What's the best CoQ10
- Thread starter magnus68
- Start date
Nelson Vergel
Founder, ExcelMale.com
I have been using this one since it got good reviews on Amazon
http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00LU1H10A?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00
http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00LU1H10A?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00
torrential
Member
All Ubiquinol is the same and comes from Kaneka Labs in Japan. The one Nelson linked looks good. Costco has "Qunol" brand Ubiquonol, 120 x 100mg I've seen on sale for as low as $24.99.
maxadvance
Active Member
This contains Soy as do most. I use Doctors Best High absorption CoQ10, no soy, highly rated.
http://www.amazon.com/Doctors-Best-...C_UL160_SR99,160_&refRID=0MN0KM5GEKZFGVWCKH9V
The ubiquinone form is less expensive and must be metabolized in the body to ubiquinol. People over 40 and those with metabolic issues should take ubiquinol. I take both forms per my doc's recommendation. Costco has a $7 off Qunol Mega 120ct ubiquinol twice a year on average. Just pd $35-7= $28 a few weeks ago.
True that there are only one or two main manufacturers of ubiquinone and ubiquinol but the better brands take the raw ingredient and capsule it in soluble form. The cheaper stuff passes through you unabsorbed.
I bite the Qunol Mega caps and spit out the capsule but have no idea if any is absorbed in the mouth.
True that there are only one or two main manufacturers of ubiquinone and ubiquinol but the better brands take the raw ingredient and capsule it in soluble form. The cheaper stuff passes through you unabsorbed.
I bite the Qunol Mega caps and spit out the capsule but have no idea if any is absorbed in the mouth.
That's ubiquinone. Good that it has the Bioperine and better oils. Not gonna help those that metabolize ubiquinone poorly which is most folks over 40. Currently the marketplace is confusing for consumers who don't understand the difference between "high absorbance" yet a form that still needs to be metabolized.
maxadvance
Active Member
I've read some references to what you say, and I'm not sure metabolize is the word to describe it. I've seen just as many references saying one form being better than the other is complete BS. Both forms convert to the other form in the body. Everyone can make their own decision, mine was based on no soy and a high absorption rate.
The amount of soy in that is essentially meaningless.
maxadvance
Active Member
yup, that makes 2 of us
maxadvance
Active Member
Not to the manufacturer, it's way cheaper to produce. And not to me, soy doesn't belong in the body. EPA and DHA in a similar amount is apparently super beneficial for the body, but soy is meaningless. Ok.
Your product contains the same soy as the product you panned. Sorry....here's this...last 2 words.
High Absorption CoQ10 contains pure, vegetarian coenzyme Q10, plus BioPerine, in an olive oil base. CoQ10 is a nutrient that supports heart function and promotes energy production in cells.* BioPerine, an herbal extract derived from black pepper fruit, promotes absorption of nutrients in the GI tract.* Preliminary studies have shown that BioPerine increases CoQ10 absorption. Vitamin E is added to ensure freshness and stability. Ingredients: Coenzyme Q10, Black pepper ext. (fruit)(BioPerine®), Extra virgin olive oil (non-GMO), beeswax, lecithin, rosemary oil, softgel capsule (gelatin, glycerin, purified water, annatto, [natural plant-source coloring agent used as a light barrier]). Contains Soy
maxadvance
Active Member
bummer, must be the lecithin
Great if you can post links to studies. I'd rather not pay extra if it is not true that qbiqinone does not have to be converted to the supposed active form ubiquinol in the body. The studies I've looked at briefly measured serum levels of ubiquinol that were achieved.
Lifeextension material is generally reliable. Here's what they have to say about ubiquinone vs ubiquibol
http://www.lifeextension.com/magazine/2007/1/report_coq10/Page-01
Last edited:
Not really a study, but they raise some good points: https://web.archive.org/web/2013081...om:80/media/pdfs/Q-Best_Sheet_Email_Click.pdf
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.
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.
Thanks for posting HarryCat.
["Ubiquinol molecule becomes oxidized in the stomach. Consequently, taking Ubiquinol as a nutrient is essentially the same as taking the more stable and less expensive oxidized form"]
If this is true then how does the author account for the dramatically increased serum levels of Ubiquinol?
He continues:
CoQ10 Bioavailability
After absorption, CoQ10 accumulates in the blood and becomes bioavailable to all body
cells. Bioavailability reflects absorption but it is not the actual absorption and should not be
used as an accurate measure of such. It does however give a good estimate of the amount
of CoQ10 available as an antioxidant in the blood and that available to the body cells...
Yes I see! "Bioavailabilty reflects absorption but it is not the actual absorption."
Anyone have a source for COQ10 suppositories?
Life Extension sell this version of ubiquinone: http://www.lifeextension.com/vitami...r-absorbable-coq10-ubiquinone-with-d-limonene
Which is an emulsified formulation like the one in this study: Takeda R, Sawabe A, Nakano R, et al. Effect of various food additives and soy constituents on high CoQ10 absorption. Japanese Journal Medicine Pharmaceutical Science 2011;64(4):614-20.
This form of ubiquinone is supposed to have at least as good absorbtion as ubiquinol:
That and other studies are summarized here:http://www.totalhealthmagazine.com/Ingredient-Spotlight/Is-Ubiquinol-All-Its-Cracked-Up-to-Be.html
maxadvance
Active Member
Last I checked Life Extension is in it to make money off their supplements, and pushing the more expensive version of a supplement would seem the'ye pushing the version with a higher profit margin. It's akin to putting credence in a Big tobacco funded study on how safe it is to smoke. I'm good.
Share this page
Sponsors
Online statistics
- Members online
- 4
- Guests online
- 5
- Total visitors
- 9
