If you want to test yourself you can try to dry scoop TUDCA. I tried and I vomit non stopw the taste stick to the tongue and at least for me it makes me vomit.
1 Like
Haha yea might skip that one. What was the taste like??
Impossible to explain. Instant vomit reflex 
1 Like
I’m thrilled to hear this because they are so good for you!! Wasn’t it satisfying to make them yourself!
I really need to get back on the wagon…
@jeanbaptiste I’ve never tasted anything that bad!
2 Likes
Yes for sure. I’ve got my 2nd batch growing while I eat my first. It’s honestly not that difficult either I just have some alarms on my phone twice a day to remember to rinse and drain the jar.
1 Like
Chinese cabbage (Bai Cai, “White cabbage”) is totally different from Bok Choi (in cantonese, in mandarin its called “Shanghai Cai”, that is, Shanghai cabbage). “Chinese cabbage” is like a big, long, much thinner, curly white cabbage. I’m a bit surrised and disappointed they haven’t included Bok Choy in the list (and also “Morning Glory” or “Gong Xin Cai”, empt hearted cabbage which grow in water).
My recent batch of broccoli sprouts.
I hear intermittent use of sulforaphane is superior to continuous use. Sprouting is a good way to keep it intermittent, and cheap.
I don’t bother removing the seed husks as it is time consuming and I don’t find them off putting.
5 Likes
Oh, interesting. Can you share links toabout this?
I don’t remember unfortunately. Someone on this forum mentioned it. I didn’t look too far into it, but since I was planning on growing sprouts I just thought it would be a convenient thing if true.
1 Like
Sulforaphane is an NRF2 activator.
Studies are needed to evaluate if the ‘hit and run’ approach, shown to be effective for senolytics [63], should also be used when NRF2–KEAP1 is targeted. The seasonal changes in NRF2–KEAP1 expression that occur in the animal kingdom may support such an approach [19]. The correct dosage of activators for stress sensors and their putative interactions with disease‐related pathways remains a concern [64]. NRF2 hyperactivation could promote oncogenesis [4]; therefore safety signals for increased risk of cancer should be taken seriously and the ‘sweet spot’ for NRF2 activation needs to be identified. Moreover, different NRF2 agonists have different potentials for carcinogenic effects [65]. As constitutive over-activation of NRF2 may be oncogenic, promote hyperplasia and increase susceptibility to atherosclerosis [3], NRF2 may have evolved in response to different selective pressures during evolution. Thus, as the global characterization of NRF2 activation is biphasic [3], both increased and depressed NRF2 expression should be avoided.
Thought I would just skim through, because the scroll bar indicated a long article. But I read it in its entirety. It is an engaging read.
1 Like
BROQ has changed their delivery system to make it easier on the stomach. I actually take 3 on an empty stomach every morning with no problem.
1 Like
Myrosinase that’s used with glucoraphanin to make sulforaphane apparently doesn’t function in stomach acid, so NootropicsDepot have now come with a formula that forms the sulporaphane in a glass of water before drinking & lab tested of course.
27 mg per serving, $1.67 per serving:
CEO of NootropicsDepot:
That’s correct. Jarrow is especially egregious. Testing methodologies need to be well thought out. You have to do simulated gastric fluid followed by simulated intestinal fluid to really show what happens when you swallow a capsule. There is a reason none of the other brands do that testing. They simply mix in neutral water and show the conversion happening there. Your stomach is NOT neutral water, though. So what happens in the real world in your body is totally different. This is why we used our Distek dissolution testing machine, where we recreate the whole GI tract environment, and then we test for conversion and sulforaphane production at every stage. Want to know the numbers?
Jarrow’s BroccoMax:
- Neutral water: Resulted in… drum roll please… 0.14mg sulforaphane. So even just dumped out of the capsule into neutral water, the most ideal scenario, you are getting basically nothing.
- Simulated gastric fluid (pH 1.2): Resulted in 0.00mg sulforaphane. Not surprising with how little was in there under ideal conditions.
- Simulated gastric fluid followed by simulated intestinal fluid: Resulted in 0.00mg. Again, not surprising based on the previous results. I just wanted to type 0.00mg again. SHAME… SHAME… SHAME…
What about Mara Labs, the people touting stabilized sulforaphane?
Mara Labs BrocElite Plus:
- Neutral water: Resulted in 1.16mg sulforaphane. Ooof… that’s slightly less than the 10mg they claim.
- Simulated gastric fluid (pH 1.2): Resulted in 0.03mg sulforaphane. Somewhat surprising, as sulforaphane is pH stable, but there might just be variability in their formulation.
- Simulated gastric fluid followed by simulated intestinal fluid: Resulted in 0.30mg.
