NAC

S

saveferris2009

New member
Hey there,

A few things:


1. The clinical trials (Phases I and IIa) supposed by the CFF are being conducted by Dr. Moss.

2. Dr. Moss is not benefiting right now from the company that is being used in the CFF NAC trials. I totally understand your POV. BioAdvantex is unique in North America for its manufacturing process. Before I found out about them, as you may know, I was importing my NAC from Europe because I knew of no other NA source that manufactured the NAC this way

"Oral N-acetylcysteine: BioAdvantex - An antioxidant, oral N-acetylcysteine replenishes glutathione levels in neutrophils. Placebo-controlled 12-week study at Stanford Univ. demonstrated decreases in inflammatory cells in lung and positive indications of changes in pulmonary function." from <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.cff.org/treatments/Pipeline/
">http://www.cff.org/treatments/Pipeline/
</a>
3. I emailed Moss and he says that he doesn' rule out oxidative harm from NAC. I have been racking my brain over the past 24 hours about where the study is that I read that demonstrated oxidative harm from NAC. As you mentioned, I am very clinically based and research is my passion / basis for the decisions I make about my health and what I speak about. So I know I didn't just come up with this statement on my own - nor would I switch myself from capsules like u take to fizzy NAC (at a much higher expense) had it not been for this study I read. I was feeling effects from the NAC tables so I would not have switched to Fizzy NAC for efficacy.

Long story short I'm not going to let this go and I will do all I can to get this study. It's bugging me.

Thanks for your question. <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">
 
S

saveferris2009

New member
Hey there,

A few things:


1. The clinical trials (Phases I and IIa) supposed by the CFF are being conducted by Dr. Moss.

2. Dr. Moss is not benefiting right now from the company that is being used in the CFF NAC trials. I totally understand your POV. BioAdvantex is unique in North America for its manufacturing process. Before I found out about them, as you may know, I was importing my NAC from Europe because I knew of no other NA source that manufactured the NAC this way

"Oral N-acetylcysteine: BioAdvantex - An antioxidant, oral N-acetylcysteine replenishes glutathione levels in neutrophils. Placebo-controlled 12-week study at Stanford Univ. demonstrated decreases in inflammatory cells in lung and positive indications of changes in pulmonary function." from <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.cff.org/treatments/Pipeline/
">http://www.cff.org/treatments/Pipeline/
</a>
3. I emailed Moss and he says that he doesn' rule out oxidative harm from NAC. I have been racking my brain over the past 24 hours about where the study is that I read that demonstrated oxidative harm from NAC. As you mentioned, I am very clinically based and research is my passion / basis for the decisions I make about my health and what I speak about. So I know I didn't just come up with this statement on my own - nor would I switch myself from capsules like u take to fizzy NAC (at a much higher expense) had it not been for this study I read. I was feeling effects from the NAC tables so I would not have switched to Fizzy NAC for efficacy.

Long story short I'm not going to let this go and I will do all I can to get this study. It's bugging me.

Thanks for your question. <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">
 
S

saveferris2009

New member
Hey there,

A few things:


1. The clinical trials (Phases I and IIa) supposed by the CFF are being conducted by Dr. Moss.

2. Dr. Moss is not benefiting right now from the company that is being used in the CFF NAC trials. I totally understand your POV. BioAdvantex is unique in North America for its manufacturing process. Before I found out about them, as you may know, I was importing my NAC from Europe because I knew of no other NA source that manufactured the NAC this way

"Oral N-acetylcysteine: BioAdvantex - An antioxidant, oral N-acetylcysteine replenishes glutathione levels in neutrophils. Placebo-controlled 12-week study at Stanford Univ. demonstrated decreases in inflammatory cells in lung and positive indications of changes in pulmonary function." from <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.cff.org/treatments/Pipeline/
">http://www.cff.org/treatments/Pipeline/
</a>
3. I emailed Moss and he says that he doesn' rule out oxidative harm from NAC. I have been racking my brain over the past 24 hours about where the study is that I read that demonstrated oxidative harm from NAC. As you mentioned, I am very clinically based and research is my passion / basis for the decisions I make about my health and what I speak about. So I know I didn't just come up with this statement on my own - nor would I switch myself from capsules like u take to fizzy NAC (at a much higher expense) had it not been for this study I read. I was feeling effects from the NAC tables so I would not have switched to Fizzy NAC for efficacy.

