating acetaminophen overdoses. Of course that is for a short-term treatment and not over 24 weeks....Anyway, if anyone is trying this out would love to hear about the experience.



#18 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,592 posts
  • 673

Posted 09 April 2021 - 01:27 AM

Good point on the NAC IV treatment for acetaminophen overdoses.  Is that a single one time IV drip?



#19 Synbion

  • Guest
  • 3 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Houston, TX
  • NO

Posted 09 April 2021 - 12:24 PM

Good point on the NAC IV treatment for acetaminophen overdoses.  Is that a single one time IV drip?

 

Found this:

 

Solution for IV Injection: For the loading dose, dilute 150 mg/kg (maximum 15 g) in 5% dextrose in water (D5W) 200 mL and infuse over 60 minutes. For the second dose, dilute 50 mg/kg (maximum 5 g) in D5W 500 mL and infuse over 4 hours. For the third dose, dilute 100 mg/kg (maximum 10 g) in D5W 1,000 mL and infuse over 16 hours. To avoid fluid overload in patients weighing <40 kg and in those requiring fluid restriction, decrease the volume of D5W proportionally and discard the unused portion.

 

So someone could be getting 30 g over the course of treatment, which is about one day. But this is IV and NAC has low oral bioavailability (4 - 9%). Hopefully I'll get some clarification from the PI on dose, but my experience is there is about a 50% chance of hearing back. His office is about a 10 min walk from mine though...


  • Informative x 1

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for SUPPLEMENTS (in thread) to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#20 Michael Lustgarten

  • Guest
  • 55 posts
  • 30
  • Location:Boston
  • NO

Posted Yesterday, 02:24 PM

Video based on the published glycine+NAC data:


  • Informative x 2
  • like x 1





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: nac, glycine, ghs

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users