Hi Bryan,
I follow Blueprint closely and take the protocol seriously precisely because your standard is "only interventions backed by sound evidence." In that spirit, one supplement I can't reconcile is NAC (1,800 mg/day).
I can't find a specific evidentiary basis for it on the protocol or product pages beyond "glutathione precursor / antioxidant support." Meanwhile, the primary literature on NAC specifically points the other way in several cancer models — e.g. Le Gal et al. 2015 (Sci Transl Med, melanoma metastasis) and Villablanca et al. 2021 (Antioxidants, colorectal tumor progression at plasma concentrations at or below human doses) — and the main healthy-adult trial (GlyNAC, glycine + NAC) missed its primary glutathione endpoint in the overall cohort.
So my genuine question: what's the specific evidence you're relying on for NAC in a healthy person, and how do you weigh it against the tumor-promotion findings? If there's data I've missed, I'd honestly like to see it — and if the honest answer is "mechanistic bet," that's useful to know too.
Thanks for the transparency the project is built on.
@DrXiakhan It's even recommend to breastfeed the baby during takeoff and landing because of the pressure. The only mistake she is making is not waiting for takeoff.