GSH and my experience

dramamama

New member
Amy-
I agree weird my pulmo won't use mucomyst...I used it all the time as a kid
and it was very helpful.

I use both NAC and Gluathione. I use the GSH-Curc caps that include gsh, nac, selenium, and curcumin....I also use the regular gsh caps. I end up at about 3500 mg of glutathione a day and very little amount of NAC. I occasionally take a NAC pill, but I took NAC at high doses before taking glutathione, and for me, glutathione is just better. I believe that a cysteine donor like NAC is very important... But, if I could only have one, no question it would be glutathione.....there is no denying the export problem.

On the utah valley site, one family decided to stop the glutathione and just do high dose NAC, following the protocol of the STANFORD study. After one month, they switched back to glutathione/ NAC combo because their daughter's weight dropped as well as here appetite...her stools revealed mal-absorption on high dose NAC. It is up to you guys, of course, do what you want to do. If you feel NAC is more studied do that....you will have some positive effects no doubt. But, there is no denying that oral and inhaled glutathione will get you even better results as you are going straight to the heart of the cf dysfunction.


New insights into the pathogenesis of cystic fibrosis: pivotal role of glutathione system dysfunction and implications for therapy.

Hudson VM.
Brigham Young University, 760 SWKT, Provo, UT 84602, USA. valerie_hudson@byu.edu
The cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator (CFTR) should no longer be viewed primarily as a 'chloride channel' but recognized as a channel that also controls the efflux of other physiologically important anions, such as glutathione (GSH) and bicarbonate. More effective approaches to cystic fibrosis treatment may result from this reconceptualization of the CFTR by researchers and clinicians. For example, oxidant damage in cystic fibrosis has been assumed to be a significant part of the pathophysiology of the disease. Generally speaking, antioxidant status in cystic fibrosis is compromised. However, until recently this was seen as secondary to the excessive chemoattraction of neutrophils in this disease caused by mutation of the CFTR protein, leading to a high oxidant burden. New findings suggest that the cystic fibrosis mutations in fact cause a primary dysfunction in the system of one of the body's most important antioxidant and immune-signaling substances: the reduced GSH system. Cystic fibrosis mutations significantly decrease GSH efflux from cells without redundant channels to the CFTR; this leads to deficiency of GSH in the epithelial lining fluid of the lung, as well as in other compartments, including immune system cells and the gastrointestinal tract. This deficiency is exaggerated over time as the higher-than-normal oxidant burden of cystic fibrosis leads to successively larger decrements in GSH without the normal opportunity to fully recover physiologic levels. This GSH system dysfunction may be the trigger for initial depletion of other antioxidants and may also play a role in initiating the over-inflammation characteristic of cystic fibrosis. Proper GSH system functioning also affects immune system competence and mucus viscosity, both of relevance to cystic fibrosis pathophysiology. <b>In a way, cystic fibrosis may be thought of as the first identified disease with GSH system dysfunction</b>.This overview provides a review of the most pertinent recent research findings in this area. Exogenous augmentation of GSH in the lung epithelial lining fluid is possible, and therapeutic approaches include administration of aerosolized buffered GSH, intravenous GSH, and oral GSH. However, it is important to remember that the pathophysiology of cystic fibrosis is multifactorial, and rectification of GSH system dysfunction in patients with cystic fibrosis will not eliminate all harmful effects of the disease. The promising results of two clinical trials of aerosolized buffered GSH in cystic fibrosis patients have been published or accepted for publication at the time of this writing. GSH depletion in lung epithelial lining fluid has also been noted in other respiratory diseases such as COPD, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, and adult respiratory distress syndrome, and therapies to augment GSH may also be contemplated in these diseases.
PMID: 15658882 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
 

dramamama

New member
Amy-
I agree weird my pulmo won't use mucomyst...I used it all the time as a kid
and it was very helpful.

I use both NAC and Gluathione. I use the GSH-Curc caps that include gsh, nac, selenium, and curcumin....I also use the regular gsh caps. I end up at about 3500 mg of glutathione a day and very little amount of NAC. I occasionally take a NAC pill, but I took NAC at high doses before taking glutathione, and for me, glutathione is just better. I believe that a cysteine donor like NAC is very important... But, if I could only have one, no question it would be glutathione.....there is no denying the export problem.

