Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Recommended brand of Ubiquinol (Kaneka QH)


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 02 September 2007 - 10:21 PM


Hello all,

I'm considering changing my brand of CoQ10 to one of the reduced forms, Kaneka QH, but I'm not sure if one brand is considered better than another.

Jarrow has their QH-Absorb product, which looks good, but it also has some odd ingredients I haven't heard of before. What's phosphatidycholine? Is that good or bad to take? It also has medium chain triglycerides, which I assume is simply a form of fat? I'll guess it's from soy oil?

Life Extension has their super bioactive brand, recently reformulated to use extra virgin olive oil. I guess all those complaints about them using hydrogenated oil got the point across.

And Healthy Origins just has medium chain triglycerides, lecithin and some generic sorts of stuff.


If price wasn't an issue, which of the above is generally considered as best? Healthy Origins is cheaper, but I'm unsure of their quality. Jarrow and Lef are in the same ballpark price-wise, so of those two, I'd rather just go with whichever one is considered better.

Thanks.

#2 ajnast4r

  • Registered User, F@H
  • 3,922 posts
  • 150
  • Location:Sacramento, California

Posted 03 September 2007 - 12:31 AM

healthy origins is about 10 bucks cheaper on iHerb... im not familiar with the brand as far as their quality control goes, but if they can produce a lot-by-lot POST production assay, i see no reason not to buy their product. email them. (and please report back here with their email & coa if provided)

if they can NOT... go with the jarrow. jarrow is a great brand... extremely reliable.


phosphatidylcholine is in essence a fat
http://en.wikipedia....phatidylcholine

medium chain triglycerides are also fat
http://en.wikipedia....n_triglycerides

they are use as lipid carriers for the ubiquinol, as its a lipid soluble substance.

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#3 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 03 September 2007 - 01:00 AM

Thanks for the information.

I have tried to email Healthy Origins twice before in the past, about different things, but they never replied. One email was in reference to their web page, where they mention they comply with the U.S. Pharmacopoeia guidelines. I was curious if this meant they were USP certified, and if so, why they don't label their products as such. No response.

Another time I emailed them for more information regarding one of their products (red yeast rice), but they never replied. I can try emailing them for a COA, but I wouldn't exactly expect a response from them anytime soon.

And the Jarrow one probably can be had for only slightly more than the Healthy Origins, using a price match (thought I saw it for around $33 somewhere). And even the LEF 100mg I've seen going for $39. So there isn't that much of a price difference between them all (for 100mg/60 softgels).

#4 ajnast4r

  • Registered User, F@H
  • 3,922 posts
  • 150
  • Location:Sacramento, California

Posted 03 September 2007 - 01:28 AM

i'de go with jarrow

#5 neogenic

  • Registered User
  • 481 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Charlotte, NC

Posted 03 September 2007 - 02:55 AM

LEF, and many other Vitamin Shoppe companies are quality but are considerably overpriced. You do get the assurance of what you're paying for is in there vs. others, but if Jarrow, NOW or NSI has it buy from them. They're all top notch for quality control and pricing. I would go with Jarrow as well. NSI might have it as well.

#6 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 03 September 2007 - 03:17 AM

I'm not sure NSI has it, but Swanson's does.The Swanson pricing is around the same as Jarrow's (I think), so I didn't list them for consideration (Jarrow most likely better). NSI might be cheaper, if they have it, but I didn't check.

As for NSI, I have read mixed things about them on this board, so never really purchased any supplements through them (although I do sometimes purchase other brands via vitacost). To be honest, their sneaky way about pricing their products put me off from the start: 80% off list price! But since they are the only ones that sell their products, via the web, there is no actual list price...

#7 ajnast4r

  • Registered User, F@H
  • 3,922 posts
  • 150
  • Location:Sacramento, California

Posted 03 September 2007 - 03:40 AM

ive heard some complains about NSI.. but if they provide COA's, then by all means. although i highly doubt they will.

and yes, that is EXACTLY the key point with jarrow... you get the assurance that what you pay for is actually in the product lol.


btw, vitamin shoppe has it for 40$... might be cheaper to just go pick it up, and save on shipping.