Long story short I'm not going to let this go and I will do all I can to get this study. It's bugging me.

Thanks for your question. <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">
 
S

saveferris2009

New member
Hey there,

A few things:


1. The clinical trials (Phases I and IIa) supposed by the CFF are being conducted by Dr. Moss.

2. Dr. Moss is not benefiting right now from the company that is being used in the CFF NAC trials. I totally understand your POV. BioAdvantex is unique in North America for its manufacturing process. Before I found out about them, as you may know, I was importing my NAC from Europe because I knew of no other NA source that manufactured the NAC this way

"Oral N-acetylcysteine: BioAdvantex - An antioxidant, oral N-acetylcysteine replenishes glutathione levels in neutrophils. Placebo-controlled 12-week study at Stanford Univ. demonstrated decreases in inflammatory cells in lung and positive indications of changes in pulmonary function." from <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.cff.org/treatments/Pipeline/
">http://www.cff.org/treatments/Pipeline/
</a>
3. I emailed Moss and he says that he doesn' rule out oxidative harm from NAC. I have been racking my brain over the past 24 hours about where the study is that I read that demonstrated oxidative harm from NAC. As you mentioned, I am very clinically based and research is my passion / basis for the decisions I make about my health and what I speak about. So I know I didn't just come up with this statement on my own - nor would I switch myself from capsules like u take to fizzy NAC (at a much higher expense) had it not been for this study I read. I was feeling effects from the NAC tables so I would not have switched to Fizzy NAC for efficacy.

Long story short I'm not going to let this go and I will do all I can to get this study. It's bugging me.

Thanks for your question. <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">
 
S

saveferris2009

New member
Hey there,
<br />
<br />A few things:
<br />
<br />
<br />1. The clinical trials (Phases I and IIa) supposed by the CFF are being conducted by Dr. Moss.
<br />
<br />2. Dr. Moss is not benefiting right now from the company that is being used in the CFF NAC trials. I totally understand your POV. BioAdvantex is unique in North America for its manufacturing process. Before I found out about them, as you may know, I was importing my NAC from Europe because I knew of no other NA source that manufactured the NAC this way
<br />
<br />"Oral N-acetylcysteine: BioAdvantex - An antioxidant, oral N-acetylcysteine replenishes glutathione levels in neutrophils. Placebo-controlled 12-week study at Stanford Univ. demonstrated decreases in inflammatory cells in lung and positive indications of changes in pulmonary function." from <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.cff.org/treatments/Pipeline/
">http://www.cff.org/treatments/Pipeline/
</a><br />
<br />3. I emailed Moss and he says that he doesn' rule out oxidative harm from NAC. I have been racking my brain over the past 24 hours about where the study is that I read that demonstrated oxidative harm from NAC. As you mentioned, I am very clinically based and research is my passion / basis for the decisions I make about my health and what I speak about. So I know I didn't just come up with this statement on my own - nor would I switch myself from capsules like u take to fizzy NAC (at a much higher expense) had it not been for this study I read. I was feeling effects from the NAC tables so I would not have switched to Fizzy NAC for efficacy.
<br />
<br />Long story short I'm not going to let this go and I will do all I can to get this study. It's bugging me.
<br />
<br />Thanks for your question. <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">
 
N

Nightwriter

New member
Saveferris,

I love the fact that you are so diligent when it comes to research. And I remember a couple of years ago when I got into trouble after a neighborhood fire filled my home with smoke and my health took a quick dive, I HAD to make some quick changes because it was one of those times my culture had Pseudomonas and MRSA and the Pseudomonas was sensitive to only 1 drug. I of course freaked, after doing so well.

