Vitamin K2 and your brain

A 2025 review linked Vitamin K2‘s effects on vascular health with cognitive function:

“Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is negatively correlated with cognitive health. Arterial stiffness, in particular, appears to be a critical factor in the functional and structural brain changes associated with aging. We review the association between vitamin K and cerebral function, discussing novel developments regarding its therapeutic role in arterial stiffness and cognitive health.

Among the non-invasive measures of vascular stiffness, pulse wave velocity (PWV) is considered the gold standard. PWV measures arterial stiffness along the entire aortic pathway, providing a reliable, feasible, and accurate assessment of vascular health. Arterial stiffness, as measured by PWV, is negatively associated with total brain volume, brain atrophy, and cognitive function. Pathogenic mechanisms responsible for vascular stiffness recently shifted from collagen and elastin to the differentiation of vascular smooth muscle cells to osteoblastic phenotype, which is triggered by oxidative stress and inflammation, membrane mechanotransduction, lipid metabolism, genetic factors, and epigenetics.

Vitamin K-dependent proteins (VKDPs) rely on vitamin K to undergo γ-glutamylcarboxylation, a modification essential for their biological activity. This family of proteins includes hepatic VKDPs such as prothrombin, FVII, FIX, and FX, protein S and protein C as well as extrahepatic VKDPs such as matrix Gla-protein (MGP), which is involved in inhibiting vascular calcification, and osteocalcin, which plays a role in bone mineralization.

Structural differences between K1 and K2 influence their bioavailability, absorption, bioactivity, and distribution within tissues. Compared to vitamin K1, the K2 subtype menaquinone-7 (MK-7) has a significantly longer half-life, accumulates more effectively in blood, and exhibits greater biological activity, particularly in facilitating the carboxylation of extrahepatic VKDPs. Circulating dephosphorylated, uncarboxylated Matrix Gla protein (dp-ucMGP), a marker of extrahepatic vitamin K deficiency, could represent a novel therapeutic target for mitigating both arterial stiffness and cognitive decline.

Vascular calcification and arterial stiffness may represent pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the onset and progression of cognitive decline. Vitamin K deficiency is a key determinant of arterial health and, by extension, may influence cognitive function in the elderly.

To elucidate potential therapeutic benefits of MK-7 supplementation on cognitive function, future randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed. These trials should focus on using optimal dosages (>500 μg/day), ensuring long follow-up periods, and utilizing the most bioactive form of vitamin K (MK-7).”

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2024.1527535/full “The role of vitamin K2 in cognitive impairment: linking vascular health to brain health”


A coauthor Dr. Katarzyna Maresz took time on her weekend to answer a few questions:

1. Regarding the second paper of Part 2 of Vitamin K2 – What can it do?:

Hello Dr. Maresz. Did this trial ever happen? “Effects of Combined Vitamin K2 and Vitamin D3 Supplementation on Na[18F]F PET/MRI in Patients with Carotid Artery Disease: The INTRICATE Rationale and Trial Design” I haven’t seen a followup mention of it since 2021.

“Hello. The study never started. The capsules were produced for the study, but the research center experienced delays. Unfortunately, I’m afraid it won’t proceed. Regarding studies on aortic stenosis and vitamin K2, BASIC II has been completed, and the data from this pilot study are currently under analysis. (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29561783/). There is also published study with K1: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.027011

2. Thank you! In your recent review of cognitive function and K2 (above), what influenced the heuristic that a >500 mcg K2 dose should be pursued in future RCTs?

“The optimal vitamin K dosage depends on the target population. Research in kidney patients has shown that 460 mcg daily was insufficient, that is why have hypothesis that at least 500 mcg should be used. The ongoing VIKIPEDIA study is using 1,000 mcg daily in peritoneal dialysis patients. In healthy young individuals, 180-360 mcg was effective in improving vitamin K status (British Journal of Nutrition (2012), 108, 1652–1657) . However, a one-year clinical study found that 180 mcg daily was sufficient for women but not for men. Additionally, older adults and individuals with metabolic disorders may require higher doses for optimal benefits. So it is pretty complicated situation. We do not have good marker of extrahepatic K status. dp-ucMGP seems to be valuable from CV perspective.”

3. Regarding Fat-soluble vitamin competition:

Thank you again Dr. Maresz! Would any consideration be given to dosing K2 separately from dosing another fat-soluble vitamin? A 2015 in vitro study found that vitamins D, A, and E outcompeted K1 intake when simultaneously dosed. I inferred from the one capsule of D3-K2 produced for the canceled trial that isn’t that much of a problem with K2?

“You are right, the key findings suggest that vitamin D, E, and K share common absorption pathways, leading to competitive interactions during uptake. However, I’m afraid we do not have human data. The majority of studies have focused on vitamin K2 alone. Recent research combining K2 and D3 showed an improvement in vitamin K status. Example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35465686/ or increase in D level: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39861434/. We do not know if VKDP activation or absorption of D would be more effective if K2 were not supplemented with D3 at the same time. Unfortunately, I doubt anyone will fund such a study, as clinical trials are very expensive. In vitro data will always raise questions regarding their relevance to human physiology. In my opinion, for patients to fully benefit from optimal vitamin K status, vitamin D levels should also be optimized, as both have synergistic effects.”