On the utah valley site, one family decided to stop the glutathione and just do high dose NAC, following the protocol of the STANFORD study. After one month, they switched back to glutathione/ NAC combo because their daughter's weight dropped as well as here appetite...her stools revealed mal-absorption on high dose NAC. It is up to you guys, of course, do what you want to do. If you feel NAC is more studied do that....you will have some positive effects no doubt. But, there is no denying that oral and inhaled glutathione will get you even better results as you are going straight to the heart of the cf dysfunction.


New insights into the pathogenesis of cystic fibrosis: pivotal role of glutathione system dysfunction and implications for therapy.

Hudson VM.
Brigham Young University, 760 SWKT, Provo, UT 84602, USA. valerie_hudson@byu.edu
The cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator (CFTR) should no longer be viewed primarily as a 'chloride channel' but recognized as a channel that also controls the efflux of other physiologically important anions, such as glutathione (GSH) and bicarbonate. More effective approaches to cystic fibrosis treatment may result from this reconceptualization of the CFTR by researchers and clinicians. For example, oxidant damage in cystic fibrosis has been assumed to be a significant part of the pathophysiology of the disease. Generally speaking, antioxidant status in cystic fibrosis is compromised. However, until recently this was seen as secondary to the excessive chemoattraction of neutrophils in this disease caused by mutation of the CFTR protein, leading to a high oxidant burden. New findings suggest that the cystic fibrosis mutations in fact cause a primary dysfunction in the system of one of the body's most important antioxidant and immune-signaling substances: the reduced GSH system. Cystic fibrosis mutations significantly decrease GSH efflux from cells without redundant channels to the CFTR; this leads to deficiency of GSH in the epithelial lining fluid of the lung, as well as in other compartments, including immune system cells and the gastrointestinal tract. This deficiency is exaggerated over time as the higher-than-normal oxidant burden of cystic fibrosis leads to successively larger decrements in GSH without the normal opportunity to fully recover physiologic levels. This GSH system dysfunction may be the trigger for initial depletion of other antioxidants and may also play a role in initiating the over-inflammation characteristic of cystic fibrosis. Proper GSH system functioning also affects immune system competence and mucus viscosity, both of relevance to cystic fibrosis pathophysiology. <b>In a way, cystic fibrosis may be thought of as the first identified disease with GSH system dysfunction</b>.This overview provides a review of the most pertinent recent research findings in this area. Exogenous augmentation of GSH in the lung epithelial lining fluid is possible, and therapeutic approaches include administration of aerosolized buffered GSH, intravenous GSH, and oral GSH. However, it is important to remember that the pathophysiology of cystic fibrosis is multifactorial, and rectification of GSH system dysfunction in patients with cystic fibrosis will not eliminate all harmful effects of the disease. The promising results of two clinical trials of aerosolized buffered GSH in cystic fibrosis patients have been published or accepted for publication at the time of this writing. GSH depletion in lung epithelial lining fluid has also been noted in other respiratory diseases such as COPD, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, and adult respiratory distress syndrome, and therapies to augment GSH may also be contemplated in these diseases.
PMID: 15658882 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
 

dramamama

New member
Amy-
I agree weird my pulmo won't use mucomyst...I used it all the time as a kid
and it was very helpful.

I use both NAC and Gluathione. I use the GSH-Curc caps that include gsh, nac, selenium, and curcumin....I also use the regular gsh caps. I end up at about 3500 mg of glutathione a day and very little amount of NAC. I occasionally take a NAC pill, but I took NAC at high doses before taking glutathione, and for me, glutathione is just better. I believe that a cysteine donor like NAC is very important... But, if I could only have one, no question it would be glutathione.....there is no denying the export problem.

On the utah valley site, one family decided to stop the glutathione and just do high dose NAC, following the protocol of the STANFORD study. After one month, they switched back to glutathione/ NAC combo because their daughter's weight dropped as well as here appetite...her stools revealed mal-absorption on high dose NAC. It is up to you guys, of course, do what you want to do. If you feel NAC is more studied do that....you will have some positive effects no doubt. But, there is no denying that oral and inhaled glutathione will get you even better results as you are going straight to the heart of the cf dysfunction.