I remember seeing your letter from Wr. Warick that you posted, and I was trying to find out dosages for NAC. A doctor friend recommended NAC back in the 90's to me and I might have taken a bit (probably not enough.) And tumeric had been recommended to me in the 80's by someone I trusted. But I never took these supplements regularly or had any idea what dosages to take.

I saw that the common dosages for NAC was 600mgs 3 times a day (could have even been from your info which I did flag). Then saw the common dosages somewhere for Tumeric. I saw that Dr. Warick at the time wasn't keen on H.S. (he is now), but I was impressed with the studies and wanted to try it. And I knew it was going under trial.

I added to my routine (which is pretty extensive as it is) these 3 substances. And amazingly, the Pseudomonas stopped being picked up, the MRSA turned to staph and I was able to get off antibiotics long enough to bring back all drug sensitivities. Then I stopped culturing anything at all (I know that this is temporary, but great nontheless). Which is where I am at the moment (knock wood).

I'm telling you this, because I do think you are knowledgeable and I've learned many things from your detailed posts. And I thought although my experience is clinical rather than scientific, you will probably find my experience interesting as well.

Thank you for past information and future information. I may not be taking the tippy top brands, but they are of a solid quality and like I said reasonably priced. But I love checking out new products and information. And it's so interesting that Dr. Moss is involved with the CFF study. It will be interesting if the study coincides with my results, because when you take so many things, you can't be sure what if it is one thing or a combination of things.
 
N

Nightwriter

New member
Saveferris,

I love the fact that you are so diligent when it comes to research. And I remember a couple of years ago when I got into trouble after a neighborhood fire filled my home with smoke and my health took a quick dive, I HAD to make some quick changes because it was one of those times my culture had Pseudomonas and MRSA and the Pseudomonas was sensitive to only 1 drug. I of course freaked, after doing so well.

I remember seeing your letter from Wr. Warick that you posted, and I was trying to find out dosages for NAC. A doctor friend recommended NAC back in the 90's to me and I might have taken a bit (probably not enough.) And tumeric had been recommended to me in the 80's by someone I trusted. But I never took these supplements regularly or had any idea what dosages to take.

I saw that the common dosages for NAC was 600mgs 3 times a day (could have even been from your info which I did flag). Then saw the common dosages somewhere for Tumeric. I saw that Dr. Warick at the time wasn't keen on H.S. (he is now), but I was impressed with the studies and wanted to try it. And I knew it was going under trial.

I added to my routine (which is pretty extensive as it is) these 3 substances. And amazingly, the Pseudomonas stopped being picked up, the MRSA turned to staph and I was able to get off antibiotics long enough to bring back all drug sensitivities. Then I stopped culturing anything at all (I know that this is temporary, but great nontheless). Which is where I am at the moment (knock wood).

I'm telling you this, because I do think you are knowledgeable and I've learned many things from your detailed posts. And I thought although my experience is clinical rather than scientific, you will probably find my experience interesting as well.

Thank you for past information and future information. I may not be taking the tippy top brands, but they are of a solid quality and like I said reasonably priced. But I love checking out new products and information. And it's so interesting that Dr. Moss is involved with the CFF study. It will be interesting if the study coincides with my results, because when you take so many things, you can't be sure what if it is one thing or a combination of things.
 
N

Nightwriter

New member
Saveferris,

I love the fact that you are so diligent when it comes to research. And I remember a couple of years ago when I got into trouble after a neighborhood fire filled my home with smoke and my health took a quick dive, I HAD to make some quick changes because it was one of those times my culture had Pseudomonas and MRSA and the Pseudomonas was sensitive to only 1 drug. I of course freaked, after doing so well.