So without fulling characterizing their formula, it’s hard to say for sure, but this appears to be variability cap-to-cap. This is not surprising, as “stabilized” sulforaphane is not really stable. It breaks down in the capsule at different rates. We were considering selling this stabilized sulforaphane ingredient from the French company that made it. However, we saw massive degradation in our testing of it, so we ruled it out.
What about Double Wood?
Double Wood Activated Sulforaphane:
- Neutral water: Resulted in 0.00mg sulforaphane. Nada
- Simulated gastric fluid (pH 1.2): Resulted in 0.00mg sulforaphane. 0 + 0 = 0
- Simulated gastric fluid followed by simulated intestinal fluid: Resulted in 0.00mg. Yep, still nada.
We didn’t find SHIT ALL in Double Wood’s product. What about Swanson?
Swanson Sulforaphane:
- Neutral water: Resulted in 0.31mg sulforaphane. Not nothing, but still pretty terrible.
- Simulated gastric fluid (pH 1.2): Resulted in 0.00mg sulforaphane. Stomach acid prevents the conversion.
- Simulated gastric fluid followed by simulated intestinal fluid: Resulted in 0.00mg. Stomach acid immediately denatures the myrosinase, so no sulforraphane can get converted.
What about Designs For Health?
Designs For Health BroccoProtect:
- Neutral water: Resulted in 7.57mg sulforaphane. Now we are getting into usable territory. It’s still just neutral water, which is not your stomach, though.
- Simulated gastric fluid (pH 1.2): Resulted in 0.05mg sulforaphane. You can see the stomach acid is what kills thing. Myrosinase is fragile.
- Simulated gastric fluid followed by simulated intestinal fluid: Resulted in 0.15mg. You get slightly more after moving to simulated intestinal fluid, but nowhere near meaningful levels.
What about Thorne?
Thorne Broccoli Seed Extract:
- Neutral water: Resulted in 17.79mg sulforaphane. Now we are talking! There is enough glucoraphanin and myrosinase to make meaningful amounts of sulforaphane… when mixed in pure neutral water. But your stomach is not that.
- Simulated gastric fluid (pH 1.2): Resulted in 0.79mg sulforaphane. You can see, the stomach acid ruins it. It denatures the myrosinase enzyme almost immediately.
- Simulated gastric fluid followed by simulated intestinal fluid: Resulted in 1.00mg. This is slightly higher, so there is some conversion happening once it reaches the neutral pH of the small intestine. However, most of the myrosinase was denatured in the stomach, so it couldn’t convert a whole lot.
So is that the end of the story? Everything out there just sucks and won’t work? Well no, the story is a bit more complicated. Those results are simulating what happens when you swallow those capsule products on an empty stomach. However, what happens if you swallow the capsule with a meal? This changes a lot, actually. When taken with a meal, the meal actually buffers up the pH of the stomach acid a bit. To model this, we have to use SGF with a pH of 3 with bile salts. When we do that, a pattern emerges. Here are those results.
- Jarrow using fed state SGF followed by SIF: 0.00mg sulforpahane. Not much to say here. There’s just nothing in there. Sorry Jarrow customers! Not sure what the deal is, because there is glucoraphanin in there, but no real conversion is happening.
- Mara Labs BrocElite Plus using fed state SGF followed by SIF: 0.82mg sulforaphane. This makes sense, because they are delivering “stabilized” sulforaphane itself, so no conversion needs to happen. It’s just each capsule is degraded at a variable rate, so it is a crapshoot.
- Double Wood using fed state SGF followed by SIF: 0.00mg sulforaphane. Start with zero, end with zero. Tide goes in. Tide goes out. Can’t explain that.
- Swanson using fed state SGF followed by SIF: 0.30mg sulforaphane. This results in much better conversion for Swanson, but they just started with so little, so not really much in there to convert.
- Designs For Health using fed state SGF followed by SIF: 4.05mg sulforaphane. So now you can see how the stomach acid makes a difference. With a fed state, you are finally getting some conversion, but it’s not efficient. It’s at least active at this dose.
- Thorne using fed state SGF followed by SIF: 11.87mg sulforaphane. Boom! Here is where you get some real sulforaphane. Taking it with food results in a higher pH in the stomach, allowing more to reach the neutral pH of the small intestine, resulting in conversion. Thorne on an empty stomach: useless. Thorne with food: good.