New insights into the pathogenesis of cystic fibrosis: pivotal role of glutathione system dysfunction and implications for therapy.

Hudson VM.
Brigham Young University, 760 SWKT, Provo, UT 84602, USA. valerie_hudson@byu.edu
The cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator (CFTR) should no longer be viewed primarily as a 'chloride channel' but recognized as a channel that also controls the efflux of other physiologically important anions, such as glutathione (GSH) and bicarbonate. More effective approaches to cystic fibrosis treatment may result from this reconceptualization of the CFTR by researchers and clinicians. For example, oxidant damage in cystic fibrosis has been assumed to be a significant part of the pathophysiology of the disease. Generally speaking, antioxidant status in cystic fibrosis is compromised. However, until recently this was seen as secondary to the excessive chemoattraction of neutrophils in this disease caused by mutation of the CFTR protein, leading to a high oxidant burden. New findings suggest that the cystic fibrosis mutations in fact cause a primary dysfunction in the system of one of the body's most important antioxidant and immune-signaling substances: the reduced GSH system. Cystic fibrosis mutations significantly decrease GSH efflux from cells without redundant channels to the CFTR; this leads to deficiency of GSH in the epithelial lining fluid of the lung, as well as in other compartments, including immune system cells and the gastrointestinal tract. This deficiency is exaggerated over time as the higher-than-normal oxidant burden of cystic fibrosis leads to successively larger decrements in GSH without the normal opportunity to fully recover physiologic levels. This GSH system dysfunction may be the trigger for initial depletion of other antioxidants and may also play a role in initiating the over-inflammation characteristic of cystic fibrosis. Proper GSH system functioning also affects immune system competence and mucus viscosity, both of relevance to cystic fibrosis pathophysiology. <b>In a way, cystic fibrosis may be thought of as the first identified disease with GSH system dysfunction</b>.This overview provides a review of the most pertinent recent research findings in this area. Exogenous augmentation of GSH in the lung epithelial lining fluid is possible, and therapeutic approaches include administration of aerosolized buffered GSH, intravenous GSH, and oral GSH. However, it is important to remember that the pathophysiology of cystic fibrosis is multifactorial, and rectification of GSH system dysfunction in patients with cystic fibrosis will not eliminate all harmful effects of the disease. The promising results of two clinical trials of aerosolized buffered GSH in cystic fibrosis patients have been published or accepted for publication at the time of this writing. GSH depletion in lung epithelial lining fluid has also been noted in other respiratory diseases such as COPD, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, and adult respiratory distress syndrome, and therapies to augment GSH may also be contemplated in these diseases.
PMID: 15658882 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
 

AnD

New member
Thanks again (Amy, I did read your blog- thanks <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0"> ). I think I will ask my clinic about the GSH (inhaled and oral) at my 3 month (which is also my yearly), and see how it goes, and then talk to my GI (liver) doctor about the NAC when I go back in about 3 months from now (they are 2 seperate practices)...
 

AnD

New member
Thanks again (Amy, I did read your blog- thanks <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0"> ). I think I will ask my clinic about the GSH (inhaled and oral) at my 3 month (which is also my yearly), and see how it goes, and then talk to my GI (liver) doctor about the NAC when I go back in about 3 months from now (they are 2 seperate practices)...
 

AnD

New member
Thanks again (Amy, I did read your blog- thanks <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0"> ). I think I will ask my clinic about the GSH (inhaled and oral) at my 3 month (which is also my yearly), and see how it goes, and then talk to my GI (liver) doctor about the NAC when I go back in about 3 months from now (they are 2 seperate practices)...
 

NoExcuses

New member
For everyone interested in GSH and NAC, be ware that the <b> FDA AND THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DOES NOT REGULATE THESE SUBSTANCES </b>

There is no guarentee that you are getting the mg or % of the NAC or GSH that the bottle says. I know I've said this before but I want to inform those who may not have read this.

So a bottle may say that each pill contains 600mg of NAC, but one pill may contain 100mg and one next to it in the same bottle may contain 1200 mg.

