1. Registering for the Forum

    We require a human profile pic upon registration on this forum.

    After registration is submitted, you will receive a confirmation email, which should contain a link to confirm your intent to register for the forum. At this point, you will not yet be registered on the forum.

    Our Support staff will manually approve your account within 24 hours, and you will get a notification. This is to prevent the many spam account signups which we receive on a daily basis.

    If you have any problems completing this registration, please email support@jackkruse.com and we will assist you.

CoQ10...company's response to my question about Ubiquinol

Discussion in 'The New Monster Thread' started by PaulaRichards, Feb 5, 2013.

  1. PaulaRichards

    PaulaRichards New Member

    http://www.aor.ca/products-page/aging/cogni-q-4/

    When I researching what and where to buy the mito rx supplements I came across this product but wondered whether it contained Ubquinol or Ubquinone so I emailed the company. Was a bit surprised by their response....(copied & pasted from the email)

    "Ubiquinol is a marketing gimmick. No scientist worth his salt even backs this
    product.

    Ubquinone has multitude of clinical scientific studies, Ubiquinol has two or so
    and both were funded by Kaneka the Japanese manufacturer someone who has skin in
    the game. The idea behind Ubiquinol is silly if one understands Redox reactions.

    Redox reactions occur in pairs- oxidation and reduction. Ubiquinol the reduced
    form is highly unstable and as soon as it gets into the stomach it will oxidize
    into the ubiquinone form. Why pay 3 times the price for an ingredient that has
    the clinical science for over 25 years? Plus even if the ubiquinone is in the
    oxidized form it will get reduced as soon as the ubiquinol form gets oxidized.

    AOR Tech
    visit www.drnibber.com for indepth and latest issues in nutritional science. An
    alternative viwepoint to the celebrity media
    ________________________________________
    (End of email)

    I didn't end up buying this company's product, mainly because I assumed it didn't contain the recommended ubiquinol and it took them almost three weeks to reply to my question!

    So...Given the fact that I don't understand the science behind much of what I read (brain fog for a few years now) I don't know what to make of this. Is there any truth to what is in the email or are they just trying to sell their product by trying to defend the ingredients. Thoughts anyone???
     
  2. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    They are the scammers........there are over 1000 articles on ubiquinol in pub med. That is an embarrassing response.
     
  3. PaulaRichards

    PaulaRichards New Member

    Thanks Dr. Kruse. i didn't know what to make of the "science" they tried to explain but it certainly didn't sound like a very professional response. I'm glad I didn't buy any of their products!!!
     
  4. santovin

    santovin New Member

    I understand this is a late, but the response you received from the company was in fact quite accurate, and was not any sort of scam. Within our mitochondria, coenzyme Q (ubiquinone) goes through a very simple redox reaction and gets reduced (gains electrons) to form ubiquinol. Its whole purpose is the transfer of electrons to create ATP within our cells. After it transfers these newly gained electrons, it becomes oxidized into ubiquinone all over again to repeat the cycle. This reaction is not catalyzed by any enzymes, and therefore the marketing ploy that we "lose the ability to convert to it" is completely false. If we lost the ability to convert ubiquinone to ubiquinol, our body's would cease to function due to insufficient ATP production needed to survive. Studies nowadays are so skewed and biased that you really cannot trust them unless you know every detail. The only difference between the two is just one simple, easily accessible chemical reaction that our bodies are very capable of doing by themselves.

    As one who has a degree in biochemistry, and having worked in a nutrition store for 3 years, I can assure you my confidence in all of the information provided. Ubiquinol is the scam, and is not any bit better than ubiquinone because as your responder said, it gets oxidized right back to ubiquinone the moment it hits your stomach acid. It pains me that doctors who are educated in the subject have not spoken louder against it. My advice is to save yourself the money and just buy ubiquinone, though ultimately it is your decision. Best of luck and take care!
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2013
  5. Another interesting article:

    http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2007/jan2007_report_coq10_01.htm

    As shown in the chart above (Figure 1), one clinical study used 1200 mg per day of ubiquinone CoQ10 to achieve blood concentrations of 3.96 mcg/mL. Based on recently published absorption studies, just 150 mg per day of ubiquinol would provide virtually the same high CoQ10 blood levels as 1200 mg of enhanced-delivery ubiquinone CoQ10.
     
  6. MeghanK

    MeghanK New Member

    @ Santovin... which brand... is there a quality issue?
     
  7. MeghanK

    MeghanK New Member

    What about the studies Dr. Kruse sites backing Ubinquinol?
     
  8. santovin

    santovin New Member

    There are no specific brands of ubiquinone that I advocate. Save yourself some money! Find the most cost effective one from a reputable company that you trust. While I understand the appeal of positive studies, I put little faith in many of them nowadays. If I believed every study I read, I would still believe that vitamin E causes heart disease and that fish oil causes prostate cancer. Basic biochemistry alone shows that ubiquinol is an overpriced scam.

    There is no such thing as the "active form of CoQ10." Our cells CONSTANTLY convert ubiquinone to ubiquinol and vice versa within our mitochondria. It's primary job is to transport electrons from one place to the next. When it has electrons, it is in the form of ubiquinol. When it "drops off" those electrons, it becomes ubiquinone again, and repeats the cycle thereafter. So, let's say that a ubiquinol supplement does not oxidize into ubiquinone in the stomach. Let's say it goes straight to our mitochondria to do its job. The FIRST thing it does is to drop off its electrons to convert itself to ubiquinone. Pointless right? It's a repeating cycle.

