Based on another thread discussing arginine and citrulline, I thought it would be best to have a topic to discuss amino acids that are both good and bad for longevity. For instance, I take:
I remember reading an article about how they were trying to use glycine as a treatment for mental health issues, at very high doses (like 40grams to 60grams a day). That caused gastro issues at that dosing level, but it turned out another glycine-like compound is called n-methyl-glycine (sarcosine) that gets turned into glycine in the body. In studies they only had to use a small amount of n-methyl glycine (e.g. 1gram to 2 grams) vs. 40 grams to 60 grams glycine, for the same effect.
So - I’m wondering if sarcosine may be a more effective way to get higher dosing levels of glycine (and thus more potential benefit).
Check out Tyrosine. I started taking 1 gram a day since 2 weeks ago. Have made a big difference on my mood and overall good feeling. Not sure if this has been tested for longevity, but it is worth a try just to feel awesome every day.
Nice paper. Thanks. I want to understand why the body doesn’t make enough of these non-essential AA that seem to have a beneficial effect when supplemented.
As an example, creatine is: methionine-glycine-arginine (doesn’t get broken down in digestion). Our bodies also make a lot but also dispose of a lot. Whether an individual would benefit from supplemental creatine is based on whether they (1) already eat a lot in red meat or fish and (2) have a low rate of disposal of creatine. If you eat a lot of meat / fish and don’t seem to benefit from supplemental creatine, you might not be able to get a benefit. “Responders vs non-responders”
The amino acids I am seriously considering adding are Arginine, Citrulline and Carnosine. Unfortunately I don’t have enough information at this time to make a final decision on these.
Dr. Brad Stanfield recommends 10 g of collagen daily. My skin has gotten noticeably thicker and stronger, probably due to this.
The GLYNAC study recommends about 7 g of glycine and cysteine. I have found no downside to glycine, so I take an additional 8-10 g of glycine daily (1 tbsp in the morning and 1 tbsp at night)
NAC (Cysteine) has a potential lung cancer risk (it protects lung cells which is great before cancer but not so great if you have it), so I take a bit lower at 2.6 g daily. It has helped with my mood and lung health. It also helps prevent colon polyps.
GLYNAC is necessary for glutathione (GSH) production which decreases as we age. My father takes a similar regimen, and his GSH levels are quite high although not quite ideal yet. He has a GSH level of about 950 uM where 1100 uM is ideal. Most Americans are around 450 uM and this declines with age (the normal range is 373-838 uM). So he is way above the average 77-year-old. High GSH is a hallmark of long-lived individuals.
I haven’t measured my glutathione yet, but I probably should at my next hospital body checkup (re-scheduled for next summer so I can test bempedoic acid).
It’s smart to think about a downside of too many simultaneous chemicals. Otherwise the thinking is only $0.30 per day vs external youth….who could resist?
V interested in Sarcosine - it is involved in autophagy and may be one of the reasons glycine is +ve for longevity.
‘Finally, we show that sarcosine can activate autophagy in cultured cells and enhances autophagic flux in vivo, suggesting a potential role in autophagy induction by DR. Thus, these data identify circulating sarcosine as a biomarker of aging and DR in mammalians and may contribute to age-related alterations in the metabolome and in proteostasis.’