I remember seeing your letter from Wr. Warick that you posted, and I was trying to find out dosages for NAC. A doctor friend recommended NAC back in the 90's to me and I might have taken a bit (probably not enough.) And tumeric had been recommended to me in the 80's by someone I trusted. But I never took these supplements regularly or had any idea what dosages to take.

I saw that the common dosages for NAC was 600mgs 3 times a day (could have even been from your info which I did flag). Then saw the common dosages somewhere for Tumeric. I saw that Dr. Warick at the time wasn't keen on H.S. (he is now), but I was impressed with the studies and wanted to try it. And I knew it was going under trial.

I added to my routine (which is pretty extensive as it is) these 3 substances. And amazingly, the Pseudomonas stopped being picked up, the MRSA turned to staph and I was able to get off antibiotics long enough to bring back all drug sensitivities. Then I stopped culturing anything at all (I know that this is temporary, but great nontheless). Which is where I am at the moment (knock wood).

I'm telling you this, because I do think you are knowledgeable and I've learned many things from your detailed posts. And I thought although my experience is clinical rather than scientific, you will probably find my experience interesting as well.

Thank you for past information and future information. I may not be taking the tippy top brands, but they are of a solid quality and like I said reasonably priced. But I love checking out new products and information. And it's so interesting that Dr. Moss is involved with the CFF study. It will be interesting if the study coincides with my results, because when you take so many things, you can't be sure what if it is one thing or a combination of things.
 
N

Nightwriter

New member
Saveferris,

I love the fact that you are so diligent when it comes to research. And I remember a couple of years ago when I got into trouble after a neighborhood fire filled my home with smoke and my health took a quick dive, I HAD to make some quick changes because it was one of those times my culture had Pseudomonas and MRSA and the Pseudomonas was sensitive to only 1 drug. I of course freaked, after doing so well.

I remember seeing your letter from Wr. Warick that you posted, and I was trying to find out dosages for NAC. A doctor friend recommended NAC back in the 90's to me and I might have taken a bit (probably not enough.) And tumeric had been recommended to me in the 80's by someone I trusted. But I never took these supplements regularly or had any idea what dosages to take.

I saw that the common dosages for NAC was 600mgs 3 times a day (could have even been from your info which I did flag). Then saw the common dosages somewhere for Tumeric. I saw that Dr. Warick at the time wasn't keen on H.S. (he is now), but I was impressed with the studies and wanted to try it. And I knew it was going under trial.

I added to my routine (which is pretty extensive as it is) these 3 substances. And amazingly, the Pseudomonas stopped being picked up, the MRSA turned to staph and I was able to get off antibiotics long enough to bring back all drug sensitivities. Then I stopped culturing anything at all (I know that this is temporary, but great nontheless). Which is where I am at the moment (knock wood).

I'm telling you this, because I do think you are knowledgeable and I've learned many things from your detailed posts. And I thought although my experience is clinical rather than scientific, you will probably find my experience interesting as well.

Thank you for past information and future information. I may not be taking the tippy top brands, but they are of a solid quality and like I said reasonably priced. But I love checking out new products and information. And it's so interesting that Dr. Moss is involved with the CFF study. It will be interesting if the study coincides with my results, because when you take so many things, you can't be sure what if it is one thing or a combination of things.
 