#8 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 03 September 2007 - 06:57 AM

With a price match, it's still probably cheaper to have iherb ship it. I'll have to check.

I think I need one or two other things anyway. Although it seems that iherb doesn't sell the chelated magnesium I want. Grr...

#9 quicksilver

  • Registered User
  • 98 posts
  • -1

Posted 06 September 2007 - 01:57 PM

LEF Ubiquinol 100 mg 60 softgels for $29.99 shipping $6 best deal I've seen if not give me a link.

#10 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 06 September 2007 - 09:45 PM

$29.99 is a pretty good deal for LEF/100mg. If I might ask, where did you find it for that price?

#11 michaeljeff

  • Registered User
  • 1 posts
  • 0

Posted 31 July 2008 - 09:38 AM

In Recent studies on Ubiquinol shows that in seriously ill patients, conventional ubiquinone CoQ10 was hardly detectable in the blood. I use Super Bioactive Coq10 Ubiquinol.

edit: spam link removed

Edited by FunkOdyssey, 31 July 2008 - 08:47 PM.


#12 healthymon

  • Registered User
  • 7 posts
  • 0

Posted 22 April 2009 - 08:52 PM

Why are you taking Ubiquinol?

Ubiquinone and Ubiquinol, being redox pairs, are easily converted from one form to the other in the body. For example, when exogenous Ubiquinone is absorbed in the intestines it is converted to Ubiquinol in the absorption cells, the lymph, or the blood. Since CoQ10 is not used to produce energy in the lymph system or blood, it is understandable why this conversion takes place to fulfill the need for antioxidant protection in the circulation. On the other hand, in the inner membrane of the mitochondria where energy is made, the oxidized form of CoQ10 (Ubiquinone) is in great demand. Here the reduced Ubiquinol form is rapidly converted to the oxidized Ubiquinone form. In the mitochondria this conversion creates a Q-Cycle. It was once felt by the late Sir Peter Mitchell (Nobel prize, 1978) that the Q-Cycle would maintain the proportion of Ubiquinone and Ubiquinol required for energy synthesis available forever. Little did he know at the time of his discovery that with age and disease the body's ability to produce Ubiquinone and to convert it to Ubiquinol would diminish and true CoQ10 deficiencies would be prevalent in an aging society.

I found a website that has some interesting facts: http://www.zmc-usa.c...abrications.pdf

#13 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 22 April 2009 - 09:02 PM

Thanks for the reply, although it's a somewhat dated post of mine. I no longer take ubiquinol -- I wanted to try it at the time for a heart issue, to see if I noticed any improvement or differences compared to ubiquinone. I did try it at a relatively high dose for several months (200-400mg/daily), but didn't notice anything (besides less money in my bank account).

I have since had my ubiquinol levels tested, and they came back fine. Currently just going with plain ole' dry CoQ10, taken with fish oil, as I don't think the absorption rates differ than much if taken with fats.

And that is an interesting article you posted. I've read it before, but keep forgetting what site it's on.

#14 Lufega

  • Registered User
  • 1,779 posts
  • 253
  • Location:Miami, Fl.

Posted 23 April 2009 - 05:18 PM

I am about to invest in the kaneka QH Ubiquinol. So what's the deal? Is it worth all the money or should I stick with the 1200 mg CoQ10?

#15 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 23 April 2009 - 05:40 PM

I am about to invest in the kaneka QH Ubiquinol. So what's the deal? Is it worth all the money or should I stick with the 1200 mg CoQ10?

I guess first question would be... why so much CoQ10? I know you have some health issues you are trying to resolve, but that is an awful lot of CoQ10 there. That's like a Parkinson's dose, which is still very iffy benefit-wise for Parkinson's people. I don't know if there is any evidence that such high doses, taken for years and years, has been proved safe either.