Epigenetic clock analysis of a clinical trial

A 2025 paper performed post-hoc epigenetic clock analyses of a supplement and exercise clinical trial completed earlier this decade:

“We report results of a post hoc analysis among 777 participants of the DO-HEALTH trial on the effect of vitamin D (2,000 IU per day) and/or omega-3 (1 g (330 mg EPA plus 660 mg DHA from marine algae) per day) and/or a home exercise program (a strength-training exercise program performed for 30 min three times per week) on four next-generation DNA methylation (DNAm) measures of biological aging (PhenoAge, GrimAge, GrimAge2 and DunedinPACE) over 3 years. Omega-3 alone slowed the DNAm clocks PhenoAge, GrimAge2 and DunedinPACE, and all three treatments had additive benefits on PhenoAge.

Inclusion criteria were age 70 years and older, living at home, having no major health events (no cancer or myocardial infarction) in the 5 years before enrollment, having sufficient mobility to visit the study centers without help and having good cognitive function with a Mini-Mental State Examination score of at least 24. 777 provided consent for these analyses and had samples available after the application of the exclusion criteria. This group of individuals formed our analysis sample, which had the following characteristics: 59% were women; the mean age at baseline was 75 years; 30% had 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels of <20 ng ml−1; 53% were healthy agers as defined in the Nurses’ Health Study (free of major chronic diseases, disabilities, cognitive impairments and mental health limitations); and 88% were physically active (29% were active one to three times per week, and 59% were active more than three times per week). The Swiss participant subgroup represents a healthier and more active subgroup within the total DO-HEALTH population.

Overall, from baseline to year 3, standardized effects ranged from 0.16 to 0.32 units (2.9–3.8 months). In summary, our trial indicates a small protective effect of omega-3 treatment on slowing biological aging over 3 years across several clocks, with an additive protective effect of omega-3, vitamin D, and exercise based on PhenoAge.”

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43587-024-00793-y “Individual and additive effects of vitamin D, omega-3 and exercise on DNA methylation clocks of biological aging in older adults from the DO-HEALTH trial”

These epigenetic clock measurements of a subset of trial subjects was interesting, although I didn’t find it particularly relevant to what I do. I take twice as much Vitamin D and omega-3s everyday, do resistance exercises once or twice a week whenever I’ve recovered from the previous session, walk a few miles on the beach if the weather is nice, and other things.

I don’t bother with epigenetic clock measurements anymore because the free one (PhenoAge) is too variable to be personally accurate. For other clocks, it would be meaningless if all I got was a 2-3 month improvement over a three year period like this trial. Studies usually find that the most deficient subjects at the beginning are the ones that show the greatest improvements with effective treatments. Unhealthiness on any epigenetic clock parameter probably wouldn’t be my starting point, so I may not show even a one-month improvement over three years.


Dr. Goodenowe offered his opinion on the paper:

“DHA is a polyunsaturated fatty acid that is essential for maintaining youthful fluidity of the body’s membranes. While our bodies can make DHA from the essential omega-3 dietary fatty acid, as we get older, our ability to make DHA decreases and oxidative stress on our bodies increases. These two factors contribute to our membranes becoming stiffer and less pliable as we age, in other words, ‘older.’

Because getting older and losing function appear to go hand in hand, we equate aging with a loss of function. As such, we think that aging causes this loss of function, like a disease. Instead, the opposite is true, and it’s the loss of function that causes aging. To slow aging you need to focus on maintaining function.”

https://www.prevention.com/health/a63850396/vitamin-exercise-boost-longeivty-study/ “Scientists Find Taking This Vitamin Boosts Longevity, Add Years to Your Life”

Prevention magazine’s editors need to better proof their writers’ work before it gets published. Unlike the headline, the trial had nothing to do with adding years to human lifespan.

Broccoli antihypertensive peptides

This 2025 rodent cell study investigated effects of broccoli peptides:

“ACE is a pivotal enzyme that has a regulatory effect on blood pressure in human renin-angiotensin system (RAS). Inhibiting ACE activity can reduce production of angiotensin II (Ang II), which binds to receptors on the vascular wall, causing vasoconstriction.

Development of natural ACE inhibitors with low side effects is an urgent need for cardiovascular therapy. Many natural angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitory (ACEI) peptides have been widely studied. However, their stability in vivo is poor in most cases.

In this study, peptides were initially digested from broccoli in vitro, and absorption was simulated by Caco2 cells transport and then analyzed by peptideomics and molecular docking. ACEI activity of broccoli crude peptide increased after digestion.

Subsequently, mechanisms were verified using a high glucose-induced vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMCs) dysfunction model. Five peptides not only inhibited proliferation, migration, and apoptosis of VSMCs by inhibiting ERK and p38 MAPK phosphorylation, but also restrained the activities of ACE and AT1R, prominently reducing Ang II levels within VSMCs under high glucose.

This research provides valuable insights into the production of novel ACEI peptides derived from broccoli protein, and offers directions for utilization of these antihypertensive peptides in health applications.”

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2025.1528184/fullIn vitro gastrointestinal digestion simulation screening of novel ACEI peptides from broccoli: mechanism in high glucose-induced VSMCs dysfunction”


Coffee compound effects

Three papers continue Polyphenol Nrf2 activators themes starting with a 2025 review of chlorogenic acid:

“Chlorogenic acid may comprise between 70 and 350 mg per cup of coffee. Chlorogenic acid can reduce reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels via the upregulation of antioxidant enzymes, decreasing oxidative stress/damage due to the action of adaptive hormetic mechanisms. There is also a substantial literature of hormetic dose responses for metabolites of chlorogenic acid, such as caffeic acid and ferulic acid.