    If you ever want more visual insight into this fascinating cellular process, then I invite you to please look up a video on "the electron transport chain" on youtube. While out of the blue and a bit overly direct, the company rep who responded to paulalyn did say it correctly: "No scientist worth his salt even backs this product."
     
  9. GlenPDQ

    GlenPDQ New Member

    And then there is the intermediate form of CoQ10 called 'semiquinone' which can be changed back into either ubiquinol or ubiquinone. Is it just a matter of time before semiquinone is hailed as the more beneficial form?
     
  10. ATL_Paleo

    ATL_Paleo Gold

    Based on my N=1, there seems to be some validity to ubinquinone working as well as ubiquinol. Earlier this year I tested my serum CoQ10 level (the only CoQ10 test so far). Prior to my serum draw, I was taking 100mg of ubiquinone twice a day, and 50mg of ubinquinol once a day.

    My results CoQ10 results were 6.7 on a reference range of 0.37 to 2.20. So in my case, high amounts of ubinquinol don't appear to be required.

    Which form is best? Let your test results decide for you.
     
  11. santovin

    santovin New Member

    Right. All different names for the same thing.
     
  12. Lahelada

    Lahelada New Member

    I would say do not stress over what you can buy. If you have the money and you want to try it to see if it is beneficial or more beneficial to you go ahead. If you can only afford ubiquinone I would say don't despair. Eat ubiquinone and ubiquinol rich foods and supplement or not supplement as you can. Disclosure: I almost bought a supplement containing ubiquinol. The price tag here is $70 dollars for 90 capsules because of import duties . Yes you guessed it. I went without.

    Kaneka http://www.kanekaqh.com/about-kanekaqh-clinical-library.html
    is the only manufacturer who sells ubiquinol to other supplement manufacturers to include in their products. The only study they cite is this http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16919858?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum an inhouse study by Kaneka.

    I also dug up this from 2007. It is interesting reading .
    http://www.zmc-usa.com/docs/CoQ10_Facts_or_Fabrications.pdf
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2013
  13. amjones

    amjones New Member

    Santovin, I can't argue with your explanations.

    But how do you explain all of the studies showing ubiquinol being more effective than ubiquinone?

    I care about results more than explanations.
     
  14. santovin

    santovin New Member

    In all honesty, the biochemical mechanism of CoQ10 is so simple that I can assert with full confidence these studies lead to an incorrect conclusion. To anyone with an education in science, these "studies" are nothing more than laughable fallacy. Sounds silly, I understand, but at the end of the day, it's your money. Studies are studies. Their information is as credible as a stranger's whom you haven't met. This is one of the reasons learning about science is so fascinating. I think it's our responsibility to strive to learn more about what and how things are working in our bodies. I do not believe we should just listen to what "strangers" are telling us. We must always be skeptical and seek answers whenever something sounds odd. What I am telling you is that ubiquinol and ubiquinone are almost the exact same compound, constantly converted back and forth within the body. I am also telling you that it is unstable, and easily transformed in the stomach's HCl. It is now your responsibility to try and verify this information with factual data, instead of opinions or "correlational studies." When you start putting the pieces together, it's actually pretty scary knowing how controllable the population is by media and marketing.




    Or you can continue spending an extra $20/month for the same product.
     
  15. cjhf

    cjhf New Member

    I have a new perspective on "studies" after listening to and reading research by electrical engineer Brian Peskin.

    http://www.brianpeskin.com/
     
  16. amjones

    amjones New Member

    Santovin -- consider the following possibility -- you are wrong. Is it possible?

    :)
     
  17. amjones

    amjones New Member

    I am attempting to locate a decent study to refute Santovin's claims. No luck so far -- if anyone has saved a link, pls share.

    Since serum levels of ubiquinol are measurable it should be a straightforward study, no?
     
  18. amjones

    amjones New Member

    Here's some interesting info which supports Santovin's claims.

    www.thorne.com/media/pdfs/Q-Best_Sheet_Email_Click.pdf‎

    In fact, the data on ubiquinol state that its bioavailability is 300 percent more than that of the oxidized dry powder products. Most dissolved, liposome, micelle and nanoparticle CoQ10 products claim to have a 260 to 350 percent greater bioavailability than oxidized dry powder CoQ10.

    The two hydroxyl groups on the Ubiquinol compound results in its stronger bonding with water and helps explain why it is so much more bioavailable than Ubiquinone.

    This bonding does make Ubiquinol slightly more water soluble than Ubiquinone, however the molecule is still lipophilic and is absorbed as a lipid.
     
  19. GlenPDQ

    GlenPDQ New Member

    My general info lookups on the web tell me CoQ10 is constantly cycled in the following manner:

    ubiquinol --> semiquinone --> ubiquinone --> semiquinone --> ubiquinol

    Often, commercial sources say it is better for people OVER a certain age to start with the reduced form. I can't say for sure, so I decided to use the 600 mg ubiquinone soft tabs to have more cash left to buy more real food. Do we become more efficient at cycling CoQ10 the longer we've been eating epi-paleo and making adjustments to our field hence less need to supposedly start with ubiquinol if we fall into the "older" category?
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2013

Share This Page