I think dosing by blood level may be the most cost effective way to approach it. If you can get blood tests through insurance, you should consider it. You can get total and free CoQ10 values tested too.

I believe Jarrow recently did a ubiquinol absorption study that showed it did in fact absorb better than ubiquinone. However, we can't know for certain if it's the ubiquinol or carrier that improved absorption. And if shooting for high serum levels, a limonene formulation may be cheaper than ubiquinol and achieve similar results. Or just get your blood levels tested, try an inexpensive formulation at a reasonable dose, and retest at a later time, and see where it is then?

Anyway, I see no reason to take that much CoQ10. Unless you have a proven mitochondrial issue, I'm not aware of any evidence that such high dosing is of benefit.

#16 Lufega

  • Registered User
  • 1,779 posts
  • 253
  • Location:Miami, Fl.

Posted 24 April 2009 - 02:52 AM

nameless,

I'm kinda taking a shot-gun approach to feeling better righ tnow. I might only use that dose to build up the enzymes faster and for a short while. So, any ideas? Regular Q10 or ubiquinol?

#17 Lufega

  • Registered User
  • 1,779 posts
  • 253
  • Location:Miami, Fl.

Posted 04 May 2009 - 03:44 PM

I was going to start on 200 mg ubiquinol from healthy origins but this shotgun approach is probably a bad idea. Instead, I'm going to try the 50 mg version first and go from there.

#18 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 04 May 2009 - 04:46 PM

I was going to start on 200 mg ubiquinol from healthy origins but this shotgun approach is probably a bad idea. Instead, I'm going to try the 50 mg version first and go from there.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of the shotgun approach myself. Not only is it expensive, but you don't know what is helping (or hurting) as you are taking too many things at one time. I think both Healthy Origins and Doctor's Best makes low dose ubiquinols. If you have access to CoQ10 blood testing where you are, it'd be interesting to do a test: first check serum values, then serum values on ubiquinol, then on ubiquinone, ideally with somewhat similar carriers.

#19 Pablo M

  • Registered User
  • 636 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 04 May 2009 - 05:31 PM

I know that Source Naturals' ubiquinol product comes directly from Kaneka, in the softgel and all. This might be the case for other brands do. Read the label. Does it say "manufactured by" or "manufactured for"?

#20 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 04 May 2009 - 05:37 PM

I'm pretty sure all ubiquinol comes from Kaneka, regardless of supplement maker. Or at least it should...

Ubiquinone is the one that has various sources.

#21 Pablo M

  • Registered User
  • 636 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 04 May 2009 - 05:48 PM

I'm pretty sure all ubiquinol comes from Kaneka, regardless of supplement maker. Or at least it should...

Ubiquinone is the one that has various sources.

Yeah, you're right about it all coming from Kaneka. What I was wondering was, does Kaneka encapsulate it all? They seem to have different versions; e.g. Jarrow sells it with choline and MCTs while cheapo brand do not. I don't have any bottles of ubiquinol.

#22 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 04 May 2009 - 05:56 PM

I'm pretty sure all ubiquinol comes from Kaneka, regardless of supplement maker. Or at least it should...

Ubiquinone is the one that has various sources.

Yeah, you're right about it all coming from Kaneka. What I was wondering was, does Kaneka encapsulate it all? They seem to have different versions; e.g. Jarrow sells it with choline and MCTs while cheapo brand do not. I don't have any bottles of ubiquinol.

Ah... yeah, that is a good question. I'm not sure if Healthy Origins actually encapsulates it or not. And now that I think about it, if someone wants to go with ubiquinol, Jarrow may be the better option (although more expensive). As at least they have an absorption study behind them. I think they make 30mg, 100mg and 200mg versions.