On the other side, Canada and most of Europe do regulate supplements such as NAC and GSH. These supplements are just as reliable for contents and weight as a med such as, say Zithromax or Pulmozyme.

So beware. And if you get a chance, import NAC or GSH from Canada or Europe if you have a connection. That way you know exactly what you're getting......
 

NoExcuses

New member
For everyone interested in GSH and NAC, be ware that the <b> FDA AND THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DOES NOT REGULATE THESE SUBSTANCES </b>

There is no guarentee that you are getting the mg or % of the NAC or GSH that the bottle says. I know I've said this before but I want to inform those who may not have read this.

So a bottle may say that each pill contains 600mg of NAC, but one pill may contain 100mg and one next to it in the same bottle may contain 1200 mg.

On the other side, Canada and most of Europe do regulate supplements such as NAC and GSH. These supplements are just as reliable for contents and weight as a med such as, say Zithromax or Pulmozyme.

So beware. And if you get a chance, import NAC or GSH from Canada or Europe if you have a connection. That way you know exactly what you're getting......
 

NoExcuses

New member
For everyone interested in GSH and NAC, be ware that the <b> FDA AND THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DOES NOT REGULATE THESE SUBSTANCES </b>

There is no guarentee that you are getting the mg or % of the NAC or GSH that the bottle says. I know I've said this before but I want to inform those who may not have read this.

So a bottle may say that each pill contains 600mg of NAC, but one pill may contain 100mg and one next to it in the same bottle may contain 1200 mg.

On the other side, Canada and most of Europe do regulate supplements such as NAC and GSH. These supplements are just as reliable for contents and weight as a med such as, say Zithromax or Pulmozyme.

So beware. And if you get a chance, import NAC or GSH from Canada or Europe if you have a connection. That way you know exactly what you're getting......
 

dramamama

New member
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>sakasuka</b></i>

For everyone interested in GSH and NAC, be ware that the <b> FDA AND THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DOES NOT REGULATE THESE SUBSTANCES </b>



There is no guarentee that you are getting the mg or % of the NAC or GSH that the bottle says. I know I've said this before but I want to inform those who may not have read this.



So a bottle may say that each pill contains 600mg of NAC, but one pill may contain 100mg and one next to it in the same bottle may contain 1200 mg.



On the other side, Canada and most of Europe do regulate supplements such as NAC and GSH. These supplements are just as reliable for contents and weight as a med such as, say Zithromax or Pulmozyme.



So beware. And if you get a chance, import NAC or GSH from Canada or Europe if you have a connection. That way you know exactly what you're getting......</end quote></div>

I agree with you Amy... Thank you for pointing this out.

I cannot speak for the companies other than Theranaturals Brand. I feel very comfortable with taking this supplement because Valerie Hudson has done so much research concerning this product. After all, she is the one who really reignited the antioxidant/cf connection and she has three boys inhaling the Theranaturals product.

I emailed her and asked her about the lack of FDA regulation and this is her response.

<b>I monitor very carefully where Theranaturals gets their GSH. The three largest manufacturers of GSH in the world are in Japan. Not only are the companies regulated by the Japanese equivalent of the FDA, but I myself contacted the particular Japanese company used by Theranaturals, and went over their manufacturing process. They make several grades of GSH, and Theranaturals uses their pharmaceutical grade GSH, which tests at 98.6% purity. Theranaturals also tested the this company's pharmaceutical grade GSH itself, sending it off to an independent testing laboratory to search for any contaminants, traces of fungi, etc. Nothing was found--the GSH is clean. I have seen all the paperwork with my own eyes. So I think you are perfectly safe using Theranaturals' GSH.

</b>

I do not have connections in other countries, unfortunately. Having said that, there are many people in other countries who have the theranaturals brand sent to them because it has repeatedly tested endo-toxin free by multiple testing facilities.
 

dramamama

New member
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>sakasuka</b></i>

For everyone interested in GSH and NAC, be ware that the <b> FDA AND THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DOES NOT REGULATE THESE SUBSTANCES </b>



There is no guarentee that you are getting the mg or % of the NAC or GSH that the bottle says. I know I've said this before but I want to inform those who may not have read this.



