Comment · Wed, July 27, 2022 · Natrium Health & Nootropics Depot
Is NALT (N-Acetyl L-Tyrosine) really just placebo?
Original post in this thread
TheNootropicist · 4 points
So according to a study I've seen mentioned frequently, NALT is a waste of time and money, because it has poor bioavailability. But it also seems that surprisingly many say that it does work, some even say that it works better than regular L-Tyrosine. Even MisterYouAreSoDumb says this. I am very confused. The NALT-supporter camp says that the study is outdated. On the other side, someone even said that NALT sucks because "even" IV administration leads to poor bioavailability, and then others said that NALT is a prodrug, meaning that it can raise L-Tyrosine levels, but why would you use this when you can just get the regular Tyrosine? Then people also say that it works better because it is more water-soluble, but isn't lipophilicty (for large molecules) a factor that predicts BBB crossing, meaning that the less water-soluble L-Tyrosine would be better? So is NALT really just a sugar pill or does it work to some degree?
What they were answering
TheGermanGuy21 · 2 points
I always used NALT, then read about L-Tyrosine being much better and that NALT would only be used because it's soluble in water. E.g. it's probably the most common ingredient in boosters, which are usually mixed in water. I then tried L-Tyrosine and felt nothing lol. Thanks for confirming that the narrative is bs.
u/MisterYouAreSoDumb · Natrium Health & Nootropics Depot
NALT works much better for me personally, and I am not alone on that front. This whole narrative has been silly for years. You really don't see people saying NAC is worthless and to just take L-cysteine, which is strange. It's just a tyrosine narrative for some reason.