Chlorogenic acid-induced hormetic biphasic dose responses in a spectrum of experimental designs:

  1. Responses to direct exposures in a range of cell types;
  2. Preconditioning experiments in which a prior dose of chlorogenic acid protected against a subsequent stressor agent;
  3. Studies that included direct exposure, showing hormesis dose responses and then selecting the optimal hormetic dosage as a preconditioning treatment to protect against a subsequent exposure to a toxic agent; and
  4. A mixed group of experiments in which preconditioning was conducted, including several neuronal cellular models, all showing protection against the subsequent exposure to the toxic agent.

However, in the context of translating experimental data to clinical relevance, the concentrations employed in the majority of the in vitro studies with chlorogenic acid far exceeded transitory peak levels, even in heavy coffee drinkers (i.e., approximately 3 μM). In addition to the use of unrealistically high chlorogenic acid concentrations, exposures were prolonged, ranging from 1 to 3 days. These studies are of limited relevance to humans, a similar concern raised by other researchers involved with polyphenol research.


The present paper has framed the hypothesis that key coffee constituents, such as chlorogenic acid, show hormetic effects in a range of cell types and endpoints. Chlorogenic acid may affect some of the health benefits of coffee drinking via its role in GI tract health and beneficial brain-gut interaction.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0009279724004897 “Do the hormetic effects of chlorogenic acid mediate some of the beneficial effects of coffee?” (not freely available) Thanks to Dr. Evgenios Agathokleous for providing copies of this and the following paper.


A 2024 review by the same research group was on hormetic effects of caffeic acid:

“Caffeic acid is a polyphenol present in numerous fruits and vegetables, especially in coffee. Diets contain about 5–10 to 50 milligrams per day of caffeic acid while coffee ingestion provides about another 250–600 milligrams per day. For the moderate to heavy coffee drinker this would result in an ingestion of about 600–1000 milligrams of caffeic acid from food and coffee consumption.

The present paper evaluates whether caffeic acid may act as an hormetic agent, mediating its chemoprotective effects as has been shown for related agents, such as rosmarinic acid, ferulic acid, and chlorogenic acid. Caffeic acid protective effects were mediated via the upregulation of a series of antioxidant enzymes related to activation of Nrf2.

Caffeic acid enhanced the lifespan of C. elegans along with similar observations for rosmarinic acid that can be hydrolyzed to caffeic acid. Several hundred plant-based agents can enhance lifespan in experimental models such as C. elegans, and there is a competition to find the most effective agents with potential commercial applications.

Hormetic effects typically show a 30 to 60% stimulation above control. This is far below the 2 to 3-fold greater than control detection limit for statistical significance based on human variability/bioplasticity and are often reported as false negatives.

A weight-of-evidence approach was proposed based on multiple in vivo and in vitro test results to derive a study design strategy to increase detection of hormetic effects within the clinical trial framework. Such research should explore hormetic based interactions linking protective catabolic-based adaptive responses with activation and regulation of anabolic mediated hormetic growth effects.”

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19390211.2024.2410776 “Caffeic Acid: Numerous Chemoprotective Effects are Mediated via Hormesis” (not freely available)


A 2024 review provided an overall picture of coffee compounds’ cardiometabolic effects:

“This review provides a comprehensive synthesis of longitudinal observational and interventional studies on the cardiometabolic effects of coffee consumption.

  • Findings indicate that while coffee may cause short-term increases in blood pressure, it does not contribute to long-term hypertension risk.
  • There is limited evidence indicating that coffee intake might reduce the risk of metabolic syndrome and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
  • Coffee consumption is consistently linked with reduced risks of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and chronic kidney disease (CKD), showing dose-response relationships.
  • The relationship between coffee and cardiovascular disease is complex, showing potential stroke prevention benefits but ambiguous effects on coronary heart disease.
  • Moderate coffee consumption, typically ranging from 1 to 5 cups per day, is linked to a reduced risk of heart failure, while its impact on atrial fibrillation remains inconclusive. Coffee consumption is associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, following a U-shaped pattern, with the largest risk reduction observed at moderate consumption levels.
  • Except for T2D and CKD, Mendelian randomization studies do not robustly support a causal link between coffee consumption and adverse cardiometabolic outcomes.

Potential beneficial effects of coffee on cardiometabolic health are consistent across age, sex, geographical regions, and coffee subtypes and are multi-dimensional, involving antioxidative, anti-inflammatory, lipid-modulating, insulin-sensitizing, and thermogenic effects. Based on its beneficial effects on cardiometabolic health and fundamental biological processes involved in aging, moderate coffee consumption has the potential to contribute to extending healthspan and increasing longevity.”

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11493900 “Coffee consumption and cardiometabolic health: a comprehensive review of the evidence”


Reversing hair greying, Part 2

Three papers that cited the 2021 Reversing hair greying study, starting with a 2024 rodent study:

“External treatment with luteolin, but not that with hesperetin or diosmetin, alleviated hair graying in model mice. Internal treatment with luteolin also mitigated hair graying.

