GSH/NAC

J

jfarel

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

Just playing devil's advocate; here is some info that disputes the benefits of NAC...



<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/tbindex.cfm?tbid=964&thePhoto=Today's">http://www.medpagetoday.com/tb...d=964&thePhoto=Today's</a></end quote></div>

COPD is a differnt animal entirely. Also, I believe the cf study was more recent. Just completed at Stanford.
 
J

jfarel

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

Just playing devil's advocate; here is some info that disputes the benefits of NAC...



<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/tbindex.cfm?tbid=964&thePhoto=Today's">http://www.medpagetoday.com/tb...d=964&thePhoto=Today's</a></end quote></div>

COPD is a differnt animal entirely. Also, I believe the cf study was more recent. Just completed at Stanford.
 
J

jfarel

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

Just playing devil's advocate; here is some info that disputes the benefits of NAC...



<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/tbindex.cfm?tbid=964&thePhoto=Today's">http://www.medpagetoday.com/tb...d=964&thePhoto=Today's</a></end quote></div>

COPD is a differnt animal entirely. Also, I believe the cf study was more recent. Just completed at Stanford.
 
J

JRPandTJP

New member
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://healthlibrary.epnet.com/GetContent.aspx?token=dce59228-1023-4705-b1c7-b407be7b4fc6&chunkiid=21807
">http://healthlibrary.epnet.com...7b4fc6&chunkiid=21807
</a>
"Safety Issues:
NAC appears to be a very safe supplement when taken alone, although one study in rats suggests that 60 to 100 times the normal dose can cause liver injury.45

As mentioned above, the combination of nitroglycerin and NAC can cause severe headaches. Safety in young children, women who are pregnant or nursing, and individuals with severe liver or kidney disease has not been established."

Again, this warning is at a high dose, so since we were unable to find a recommened, tested level of NAC used in CF children we opted to wait or not use it. We found the GSH research to be more conclusive at the time.
 
J

JRPandTJP

New member
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://healthlibrary.epnet.com/GetContent.aspx?token=dce59228-1023-4705-b1c7-b407be7b4fc6&chunkiid=21807
">http://healthlibrary.epnet.com...7b4fc6&chunkiid=21807
</a>
"Safety Issues:
NAC appears to be a very safe supplement when taken alone, although one study in rats suggests that 60 to 100 times the normal dose can cause liver injury.45

As mentioned above, the combination of nitroglycerin and NAC can cause severe headaches. Safety in young children, women who are pregnant or nursing, and individuals with severe liver or kidney disease has not been established."

Again, this warning is at a high dose, so since we were unable to find a recommened, tested level of NAC used in CF children we opted to wait or not use it. We found the GSH research to be more conclusive at the time.
 
J

JRPandTJP

New member
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://healthlibrary.epnet.com/GetContent.aspx?token=dce59228-1023-4705-b1c7-b407be7b4fc6&chunkiid=21807
">http://healthlibrary.epnet.com...7b4fc6&chunkiid=21807
</a>
"Safety Issues:
NAC appears to be a very safe supplement when taken alone, although one study in rats suggests that 60 to 100 times the normal dose can cause liver injury.45

As mentioned above, the combination of nitroglycerin and NAC can cause severe headaches. Safety in young children, women who are pregnant or nursing, and individuals with severe liver or kidney disease has not been established."

Again, this warning is at a high dose, so since we were unable to find a recommened, tested level of NAC used in CF children we opted to wait or not use it. We found the GSH research to be more conclusive at the time.
 
J

JRPandTJP

New member
If you really want to get heady about the whole cellular GSH issue as it relates to CF pathology there is a new theory about it here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://healthlibrary.epnet.com/GetContent.aspx?token=dce59228-1023-4705-b1c7-b407be7b4fc6&chunkiid=21807)
">http://healthlibrary.epnet.com...chunkiid=21807)
</a>

One thing it discusses is having too much intracellular GSH. The theory is complicated to me (my hubby understands it better as he studied microbiology/genetics in college and some how can stay awake while reading medical papers) but it discusses intracellular GSH and cell death (apoptosis). So the GSH piece of CF pathology is complicated and not cut and dry. This is why was bummed when the GSH studies seemingly disappeared off the CFF trials page. Don't know if it was dropped. I hope the current NAC ones go to final stage as it deals with the same piece the way I see it.

We are happy using it but still keep our eyes and ears open as research continues on many supplements.
 