#23 darthvieder

  • Registered User
  • 2 posts
  • 0

Posted 19 July 2009 - 07:17 PM

interesting.. im going to check this one out.. thanks a lot


commission de surendettement
- commission de surendettement, vous pouvez demander un dossier de surendettement.



#24 Bat1980

  • Registered User
  • 1 posts
  • 0
  • Location:England

Posted 28 September 2010 - 11:08 PM

I'm really sorry to drag up an old thread but I'm so confused as to whether my Father and I should take the regular Co-Q10 or Ubiquinol.
I am 30 and he's 72, we're both chronically ill.
I understand that Ubiquinol and Ubiquinone are redox pairs, meaning that the body can convert one to the other, but I've also read that as you get older (Dad) and also if you're ill (myself and Dad), the body's ability to convert to the reduced form is lessened.
I'd love some opinions on which you think we should take, many thanks.

#25 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 28 September 2010 - 11:49 PM

When you say chronically ill, what illnesses do you and your father have?

If you have heart problems or mitochondrial issues, it may help. If you or your father takes a statin, it could also be warranted.

I'd say go with ubiquinol if unsure of which form to take, but the better question may be what dosage to use or if you even need it.

If you have insurance and a willing doctor, he/she can test your serum CoQ10 levels (and ubiquinol levels too), so that may help with deciding if you or your father should take either and if ubiquinol could be helpful.

Edited by nameless, 28 September 2010 - 11:49 PM.


#26 longevitynow

  • Registered User
  • 266 posts
  • 31
  • Location:Mexico City

Posted 16 November 2010 - 10:28 PM

I'm a CoQ10 fan of 25 years. Began for gum problems. Have been happy with it. My mother gets muscle aches with statins, so maybe I have a higher genetic need. I take an oil based CoQ10, typically 100mgs in the morning. If I've had a particularly stressful day or am feeling really tired, I'll pop an extra one later. Tried several bottles various brands ubiquinol, haven't noticed anything. I've see the studies showing higher/more sustained blood levels with ubiquinol, but I think it is the levels in the membranes and mitochondria that are probably more important. As the prices are going down I will probably experiment more in the future, but currently I get my CoQ10 100 mgs 90 caps for $19, so I'm happy with that. I'd rather spend some money on other mitochondrial supplements (ALA, ALCAR, maybe Ribose) than spend a lot more on CoQ10. If ubiquinol really is so superior some of the prices above may make it comparable or even superior in price. Not convinced that it is that superior to my oil-based CoQ10 yet. I think all these CoQ10 research studies compare their CoQ10 to the worst CoQ10 they can find,and don't mix it with oil. I've seen so many brands/forms over the years with charts showing how superior their brand is that I am very skeptical.

#27 nameless

  • Registered User
  • 2,265 posts
  • 135

Posted 16 November 2010 - 11:50 PM

I think all these CoQ10 research studies compare their CoQ10 to the worst CoQ10 they can find,and don't mix it with oil. I've seen so many brands/forms over the years with charts showing how superior their brand is that I am very skeptical.


Yeah, I was skeptical too. And many of the studies do seem to pick the worst form of CoQ10 to test against.

However I did change my mind since my original post (which was like 2 years ago, or so). As I did have my serum levels tested for CoQ10 several times.

For myself, ubiquinol increased my serum levels about 2.5x better than an oil based CoQ10. I expect the numbers may differ for some people, but for myself it was more cost effective (and less pills to take) just going with ubiquinol.

If CoQ10 works for you, I say stick with it though. Not everyone needs higher serum levels.

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#28 pycnogenol

  • Registered User
  • 1,164 posts
  • 71
  • Location:In a van down by the river!

Posted 17 November 2010 - 04:16 PM

I get my CoQ10 100 mgs 90 caps for $19, so I'm happy with that.


What CoQ10 brand are you taking? I'm taking Life Extension - Super Ubiquinol CoQ10 50 mg

Edited by pycnogenol, 17 November 2010 - 04:20 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users