Both treatments suppressed the increase in p16ink4a-positive cells in bulges [senescent keratinocyte stem cells (KSCs)]. Both treatments also suppressed decreases in expression levels of endothelins in KSCs and their receptor (Ednrb) in melanocyte stem cells (MSCs), and alleviated hair graying in mice.”

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3921/13/12/1549 “Anti-Graying Effects of External and Internal Treatments with Luteolin on Hair in Model Mice”

This study treated subjects internally and externally with luteolin and hesperetin, which are ranked #7 (effective treatment) and #14 (not an effective treatment) per Nrf2 activator rankings. I wonder what these researchers would have found if they used the #1 ranked Nrf2 activator, sulforaphane.


A 2024 review managed to cover the Nrf2 activation subject without mentioning sulforaphane:

“Certain types of hair graying can be prevented or treated by enhancing MSC maintenance or melanocyte function, reducing oxidative stress, and managing secretion and action of stress hormones.

Tactical approaches to pursue this goal may include a selective activation of the p38 MAPK–MITF axis, enhancing cellular antioxidant capacity through activating NRF2, and modulating the norepinephrine–β2AR–PKA signaling pathway.”

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/14/17/7450 “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Factors Associated with Hair Graying (Canities) and Therapeutic Potential of Plant Extracts and Phytochemicals”

This reviewer also avoided citing the 2021 Sulforaphane and hair loss, although hair loss was mentioned multiple times. I suspect that institutional politics was involved, as both papers are from South Korea.


Reference 32 of this review was a 2023 review that covered mainly unintentional hair greying reversal as a side effect noted when people had pharmaceutical treatments for various diseases:

“Hair graying is a common and visible sign of aging resulting from decreased or absence of melanogenesis. It has long been thought that reversal of gray hair on a large scale is rare. However, a recent study reported that individual gray hair darkening is a common phenomenon, suggesting the possibility of large-scale reversal of gray hair.

All these treatments rely on the presence of a sufficient population of active McSCs. Maintaining a healthy population of McSCs is also an urgent problem that needs to be addressed.”

https://www.ijbs.com/v19p4588.htm “Reversing Gray Hair: Inspiring the Development of New Therapies Through Research on Hair Pigmentation and Repigmentation Progress”


I published A hair color anecdote two months into eating broccoli sprouts every day when I first noticed dark hair growing in. Since it’s been over 4 years that I’ve continued eating broccoli sprouts daily, I think it’s alright to stop referring to my continuing reversal of hair greying as an anecdote.

But it was apparently too late to address hair loss, which started before I turned 30. So now you know what to do. 🙂

A sulforaphane review

Here’s a 2025 review where the lead author is a retired researcher whose words readers might interpret as Science. As a reminder, unlike study researchers, reviewers are free to:

  • Express their beliefs as facts;
  • Over/under emphasize study limitations; and
  • Disregard and misrepresent evidence as they see fit.

Reviewers also aren’t obligated to make post-publication corrections for their errors and distortions. For examples:

1. After the 7. Conclusions section, there’s an 8. Afterword: I3C and DIM section. The phrase “As detailed in our earliest work on broccoli sprouts..” indicated a belief carried over from last century of the low importance of those research subjects.

Then, contrary to uncited clinical trials such as Our model clinical trial for Changing to a youthful phenotype with broccoli sprouts and Eat broccoli sprouts for DIM, “Broccoli sprouts had next to no indole glucosinolates.” And in the middle of downplaying I3C and DIM research, they stated: “There are 149 clinical studies on DIM and 11 on I3C listed on clinicaltrials.gov, suggesting a good safety profile. Potential efficacy and mode of action in humans are a subject of intense current investigation, though definitive answers will not come for some time.” 🧐

2. In the 3. Sulforaphane section, they asserted: “Glucosinolates such as glucoraphanin are ‘activated’ or converted to isothiocyanates such as sulforaphane by an enzyme called myrosinase, which is present in that same plant tissue (e.g., seed, sprout, broccoli head, or microgreen) and/or in bacteria that all humans possess in their gastrointestinal tracts.” and cited a 2016 book they coauthored that I can’t access.

The first 2021 paper of Broccoli sprout compounds and gut microbiota didn’t assert that “all humans” had certain gut microbiota that converted glucosinolates to isothiocyanates. That paper instead stated: “Human feeding trials have shown inter-individual variations in gut microbiome composition coincides with variations in ITC absorption and excretion, and some bacteria produce ITCs from glucosinolates.”

3. Nearly half of their cited references were in vitro cancer papers. I rarely curate those types of studies because of their undisclosed human-irrelevant factors. For example, from the second paper of Polyphenol Nrf2 activators:

Bioavailability studies reveal that maximum concentrations in plasma typically do not exceed 1 µM following consumption of 10–100 mg of a single phenolic compound, with the maximum concentration occurring typically less than 2 h after ingestion, then dropping quickly thereafter. In the case of the in vitro studies assessed herein, and with few exceptions, most of the studies employed concentrations >10 µM with some studies involving concentrations in the several hundred µM range, with the duration of exposure typically in the range of 24–72 h, far longer duration than the very short time interval of a few minutes to several hours in human in vivo situations.

applsci-15-00522-g001-550

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/2/522 “The Impact of Sulforaphane on Sex-Specific Conditions and Hormone Balance: A Comprehensive Review”

Nrf2 activator rankings

A 2024 cell study compared and contrasted findings of previous plant compound Nrf2 inducer studies with a newer assay type:

“Various plants have been reported to contain compounds that promote transcriptional activity of Nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) to induce a set of xenobiotic detoxifying enzymes, such as NAD(P)H-quinone acceptor oxidoreductase 1 (NQO1), via the antioxidant response element (ARE). An ARE luciferase reporter assay was recently developed to specifically assess Nrf2 induction potency of compounds.