So a bottle may say that each pill contains 600mg of NAC, but one pill may contain 100mg and one next to it in the same bottle may contain 1200 mg.



On the other side, Canada and most of Europe do regulate supplements such as NAC and GSH. These supplements are just as reliable for contents and weight as a med such as, say Zithromax or Pulmozyme.



So beware. And if you get a chance, import NAC or GSH from Canada or Europe if you have a connection. That way you know exactly what you're getting......</end quote></div>

I agree with you Amy... Thank you for pointing this out.

I cannot speak for the companies other than Theranaturals Brand. I feel very comfortable with taking this supplement because Valerie Hudson has done so much research concerning this product. After all, she is the one who really reignited the antioxidant/cf connection and she has three boys inhaling the Theranaturals product.

I emailed her and asked her about the lack of FDA regulation and this is her response.

<b>I monitor very carefully where Theranaturals gets their GSH. The three largest manufacturers of GSH in the world are in Japan. Not only are the companies regulated by the Japanese equivalent of the FDA, but I myself contacted the particular Japanese company used by Theranaturals, and went over their manufacturing process. They make several grades of GSH, and Theranaturals uses their pharmaceutical grade GSH, which tests at 98.6% purity. Theranaturals also tested the this company's pharmaceutical grade GSH itself, sending it off to an independent testing laboratory to search for any contaminants, traces of fungi, etc. Nothing was found--the GSH is clean. I have seen all the paperwork with my own eyes. So I think you are perfectly safe using Theranaturals' GSH.

</b>

I do not have connections in other countries, unfortunately. Having said that, there are many people in other countries who have the theranaturals brand sent to them because it has repeatedly tested endo-toxin free by multiple testing facilities.
 

dramamama

New member
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>sakasuka</b></i>

For everyone interested in GSH and NAC, be ware that the <b> FDA AND THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DOES NOT REGULATE THESE SUBSTANCES </b>



There is no guarentee that you are getting the mg or % of the NAC or GSH that the bottle says. I know I've said this before but I want to inform those who may not have read this.



So a bottle may say that each pill contains 600mg of NAC, but one pill may contain 100mg and one next to it in the same bottle may contain 1200 mg.



On the other side, Canada and most of Europe do regulate supplements such as NAC and GSH. These supplements are just as reliable for contents and weight as a med such as, say Zithromax or Pulmozyme.



So beware. And if you get a chance, import NAC or GSH from Canada or Europe if you have a connection. That way you know exactly what you're getting......</end quote></div>

I agree with you Amy... Thank you for pointing this out.

I cannot speak for the companies other than Theranaturals Brand. I feel very comfortable with taking this supplement because Valerie Hudson has done so much research concerning this product. After all, she is the one who really reignited the antioxidant/cf connection and she has three boys inhaling the Theranaturals product.

I emailed her and asked her about the lack of FDA regulation and this is her response.

<b>I monitor very carefully where Theranaturals gets their GSH. The three largest manufacturers of GSH in the world are in Japan. Not only are the companies regulated by the Japanese equivalent of the FDA, but I myself contacted the particular Japanese company used by Theranaturals, and went over their manufacturing process. They make several grades of GSH, and Theranaturals uses their pharmaceutical grade GSH, which tests at 98.6% purity. Theranaturals also tested the this company's pharmaceutical grade GSH itself, sending it off to an independent testing laboratory to search for any contaminants, traces of fungi, etc. Nothing was found--the GSH is clean. I have seen all the paperwork with my own eyes. So I think you are perfectly safe using Theranaturals' GSH.

</b>

I do not have connections in other countries, unfortunately. Having said that, there are many people in other countries who have the theranaturals brand sent to them because it has repeatedly tested endo-toxin free by multiple testing facilities.
 

Diane

New member
I've never tried the Theranaturals brand. I have been taking the Jarrow brand from IHERB.COM , and have had great success with it. <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">
 

Diane

New member
I've never tried the Theranaturals brand. I have been taking the Jarrow brand from IHERB.COM , and have had great success with it. <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">
 

Diane

New member
I've never tried the Theranaturals brand. I have been taking the Jarrow brand from IHERB.COM , and have had great success with it. <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">
 
Top