Yes, you can obtain Glycine from serine, but serine has the link to cancer. So Glycine is superior to serine IMHO.
After reading all of these articles, I had decided to continue with 3 g of Glycine a day and 1 g of NAC (down from 3g)
I believe the translated dose equivalent for the mouse lung cancer study was 8g daily of NAC. This is not exceedingly high.
look at this in relation with the sleep!
Can physical activity eliminate the mortality risk associated with poor sleep?
YES!
My gift to youā¦ at last, good news for poor sleepers!
I would be interested in the details of studies that showed no effects or were positive for NAC use. Taking NAC seems risky due to the anti oxidant effects
Although small studies suggest that NAC may inhibit cancer biomarker development (15) (16), a large trial found it did not inhibit formation of secondary head and neck or lung tumors (17). Other preliminary findings suggest NAC may help reduce cancer treatment-related side effects such as liver toxicity (4), neuropathy (18) (57), mucositis (43) (50), or poor hematopoietic function (58), but it did not reduce oxidative stress (42) or cisplatin toxicities (51). It is also unclear whether NAC, as an antioxidant, may alter cancer treatment effectiveness.
It seems that glucosamine is also considered a calorie restriction mimetic.
Full study is downloadable on the site.
Increase in lifespan of mice was around 10%.
Additionally, a dose-dependent lifespan
curve was observed, which is supported by previous epidemiological
data showing lower mortality with higher doses of glucosamine [22]. Of
further note is a large-scale prospective cohort study involving 490,000
subjects in 2020 reporting that glucosamine intake reduced the risk of
cancer, heart disease, respiratory disease, digestive disease, and mortality
[26]. This reduction in mortality (HR: 0.85, 95%CI: 0.82ļ½0.89)
may be due to a physiological effect that is quite different from the effect
on the knee joint. There are reports of a possible explanation of mechanism for this mortality reduction. In a clinical trial, oral administration
of glucosamine modulates the intracellular redox state, thereby
improving vascular endothelial function [27]. In addition, although this
data has been reported in a preclinical study, the regulatory effect of
glucosamine on carbohydrate metabolism and autophagy could play a
role in its potential anti-aging effects, thus lowering mortality risk [28].
Therefore, based on the evidence that we could obtain, among the
various CRMs and geroprotectors, glucosamine is one of the most likely
to increase the healthy human lifespan.
Glucosamine, chondroitn, hyaluronic acid, and MSM are all lectin binding molecules. I found this out a while back when I was reading Gundry. All you have to do is type any of them into google scholar with the words " lectin binding" and you will get a huge list of studies. I started taking a pill with them all with every meal, since to me it seems you have to bind to the lectins when they are in your gut right?
The other thing is that Malcolm Kendrick in his book comes to the conclusion that the glycocalax is made of these things and taking them will help protect arteries.
Itās good to see that they are getting the right answers even though we donāt know the exact mechanism.
Quoting the study: āGlyNAC was provided as capsules of glycine (1.31 mmol/kg/d) and cysteine (0.83 mmol/kg/d, provided as N-acetylcysteine, NAC), prepared by a licensed compounding pharmacist, and replenished every 4 weeks for the 12-week duration of supplementation.ā
Molecular masses of glycine, NAC and cysteine are 75,07 g/mol, 163,19 g/mol and 121,16 g/mol respectively. These figures produce doses for glycine and NAC of 98 mg/kg/day and 132 mg/kg/day respectively.
But in the study they mention dose of cysteine, not NAC. Therefore and on my basis of molecular mass of cysteine being 74,2% of NAC, dose of NAC to get 0.83 mmol/kg/day of cysteine reaches 178 mg/kg/day.
For a 87kg. guy like me GlyNAC dosing turns into 8.7 g/day of glycine and 11,4 g/day of NAC.
No commercially available glycine or NAC pills fit this dosing plan without the image of a daily impressive ammount of them on my table for being equitably distributed in the main 3 foods.
So I am buying both glycine and NAC bulk - in EU - and encapsulating size ā1ā capsules.
Hope this helps those of you interested and please correct me if you think I am wrong about the cysteine/NAC assumption or the calculations.
But donāt you think taking both simultaneously they combine into other compound or act differently to taking any of them separately, to enhance gluthatione production in our organism?. In other words, when taking both together they do not act independently, because if so IMHO no increase of gluthatione production in our organism - the aim of your afore mentioned study - would be reached at any point. OTOH I canāt find any study showing glycine or NAC alone notably increasing gluthatione production.
I buy glycine in bulk but I donāt encapsulate it. It is sweet and tastes better than most other sugar substitutes. I use it on cereal etc. to supplement my encapsulated form. It is not too much for me to put 4-6 grams on my cereal.
Yes, I do want more glutathione with a big *BUT. NAC is a fantastic supplement. It stops lung damage and protects lung cells. BUT, if you have lung cancer it will ALSO protect the cancer cells. This is the downside to all anti-oxidants because your body uses ROS to kill troublesome cells that include cancer. Anti-oxidants stop ROS and therefore prevent your body from cleaning up these troublesome cells. They offer too much protection sometimes!
why not taking NAC ethyl ester (NACET) instead, it claims to be 20x more bioavailability than NAC. You dont need to take so much NAC per day anymore. NACET is available on Amazon as health supplement.
I am not sure the scientific community knows everything about the effects on antioxidants, I suspect different antioxidants works in different ways. The latest study coming out of the ITP (not official yet) shows a 10% lifespan increase in mice using astaxanthin. I suspect that this is because mice get cancer sooner or later, astaxanthin blunts that to some effect making mice live longer.
Just thinking out loud.
No, I understand your point. Iām a little bit confused by the astaxanthin results too. I do take astaxanthin as well as vitamin C. Both are antioxidants. I have been concerned about the studies done on NAC and lung cancer. One said it prevented it, one was neutral, and one said it increased your odds of getting lung cancer to 10%. That last one made me worried. Before that, I was taking 3.2g of NAC daily. Now I take just 1g in the morning.
After seeing the Brian Johnson protocol, I noticed he takes 1.8 g of NAC in the morning and evening for 3.6 g daily. Based on his stack, I will be upping my daily NAC to 1.6 g of NAC in the morning.
Treatment for cancer, such as radiation therapy is actually an oxidant. If you take antioxidants during cancer treatment, you re negating the radiation treatmentā¦
This actual study with humans says; meh.
May help some if you are old like me, but even then meh.
One more iffy supplement I wonāt be taking.
"supplementation was safe and well tolerated by the subjects, but did not increase levels of GSH-F: GSSG "
I take glycine with the hope that it will improve the quality of my sleep. Creatine for lean muscle mass.