33 compounds were sorted in the order of their transcriptional activity of Nrf2. CD value is the concentration of a compound required to double the basal activities of individual enzymes or luciferase activity.

nrf2 induction

This study is the first to examine consistency of the transcriptional activity of Nrf2 evaluated using ARE reporter and NQO1 assays for multiple compounds. Future comparisons of CD values by each assay across cell types may be used to demonstrate consistency between the assays, as well as to reveal the factors that influence Nrf2 induction potency.”

https://bmcresnotes.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13104-024-07038-6 “Nrf2 induction potency of plant-derived compounds determined using an antioxidant response element luciferase reporter and conventional NAD(P)H-quinone acceptor oxidoreductase 1 activity assay”


A 2019 ranking of sulforaphane with 18 other Nrf2 activators was curated in Part 2 of Rejuvenation therapy and sulforaphane, and pointed out bioavailability differences:
OMCL2019-2716870.006

It [sulforaphane] is not only a potent Nrf2 inducer but also highly bioavailable [around 80%], so that modest practical doses can produce significant clinical responses. Other Nrf2 activators [shown in the above image] not only lack potency, but also lack the bioavailability to be considered as significant intracellular Nrf2 activators.”

This study attempted to explain differences in the two assay findings with numerous “may” and “could” statements. Okay.

But if you want to activate your body’s endogenous detoxification and antioxidant systems with a natural plant compound, sulforaphane remains the number one choice.

PXL_20241223_185836159

Too dangerous to investigate?

This blog’s 1100th curation is a clinical trial of ergothioneine’s effects on cognitive decline:

“We recruited participants aged between 60–90 years of age, from three study cohorts diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and provided them with ergothioneine (ET)  (25 mg capsules administered orally three times a week) or placebo in a double-blinded and randomized manner. Blood samples were collected at baseline and quarterly (visits 1, 4, 7, 10, 14) for clinical safety assessment and biomarker analyses). Neuro-cognitive assessments were conducted biannually (visits 7 and 14).

Following ET intake, an increase in Z-scores was observed in the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) (immediate and delayed recalls), which evaluates learning ability and memory.

ravlt

wbc

Participants in both ET and placebo groups recorded a lower total white blood cell count compared to baseline at visit 7, both of which recovered subsequently. The reasons for this anomaly are unclear but values were all still within the expected range for their age.”

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epub/10.1177/13872877241291253 “Investigating the efficacy of ergothioneine to delay cognitive decline in mild cognitively impaired subjects: A pilot study”


I rated this study a waste of time and money for the researchers’ incurious lack of following where their data led. Significant WBC signals of both treatment and placebo subjects’ immune system responses were shrugged off with an “expected range” non-explanation.

What can’t white tea do?

An effusive 2024 review of white tea’s beneficial effects:

“This comprehensive examination contributes nuanced perspectives, paving the way for continued research, innovation, and integration of white tea into diverse consumer preferences. Overall, white tea emerges as a multifaceted beverage with far-reaching implications for health, wellness, and the future landscape of the tea industry.”

white tea

https://www.sciopen.com/article/10.26599/FSHW.2024.9250424 “New insights into chemical compositions and health benefits of white tea and development of new products derived from white tea” (click pdf link)


I didn’t see a mention of white tea drinkers’ ability to levitate and fly the astral plane like the Red Bull commercials. Maybe it’s just obvious?

TFEB and autophagy

Two 2024 papers that cited Precondition your defenses with broccoli sprouts, starting with an in vitro study of influences on auditory cell function:

“Although various studies have focused on the effect of oxidative stress on the inner ear as an inducer of age-related hearing loss (ARHL), there are no effective preventive approaches for ARHL.

We focused on the function of TFEB and the impact of intracellular ROS as a potential target for ARHL treatment in a NaAsO2-induced auditory premature senescence model. Our results suggested that short exposure to NaAsO2 leads to DNA damage, lysosomal damage and mitochondrial damage in auditory cells, triggering temporary signals for TFEB transport into the nucleus and, as a result, causing insufficient autophagic flux and declines in lysosomal function and biogenesis and mitochondrial quality.

41420_2024_2139_Fig6_HTML

This is the first report to indicate that the inactivation of TFEB directly causes oxidative stress (NaAsO2)-induced premature auditory senescence and SASP induction via decreases in autophagic flux and lysosomal dysfunction, with a lowered pH at the transcriptional level and, as a consequence, ROS production with decreasing mitochondrial quality in auditory cells. The activator of TFEB might have a pivotal antiaging effect in the inner ear.”

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41420-024-02139-4 “Premature senescence is regulated by crosstalk among TFEB, the autophagy lysosomal pathway and ROS derived from damaged mitochondria in NaAsO2-exposed auditory cells”


These researchers used exposure concentrations and durations that had no relevance to humans. Human irrelevance made it difficult to assess the above graphic that shows both TFEB activation and inactivation as stress-related. “No effective preventive approaches for ARHL” was asserted as a given, although “TFEB activation via transport into the nucleus contributes to anti-senescence activity in auditory cells and represents a new therapeutic target for ARHL” was also stated.

