Biochemical Pharmacology
Volume 84, Issue 11, 1 December 2012, Pages 1522-1533
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006295212006417
Volume 84, Issue 11, 1 December 2012, Pages 1522-1533
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006295212006417
NACET is 10X more potent than NAC yet the dose is 1/10th that of NAC. So it seems like a wash to me except NACET is much more expensive.
I wish they studied NACET more because it has the potential to be far superior to NAC. Just wish the supplement manufacturers didn’t insist on including Molybdenum with it.
Yes it is, that is why I take/have been taken what I call “GlyNACET” the published paper protocol/dosing using NACET{600mg to 800mg per day] instead of NAC.
I would think the required prerequisite assumption is that NAC is good for you?