N

Nightwriter

New member
Saveferris,
<br />
<br />I love the fact that you are so diligent when it comes to research. And I remember a couple of years ago when I got into trouble after a neighborhood fire filled my home with smoke and my health took a quick dive, I HAD to make some quick changes because it was one of those times my culture had Pseudomonas and MRSA and the Pseudomonas was sensitive to only 1 drug. I of course freaked, after doing so well.
<br />
<br />I remember seeing your letter from Wr. Warick that you posted, and I was trying to find out dosages for NAC. A doctor friend recommended NAC back in the 90's to me and I might have taken a bit (probably not enough.) And tumeric had been recommended to me in the 80's by someone I trusted. But I never took these supplements regularly or had any idea what dosages to take.
<br />
<br />I saw that the common dosages for NAC was 600mgs 3 times a day (could have even been from your info which I did flag). Then saw the common dosages somewhere for Tumeric. I saw that Dr. Warick at the time wasn't keen on H.S. (he is now), but I was impressed with the studies and wanted to try it. And I knew it was going under trial.
<br />
<br />I added to my routine (which is pretty extensive as it is) these 3 substances. And amazingly, the Pseudomonas stopped being picked up, the MRSA turned to staph and I was able to get off antibiotics long enough to bring back all drug sensitivities. Then I stopped culturing anything at all (I know that this is temporary, but great nontheless). Which is where I am at the moment (knock wood).
<br />
<br />I'm telling you this, because I do think you are knowledgeable and I've learned many things from your detailed posts. And I thought although my experience is clinical rather than scientific, you will probably find my experience interesting as well.
<br />
<br />Thank you for past information and future information. I may not be taking the tippy top brands, but they are of a solid quality and like I said reasonably priced. But I love checking out new products and information. And it's so interesting that Dr. Moss is involved with the CFF study. It will be interesting if the study coincides with my results, because when you take so many things, you can't be sure what if it is one thing or a combination of things.
 
A

alegris

Guest
Hi, great discussion. I just wanted to mention the oxidation thing is correct. The sheet inside the box mentions NAC is "prone to air oxidation." It goes on to mention how the tablets are manufactured using special techniques and equipment to ensure stability, yada, yada, yada. Also mentions they wrap each tablet in "special 4-layer material to keep moisture and air from entering the packet."

Also wanted to say they're not that expensive. Only $15 (CAD) a box (20 tablets) so only $1.50/day.

Ok, that's all.
 
A

alegris

Guest
Hi, great discussion. I just wanted to mention the oxidation thing is correct. The sheet inside the box mentions NAC is "prone to air oxidation." It goes on to mention how the tablets are manufactured using special techniques and equipment to ensure stability, yada, yada, yada. Also mentions they wrap each tablet in "special 4-layer material to keep moisture and air from entering the packet."

Also wanted to say they're not that expensive. Only $15 (CAD) a box (20 tablets) so only $1.50/day.

Ok, that's all.
 
A

alegris

Guest
Hi, great discussion. I just wanted to mention the oxidation thing is correct. The sheet inside the box mentions NAC is "prone to air oxidation." It goes on to mention how the tablets are manufactured using special techniques and equipment to ensure stability, yada, yada, yada. Also mentions they wrap each tablet in "special 4-layer material to keep moisture and air from entering the packet."

Also wanted to say they're not that expensive. Only $15 (CAD) a box (20 tablets) so only $1.50/day.

Ok, that's all.
 
A

alegris

Guest
Hi, great discussion. I just wanted to mention the oxidation thing is correct. The sheet inside the box mentions NAC is "prone to air oxidation." It goes on to mention how the tablets are manufactured using special techniques and equipment to ensure stability, yada, yada, yada. Also mentions they wrap each tablet in "special 4-layer material to keep moisture and air from entering the packet."

Also wanted to say they're not that expensive. Only $15 (CAD) a box (20 tablets) so only $1.50/day.

Ok, that's all.
 
A

alegris

Guest
Hi, great discussion. I just wanted to mention the oxidation thing is correct. The sheet inside the box mentions NAC is "prone to air oxidation." It goes on to mention how the tablets are manufactured using special techniques and equipment to ensure stability, yada, yada, yada. Also mentions they wrap each tablet in "special 4-layer material to keep moisture and air from entering the packet."
<br />
<br />Also wanted to say they're not that expensive. Only $15 (CAD) a box (20 tablets) so only $1.50/day.
<br />
<br />Ok, that's all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top