Just like the two papers in Eat broccoli sprouts for your hearing, preconditioning’s importance wasn’t investigated. So this study didn’t have findings about how mild TFEB activation or inactivation might precondition auditory cells for other stress that might damage hearing.


Next is a review of muscle regeneration and autophagy:

“Satellite cells, also known as muscle stem cells when activated, are essential for muscle repair. These adult stem cells typically remain in a dormant state. In response to tissue injury, these cells are rapidly activated and divided to generate new stem cells, which proliferate to form myoblasts, which further differentiate into myocytes to repair damaged muscle tissue. However, muscle regeneration can be significantly impaired under various conditions due to dysfunctional satellite cell activity.

mTORC1 activity is suppressed during amino acid starvation, leading to autophagy activation. Under these conditions, TFEB, TFE3, and MITF translocate to the nucleus, where they enhance the transcription of genes involved in autophagy and lysosomal function. When nutrients are abundant, mTORC1 suppresses autophagy. This inhibition ensures that resources are directed toward growth and proliferation rather than cellular recycling.

Chronic injuries are typically associated with sustained metabolic or oxidative stress, leading to prolonged or impaired autophagy. While autophagy serves a compensatory and beneficial role in acute injuries, its role in chronic muscle diseases is more complex. On the one hand, autophagy alleviates oxidative stress and mitigates aging. On the other hand, dysregulated autophagy may contribute to muscle fibrosis and loss of muscle mass.

The function of autophagy varies across different stages of satellite cell activity. Autophagy:

  1. Maintains cellular homeostasis by clearing damaged organelles.
  2. Preserves the number of satellite cells by antagonizing apoptosis.
  3. Sustains the quiescence of satellite cells by reducing reactive oxygen species (ROS).
  4. Promotes the activation of satellite cells by supplying energy.
  5. Facilitates the differentiation of satellite cells by mitochondrial remodeling.”

ijms-25-11901-g003-550

https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/25/22/11901 “Autophagy in Muscle Regeneration: Mechanisms, Targets, and Therapeutic Perspective”


I’ve curated a few other of the 110 papers that cited the 2020 “Sulforaphane activates a lysosome-dependent transcriptional program to mitigate oxidative stress” over the years, to include:

Sulforaphane’s effects on autism and liver disease;

Bridging Nrf2 and autophagy; and

Eat broccoli sprouts to maintain your cells.

Polyphenol Nrf2 activators

Two 2024 reviews by the same group that published Sulforaphane in the Goldilocks zone investigated dietary polyphenols’ effects as “hormetic nutrients”:

“Polyphenols display biphasic dose–response effects by activating at a low dose the Nrf2 pathway resulting in the upregulation of antioxidant vitagenes [see diagram]. We aimed to discuss hormetic nutrients, including polyphenols and/or probiotics, targeting the Nrf2 pathway and vitagenes for the development of promising neuroprotective and therapeutic strategies to suppress oxidative stress, inflammation and microbiota deregulation, and consequently improve cognitive performance and brain health.

antioxidants-13-00484-g001

Hormetic nutrition through polyphenols and/or probiotics targeting the antioxidant Nrf2 pathway and stress resilient vitagenes to inhibit oxidative stress and inflammatory pathways, as well as ferroptosis, could represent an effective therapy to manipulate alterations in the gut microbiome leading to brain dysfunction in order to prevent or slow the onset of major cognitive disorders. Notably, hormetic nutrients can stimulate the vagus nerve as a means of directly modulating microbiota-brain interactions for therapeutic purposes to mitigate or reverse the pathophysiological process, restoring gut and brain homeostasis, as reported by extensive preclinical and clinical studies.”

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3921/13/4/484 “Hormetic Nutrition and Redox Regulation in Gut–Brain Axis Disorders”


I’m not onboard with this study’s probiotic assertions because most of the cited studies contained unacknowledged measurement errors. Measuring gut microbiota, Part 2 found:

“The fecal microbiome does not represent the overall composition of the gut microbiome. Despite significant roles of gut microbiome in various phenotypes and diseases of its host, causative microbes for such characteristics identified by one research fail to be reproduced in others.

Since fecal microbiome is a result of the gut microbiome rather than the representative microbiome of the GI tract of the host, there is a limitation in identifying causative intestinal microbes related to these phenotypes and diseases by studying fecal microbiome.”

These researchers also erroneously equated isothiocyanate sulforaphane’s Nrf2-activating mechanisms with polyphenols activating Nrf2.


This research group did better in clarifying polyphenols’ mechanisms in a review of hormetic dose-response effects of the polyphenol rosmarinic acid:

“This article evaluates whether rosmarinic acid may act as a hormetic agent, mediating its chemoprotective effects as has been shown for similar agents, such as caffeic acid, a derivative of rosmarinic acid.

Rosmarinic acid enhanced memory in institute of cancer research male mice in the Morris water maze (escape latency).

untitled

Of importance in the evaluation of rosmarinic acid are its bioavailability, metabolism, and tissue distribution (including the capacity to affect and/or cross the BBB and its distribution and half-life within the brain). In the case of polyphenols, including rosmarinic acid, they are typically delivered at low doses in the diet and, in most instances, they do not escape first-pass metabolism, with the prominent chemical forms being conjugates of glucuronides and sulfates, with or without methylation.