J

JRPandTJP

New member
If you really want to get heady about the whole cellular GSH issue as it relates to CF pathology there is a new theory about it here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://healthlibrary.epnet.com/GetContent.aspx?token=dce59228-1023-4705-b1c7-b407be7b4fc6&chunkiid=21807)
">http://healthlibrary.epnet.com...chunkiid=21807)
</a>

One thing it discusses is having too much intracellular GSH. The theory is complicated to me (my hubby understands it better as he studied microbiology/genetics in college and some how can stay awake while reading medical papers) but it discusses intracellular GSH and cell death (apoptosis). So the GSH piece of CF pathology is complicated and not cut and dry. This is why was bummed when the GSH studies seemingly disappeared off the CFF trials page. Don't know if it was dropped. I hope the current NAC ones go to final stage as it deals with the same piece the way I see it.

We are happy using it but still keep our eyes and ears open as research continues on many supplements.
 
J

JRPandTJP

New member
If you really want to get heady about the whole cellular GSH issue as it relates to CF pathology there is a new theory about it here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://healthlibrary.epnet.com/GetContent.aspx?token=dce59228-1023-4705-b1c7-b407be7b4fc6&chunkiid=21807)
">http://healthlibrary.epnet.com...chunkiid=21807)
</a>

One thing it discusses is having too much intracellular GSH. The theory is complicated to me (my hubby understands it better as he studied microbiology/genetics in college and some how can stay awake while reading medical papers) but it discusses intracellular GSH and cell death (apoptosis). So the GSH piece of CF pathology is complicated and not cut and dry. This is why was bummed when the GSH studies seemingly disappeared off the CFF trials page. Don't know if it was dropped. I hope the current NAC ones go to final stage as it deals with the same piece the way I see it.

We are happy using it but still keep our eyes and ears open as research continues on many supplements.
 
C

CFHockeyMom

New member
For sure, COPD is completely different but I think examining all info on a subject is worthwhile when trying to decide whether or not a particular med/supplement/treatment/etc is right for you.

Also, the intent of the study was to reduce oxidative stress (improve antioxidant protection) which I believe is also the reason for the use of NAC in CF patients. So, yes, the diseases are very different but the reason for the studies were similar.
 
C

CFHockeyMom

New member
For sure, COPD is completely different but I think examining all info on a subject is worthwhile when trying to decide whether or not a particular med/supplement/treatment/etc is right for you.

Also, the intent of the study was to reduce oxidative stress (improve antioxidant protection) which I believe is also the reason for the use of NAC in CF patients. So, yes, the diseases are very different but the reason for the studies were similar.
 
C

CFHockeyMom

New member
For sure, COPD is completely different but I think examining all info on a subject is worthwhile when trying to decide whether or not a particular med/supplement/treatment/etc is right for you.

Also, the intent of the study was to reduce oxidative stress (improve antioxidant protection) which I believe is also the reason for the use of NAC in CF patients. So, yes, the diseases are very different but the reason for the studies were similar.
 
N

NoExcuses

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

Just playing devil's advocate; here is some info that disputes the benefits of NAC...



<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/tbindex.cfm?tbid=964&thePhoto=Today's">http://www.medpagetoday.com/tb...d=964&thePhoto=Today's</a></end quote></div>


the reason why NAC works in CF patients is due to our absorption issues. COPD people do no have a lack of GSH in their body due to absorption issues - but they do have inflammation issues.

COPD is a completely different animal. Like comparing a drug for AIDS patients and cancer patients. It doesn't translate...
 
N

NoExcuses

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

Just playing devil's advocate; here is some info that disputes the benefits of NAC...



<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/tbindex.cfm?tbid=964&thePhoto=Today's">http://www.medpagetoday.com/tb...d=964&thePhoto=Today's</a></end quote></div>


the reason why NAC works in CF patients is due to our absorption issues. COPD people do no have a lack of GSH in their body due to absorption issues - but they do have inflammation issues.

COPD is a completely different animal. Like comparing a drug for AIDS patients and cancer patients. It doesn't translate...
 
N

NoExcuses

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

Just playing devil's advocate; here is some info that disputes the benefits of NAC...



<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/tbindex.cfm?tbid=964&thePhoto=Today's">http://www.medpagetoday.com/tb...d=964&thePhoto=Today's</a></end quote></div>


the reason why NAC works in CF patients is due to our absorption issues. COPD people do no have a lack of GSH in their body due to absorption issues - but they do have inflammation issues.

COPD is a completely different animal. Like comparing a drug for AIDS patients and cancer patients. It doesn't translate...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top