This archived forum used to be called 'Peatarian' (in reference to Ray Peat).

Coenzyme Q10 form, Oxidation vs Reduction

Which form of Coenzyme Q10 is it better to take - Ubiquinone or Ubiquinol - and why is it so?

According to wikipedia about ubiquinol: "Ubiquinol is the antioxidant form of CoQ10 and is essential for mitochondrial synthesis of energy. It is the only known lipid-soluble antioxidant that is endogenously synthesized, protecting biological membranes against lipid peroxidation as well as regenerating other antioxidants such as Vitamin C and Vitamin E.".. BUT: "Ubiquinol is an electron-rich (reduced) form of coenzyme Q10".

If ubiquinol is the reduced form of Coenzyme Q10 what exactly does that mean? Does it mean that it accepts electrons, or that it donates them? According to RP, its better when the cell is in a more oxidized state, meaning fewer free electrons? (correct me if I'm wrong). Which form of the CoQ10 would be better if we consider RP's ideas?

Has anyone ever taken CoQ10, and what were the effects experienced from it?
asked Apr 16, 2015 by freshness
I took ubiquinone, I experienced no effects. It's recommended for seniors I think.

1 Answer

Anecdotally, it's reported that Peat said in email: "[What do you think of ubiquinol supplementation? Is it dangerous?] I would prefer to use ubiquinone; the reduced form is more likely to be interactive with iron, etc.:

It's not clear how much ubiquinone is absorbed by the body, unless you dissolve it in DMSO and alcohol (and perhaps urea), and apply it to skin membranes. That may not be practical for you.

There are a number of other quinones you can try that might be more effective and practical, such as the tetracyclines, emodin, lapachol and Vitamin K2.
answered Apr 16, 2015 by visionofstrength