These conjugated metabolites are chemically distinct from the parent compound, showing considerable differences in size, polarity, and ionic form. Their biological actions are quite different from the parent compound.

Bioavailability studies reveal that maximum concentrations in plasma typically do not exceed 1 µM following consumption of 10–100 mg of a single phenolic compound, with the maximum concentration occurring typically less than 2 h after ingestion, then dropping quickly thereafter. In the case of the in vitro studies assessed herein, and with few exceptions, most of the studies employed concentrations >10 µM with some studies involving concentrations in the several hundred µM range, with the duration of exposure typically in the range of 24–72 h, far longer duration than the very short time interval of a few minutes to several hours in human in vivo situations.

We strongly recommend that all experiments using in vitro models to study biological responses to dietary polyphenols use only physiologically relevant flavonoids and their conjugates at appropriate concentrations, provide evidence to support their use, and justify any conclusions generated. When authors fail to do this, referees and editors must act to ensure that data obtained in vitro are relevant to what might occur in vivo.”

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/med-2024-1065/html “The chemoprotective hormetic effects of rosmarinic acid”

Failed aging paradigms

A 2024 paper with 81 coauthors presented different views of aging:

“This article highlights the lack of consensus among aging researchers on fundamental questions such as the definition, causes, and onset of aging as well as the nature of rejuvenation. Our survey revealed broad disagreement and no majority opinion on these issues.

We obtained 103 responses (∼20% of which were submitted anonymously). The respondents included 29.8% professors, 25% postdoctoral fellows, 22.1% graduate students, 13.5% industry professionals, and 9.6% representing other categories (a total of eight additional groups).

When does aging begin? At 20 years (22%), gastrulation (18%), conception (16.5%), gametogenesis (13%), 25 years (11%), birth (8%), 13 years (5%), and 9 years (4%). Nobody chose the only remaining option (30 years).

m_pgae499f3

It is clear from responses that aging remains an unsolved problem in biology. While most scientists think they understand the nature of aging, apparently their understanding differs. Where some may stress the importance of targeting underlying mechanisms, others focus on ameliorating the phenotypes.”

https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/3/12/pgae499/7913315?login=false “Disagreement on foundational principles of biological aging”


I’ll assert that these researchers were unable to incorporate information outside of their chosen paradigm. This would explain why only 18% understood the embryonic stage of gastrulation as aging’s start, although the 2022 paper Epigenetic profiling and incidence of disrupted development point to gastrulation as aging ground zero in Xenopus laevis provided epigenetic clock evidence that:

“It is not birth, marriage, or death, but gastrulation which is truly the most important time in your life.”


I’ve cited Josh Mitteldorf’s work about aging a few times. His paradigm of aging is in his 2017 book Cracking the Aging Code: The New Science of Growing Old – And What It Means for Staying Young that:

“Aging has an evolutionary purpose: to stabilize populations and ecosystems.”

However, there isn’t evidence of such causal inheritance mechanisms that would begin an organism’s aging during embryogenesis, i.e., that an embryo’s development of aging elements at gastrulation is causally affected by population and ecosystem factors.


Dr. Goodenowe recently had a casual conversation Episode 8 – Perpetual Health, Exploring The Science Behind Immortality where he asserted items such as:

“What we’re all fighting is entropy. Entropy is the tendency of all things to reach a level of randomness. Aging is not a disease. It’s just apathy and entropy. The body just doesn’t care – people don’t pay attention.

This notion that we are programmed for death is wrong. We’re not programmed to die. We actually teach ourselves to die. The body learns how to die, so as your function decreases, it adjusts. It appears to be programmed because of the association with chronological age.”

I haven’t seen any of his papers that put these and his other assertions up for review. For example, I doubt the entropy-caused randomness assertion would survive peer review per Stochastic methylation clocks?:

“Entropic theories of aging have never been coherent, but they are nevertheless experiencing a resurgence in recent years, primarily because neo-Darwinist theories of aging are all failing. I find this ironic, because the neo-Darwinist theories arose precisely because scientists realized that the Second Law of Thermodynamics does not apply to living systems.”


The funny thing about failed aging paradigms is that quite a few of their treatments improve healthspan, but not lifespan. If they don’t “target aging underlying mechanisms” they “ameliorate aging phenotypes.” None so far have positively affected both human healthspan and lifespan.

PXL_20241129_174732711.MP~2

Sulforaphane in a tablet?

A 2024 randomized placebo-controlled human study by the product manufacturer investigated enteric-coated sulforaphane:

“The safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of an enteric-coated tablet formulation of SFX-01 were evaluated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study [300 mg once daily (46.2 mg sulforaphane (SFN)), 300 mg twice daily or 600 mg once daily (92.4 mg SFN)] over 7 days in healthy male participants. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 94% of participants who received SFX-01 and were most commonly gastrointestinal events.

The observed peak blood concentration (Cmax) for the sum of SFN and metabolites (total thiol) across all treatment cohorts ranged from 0.43 to 2.12 µmol/L in 3–6 hours. Urinary excretion of SFN and individual metabolites ranged from < 1 to 41%, and the proportion excreted did not appear to be influenced by the dose.

