ExcelMale
Menu
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Videos
Lab Tests
Doctor Finder
Buy Books
About Us
Men’s Health Coaching
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Add and Read Reviews
Supplement Reviews
What's the best CoQ10
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Re-Ride" data-source="post: 33774" data-attributes="member: 8395"><p>The life extension article cites multiple studies both human and rat. I tend to ignore rat studies. The human assimilation studies demonstrate that it took 1200 mg / day of ubiquinone to achieve therapeutic serum levels of 3.96 mcg/ml. It only took one eighth as much or 150 mg of ubiquinol to achieve the same serum level. </p><p></p><p>To achieve 7.28 mcg/ml in another study required 2400mg/day ubiquinone compared to only 300 mg/day ubiquinol. Again, that's eight times as much ubiquinone even though an advanced delivery system was used. </p><p></p><p>Single dose side by side study 100 mg dosing: ["In a side-by-side single-dose human study, ubiquinol absorption was compared directly to conventional CoQ10 (ubiquinone) using the same delivery system. Subjects were given either 100 mg of ubiquinol or 100 mg of ubiquinone. To further validate the study, the subjects were crossed over, so that every participant was tested after receiving ubiquinol and later ubiquinone, and vice versa."] </p><p></p><p>This study showed 60% higher serum levels. Life extension goes on to say that it takes 4 weeks to achieve full benefit. </p><p></p><p>Non-believers must conclude that these studies are flawed. If so where is the critique and where are the ubiquinone studies that show therapeutically useful serum levels with ubiquinone taken in the 300 mg /day range or even at 600 mg/day that the most adherent are likely to consume?</p><p></p><p>Class action challenges to the Qunol brand were largely rejected with the exception of claims against it's liquid ubiquinone product. A meager $3 per bottle settlement was obtained based on the wording and the fact that Qunol only had lab studies not human tests on it's liquid ubiquinone. Claims against it's ubiquinol were rejected as the product was found to be substantially better absorbed and bioactive as claimed.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Re-Ride, post: 33774, member: 8395"] The life extension article cites multiple studies both human and rat. I tend to ignore rat studies. The human assimilation studies demonstrate that it took 1200 mg / day of ubiquinone to achieve therapeutic serum levels of 3.96 mcg/ml. It only took one eighth as much or 150 mg of ubiquinol to achieve the same serum level. To achieve 7.28 mcg/ml in another study required 2400mg/day ubiquinone compared to only 300 mg/day ubiquinol. Again, that's eight times as much ubiquinone even though an advanced delivery system was used. Single dose side by side study 100 mg dosing: ["In a side-by-side single-dose human study, ubiquinol absorption was compared directly to conventional CoQ10 (ubiquinone) using the same delivery system. Subjects were given either 100 mg of ubiquinol or 100 mg of ubiquinone. To further validate the study, the subjects were crossed over, so that every participant was tested after receiving ubiquinol and later ubiquinone, and vice versa."] This study showed 60% higher serum levels. Life extension goes on to say that it takes 4 weeks to achieve full benefit. Non-believers must conclude that these studies are flawed. If so where is the critique and where are the ubiquinone studies that show therapeutically useful serum levels with ubiquinone taken in the 300 mg /day range or even at 600 mg/day that the most adherent are likely to consume? Class action challenges to the Qunol brand were largely rejected with the exception of claims against it's liquid ubiquinone product. A meager $3 per bottle settlement was obtained based on the wording and the fact that Qunol only had lab studies not human tests on it's liquid ubiquinone. Claims against it's ubiquinol were rejected as the product was found to be substantially better absorbed and bioactive as claimed. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Share this page
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Sponsors
Forums
Add and Read Reviews
Supplement Reviews
What's the best CoQ10
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top