Solid rebuttal. Didn’t realize the people were selenium deficient in the studies.

2 Likes

I took ubiquinol and had negative side effects on my health. It caused a mild depression and various aches and pains. I won’t take it again.

3 Likes

How much were you taking?

I took 100 mg of NOW brand ubiquinol.

We need a “challenge my stack” thread to eliminate all the noise and useless supplements from each other’s stack :stuck_out_tongue:

11 Likes

That would be a really great idea

Liner AI’s response when I asked: how reliable is a CoQ10 blood test and does taking Ubiquinol raise this number?

(Anecdotally, my CoQ10 was above the range when I was taking 400mg Ubiquinol years ago, and on the bottom of the normal range when I wasn’t taking any)

AI response: The reliability of CoQ10 blood tests has been subject to research, particularly regarding their effectiveness in diagnosing deficiencies and monitoring treatments. Additionally, Ubiquinol supplementation has been shown to influence CoQ10 levels in the bloodstream, raising important considerations for both clinical and athletic contexts.

Reliability of CoQ10 Blood Testing

The most reliable method for diagnosing primary defects in CoQ10 (ubiquinone) biosynthesis is through the direct measurement of CoQ10 in muscle tissue . However, blood tests can also be useful, particularly for diagnosing secondary CoQ10 deficiencies associated with mitochondrial disorders in patients . It is noted that blood tests for CoQ10 levels are appropriate for monitoring patients who are undergoing treatment for degenerative conditions, such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases, and in those receiving statin therapy .

Despite these uses, blood tests do have limitations. They are not particularly useful for distinguishing between primary and acquired CoQ10 deficiencies . The reliability of the results can be influenced by specimen handling, which can lead to false positives if not strictly followed .

Impact of Ubiquinol Supplementation on CoQ10 Blood Levels

Ubiquinol, the reduced form of CoQ10, has demonstrated a significant impact on plasma levels of CoQ10. Research shows that Ubiquinol supplementation can achieve higher blood CoQ10 levels at lower dosages compared to oxidized CoQ10 . In a controlled study, participants receiving daily supplementation of 300 mg Ubiquinol for six weeks showed a notable increase in their peak power output, suggesting an enhancement of physical performance tied to elevated CoQ10 levels .

The results indicate that while both Ubiquinol and placebo groups improved their physical performance, the Ubiquinol group experienced a significantly greater increase, suggesting its effectiveness in raising CoQ10 levels and thereby enhancing athletic capabilities . Importantly, the study highlighted that higher plasma levels of CoQ10 correlate with improved performance, emphasizing the potential advantage of Ubiquinol for individuals, particularly athletes, who may struggle to maintain adequate CoQ10 levels due to intense training regimens .

Summary of Findings

The assessment of CoQ10 blood levels is a valuable tool for diagnosing deficiencies and monitoring treatments, although it is not without limitations in reliability. Ubiquinol supplementation appears to significantly elevate plasma CoQ10 levels and enhance physical performance, suggesting its beneficial role, especially for individuals facing high metabolic demands, such as athletes.

Conclusion

CoQ10 blood tests can provide useful information, particularly when muscle measurement is not viable. Ubiquinol supplementation is effective in raising blood CoQ10 levels, which can translate into improved physical performance and health benefits. Continuous monitoring and appropriate dosing remain critical for optimizing outcomes.

1 Like

@adssx not all the animal studies are negative.

What’s your source? And why doesn’t it include negative results?

Here’s mine: Coenzyme Q10 and its possible anti-ageing properties

Shorter lifespan in mice and rats + lack of positive RCTs in humans = end of the story. No matter how many positive results you have in C. Elegans.

3 Likes

@adssx This is a great and important idea. How to proceed? Even though I have shrunken my list dramatically I’m sure I’m still wasting my money. I just hope I’m not wasting my health.

1 Like

Feel free to create a new topic “Challenge my stack” (or whatever other name)!

1 Like

A part of me is throwing softballs out there for you because I know you’re gonna bring good information in response :rofl:

You’ve done a good job. You ALMOST convinced me to stop taking it. Almost.

1 Like

And yet, according to the study cited above, a four-supplement cocktail that included COq-10 helped children recover from mitochondrial deficiencies. The lead researcher, Dr. Mark Tarnopolsky of McMaster University, says the cocktail can also help our senior citizens, who may have some of the same deficiencies.

1 Like

So if you have those deficiencies, that cocktail is useful. How does that relate to taking out just one of the four ingredients, and using it for… something? If someone sees benefits, that’s fantastic, and more power to them. Meanwhile, those who are looking at CoQ(10) as a supplement candidate would be better informed through studies showing some defined health benefits. Not claiming that none exist, only hoping to see evidence.

2 Likes

All four supplements were chosen by an extensive review of the literature, followed by experimentation with the safest and most promising prospects. I think any one of the four, singly or in combination, will have positive effects on health.

Can you please link to the research paper? (not the YouTube video)

Is there another paper confirming the findings? (remember that a third of research papers are fraudulent and another third is just wrong…)

If Q10 was so good it would have been tested loooooong ago in the ITP.

2 Likes

I think this is a case where rodent data is a bit questionable. Humans primarily produce CoQ10 while mice and rats produce much more CoQ9. CoQ9 is similar but not the same and when rodents evolved to use CoQ9 more than CoQ10 we can’t necesarily give CoQ10 to rodents and expect the results to reflect what would happen in humans. Negative or null results from CoQ10 in rodents might be caused by CoQ10 simply not being benficial, or it might in part be because the rodents need more CoQ9 than CoQ10. Maybe excess CoQ10 has more negative effects in rodents than humans. It’s hard to say without more data.

4 Likes

A few among the many:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1357272514000375

https://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476(20)31170-7/fulltext

These papers don’t prove anything. The first is a review by a single author. The second is an editorial commenting on another paper.

I don’t care to go through them all, but the volume of papers says something. They have proven a strong association between the mito and CoQ-10. It’s at least as strong as the science debunking the Shroud of Turin.