12325_2024_3018_Fig2_HTML

Pharmacokinetic analyses demonstrated that the behavior of SFX-01 enteric-coated tablets was in line with expectations (i.e., rapid absorption following a lag phase attributed to the enteric coating on the tablet formulation), and individual Cmax and AUC values for combined SFN and metabolites were within the range required for pharmacological activity based on in vitro data. Future studies in relevant patient populations/disease indications will look to evaluate pharmacodynamics and target engagement.”

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-024-03018-1 “A Phase 1 Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study Evaluating the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Enteric-Coated Stabilized Sulforaphane (SFX-01) in Male Participants”


This study’s referenced a 2017 study for:

“The proportion excreted via the urine in this study (15–60%) broadly agreed with a 2017 report in which 10 patients were administered 200 µmol of SFN in a 1:1 alpha-cyclodextrin solution, and a mean excretion of 62.3% of the administered dose was measured.”

I’ve curated that 2017 study several times, such as in the second discussion topic of Microwave broccoli seeds to create sulforaphane.

I’m sure these researchers feel that they did a good job for their sponsor. But this current study didn’t address items that would advance science past the 2017 study done at a lower 35 mg dose. For example:

  1. Why did subject bioavailability vary from < 1 to 41% as measured by urinary excretion of sulforaphane and metabolites? The 62.3% average of the 2017 study was meaningless considering those subjects varied from 86.9% to 19.5% (> 400% higher).
  2. Why did subject peak blood concentration vary from 2.12 to 0.43 µmol/L (almost 500% higher)? These researchers knew that would happen as the 2017 study subjects varied from 2.032 to 0.359 μmol (over 500% higher).
  3. Why did almost all (94%) subjects have adverse reactions to the 46.2 to 92.4 mg sulforaphane doses? 60% of the 2017 study subjects also had adverse reactions to a lower 35 mg dose. In what normal situation would people want to take tablets that made them nauseous?

PXL_20241101_192705828

Do broccoli sprouts help treat colonic inflammation?

A 2024 human study investigated broccoli sprouts’ effects as an adjunct to ulcerative colitis treatment:

“A dietary approach with sulforaphane (SFN)-rich broccoli sprouts (BS) mitigates colonic inflammation in human ulcerative colitis (UC) patients treated with mesalazine. Subjects were instructed to take 20 g of raw BS or alfalfa sprouts (AS) daily for 8 weeks, with BS containing 4.4 mg/g glucoraphanin, a precursor of sulforaphane, and AS containing no glucoraphanin.

Our findings indicate that the positive effects of SFN-rich BS may be driven by activation of the Nrf2-dependent antioxidant system, which helps combat chronic oxidative stress.

broccoli sprouts and ulcerative colitis

Instead of using glucoraphanin tablets, we used raw BS in our study. Most of the glucoraphanin in BS is converted to biologically active SFN by myrosinase activity in raw BS during chewing BS in the oral cavity. The rest of the glucoraphanin is converted into biological active SFN by myrosinase activity in intestinal microbiota.

Oral intake of BS induces much higher concentrations of systemic SFN compared to taking the same amount of oral glucoraphanin tablets. Another clinical trial using pure SFN, such as via glucoraphanin tablets, instead of using BS, must be conducted.”

https://www.ffhdj.com/index.php/ffhd/article/view/1440/4044 “Dietary intake of sulforaphane-rich broccoli sprouts decreases fecal calprotectin levels in patients with ulcerative colitis”


This study’s daily 20 grams of broccoli sprouts and 88 mg (4.4 mg x 20) glucoraphanin is about what I take, with red cabbage sprouts (which also contain glucoraphanin) and mustard sprouts comprising the other two thirds of total 60-65 grams. Sulforaphane amounts weren’t calculated, as they depend on whether sprouts were eaten with other foods (I’ve eaten them alone since Week 19), how thoroughly sprouts were chewed (I chew each mouthful for at least a minute before swallowing), the presence of certain gut microbiota, sprout age, and other factors.

PXL_20241006_161510628

Brain restoration with plasmalogens, Part 2

This September 2024 presentation adds data points and concepts to Part 1:

supplementation

  1. “Your brain is dynamically connected to and adaptively responsive to its environment.
  2. You are in control of this environment (nutrition, stimulation, adversity).
  3. Need to measure the environment (lab testing, physiology) and adaptive response to the environment (MRI) to optimize your environment (nutrition, lifestyle) to achieve optimal brain structure, function, health, and longevity.

neurovascular

From a global cortical volume and thickness perspective, 17 months of high dose plasmalogens reversed about 15 years of predicted brain deterioration. 31 months reversed almost 20 years. So you can get more out of life.”

https://drgoodenowe.com/immortal-neurology-building-maintaining-an-immortal-brain/


Dr. Goodenowe also added case studies of two patients:

1. A 50-year-old woman with MS who had been legally blind in one eye for 32 years who regained sight in that eye after eight months of supplementation.

“This is the adaptability of the human brain. Her eye is not actually impaired. What’s impaired is the ability, the adaptability of the brain to the signal of light, to actually start interpreting what that light signal is.”

2. A 61-year-old man with dementia from firefighting work for the U.S. Navy in a toxic environment with head injuries after nine months of supplementation.

“The brain can heal itself is the point of the story. His executive function skills in everyday life are getting better.”