So saying that sulforaphane can only be made outside the body is not an accurate statement. It can be made in the body. It’s just EXTREMELY variable from time-to-time, person to person, and day-to-day. It certainly cannot be made when taken on an empty stomach, as the pH of the stomach acid immediately denatures the myrosinase. Yes, even with “enteric coated” capsules. All of our testing was done with products exactly as they are sold to customers and suggested to be taken. We didn’t dump out capsules or anything. We put them into simulated gastric fluid as they come out of the bottles. Almost every single capsule we have tested that has been labeled enteric fails our testing, so these results don’t surprise us. I am sure they surprise consumers, but this is what I have been saying for many years. Nobody is doing proper dissolution testing in SGF and SIF under fasted and fed states to prove their products deliver what they say in humans. Thorne did do a pharmacokinetic study on theirs in humans. However, I don’t think anyone actually read the details. The study group took 9 capsules as a dose. NINE!!! They tell people on the bottle to take 1 capsule as a dose, then they design their study around the participants taking 9 capsules… It’s insane to me! There is just so much unsubstantiated claims and BS out there about sulforaphane by brands, either with no data to back it up, or manipulated data to make it look how they want.
This is why we designed SulfoMax the way we did. Mixing a scoop into luke warm water, letting it sit for a few minutes, then diluting and drinking is the ONLY way to ensure you are consistently getting high amounts of sulforaphane. We did a TON of science on our formula, and getting the sources, amounts, ratios, and timing right. If you follow our instructions, you essentially get 100% conversion efficiency. Every single milligram of glucoraphanin gets converted to sulforaphane by the mustard myrosinase we use. We tested out a ton of different myrosinase sources to find the right one, too. Did you know that myrosinase is not one thing. It’s a CLASS of enzymes, not a single enzyme. Where you get your myrosinase matters for the conversion efficiency. Also, the source of glucoraphanin matters. There is something called ESP, or epithiospecifier protein, that exists in many brassicas. Broccoli is one of them with ESP. What does ESP do in the presence of myrosinase? Well it results in the glucoraphanin converting not into the absorbable sulforaphane, but to the non-bioavailable sulforaphane nitrile form. Your body simply excretes that out. So the source of the glucoraphanin and the source of the myrosinase matter a lot. Then the pH and chemistry of the conversion matter as well. This is how we landed on the formulation we did. It delivers the world’s highest amount of sulforaphane per serving, at 27mg. In fact, I almost cancelled this release because I thought we might have made it too strong. However, the crucial thing for our formulation is to take it with a meal to prevent stomach upset. It’s a MASSIVE amount of sulforaphane per dose. This can be a bit too much for some people on an empty stomach. You don’t need to take with food, as it will work perfectly fine without it. However, we suggest it be taken with food, at least until you determine how your system will respond. It’s a great supplement, but potent, as you can see by the numbers. If you are looking for the absolute maximum amount of sulforaphane, delivered at the same dose every single time, SulfoMax is it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/NootropicsDepot/comments/1vzzlat/comment/p6bd8nh/
1 Like
Glad you posted about this! From what I can tell, one would buy this or BROQ based on price, if there should be a sale, but I’d love your thoughts.
I recently looked into this because I had a bug incident in a head of collards, and for my sanity, I had to take a break from greens. Fable said if I take BROQ and have daily arugula, I don’t have to worry about a break. (I’ll eventually go back, as I always do… )
When I got the email from Nootropics, I asked Fable to compare theirs to BROQ, and he said:
Summary: SulfoMax and BROQ are the same idea — pre-made sulforaphane, not the “hope your stomach converts it” kind — so the marketing dig at capsules doesn’t apply to BROQ. SulfoMax gives about 2.7× the dose per serving at roughly the same cost per milligram. BROQ has human absorption data; SulfoMax has only the maker’s lab data.
Call: helps (keeps you off the broccoli) — lean either product. Neither is clearly better. Stay on BROQ unless you want the higher dose.
Weakest point of my call: BROQ’s exact per-tablet dose (10 mg) came from an Amazon Q&A, not the label (forum tier). And SulfoMax is brand new — no independent test exists yet. Both numbers are “as labeled.”
How they compare
The key thing SulfoMax gets wrong about competitors: its whole pitch is that capsules (precursor + enzyme) fail in stomach acid. That’s true for products like Avmacol — around 20% bioavailability on average, per human trial (Panjwani, Nutrients 2019). But BROQ is the US version of Prostaphane, a stabilized finished sulforaphane. One pharmacokinetic evaluation reported an average bioavailability around 70% for Prostaphane’s sulforaphane (human PK study, Fahey, Mol Nutr Food Res 2017). So BROQ already skips the stomach-acid problem.
SulfoMax’s approach: Myrosinase from white mustard seed converts the black kale glucoraphanin into active sulforaphane, right in the glass, buffered with potassium bicarbonate. Then, per their in-house testing, sulforaphane held stable through simulated gastric fluid at pH 1.2 and pH 3. That’s chemically plausible and lands you in the same category as BROQ (manufacturer tier, no human data).
Dose: SulfoMax 27mg of active sulforaphane per scoop. BROQ ~10 mg per tablet (forum tier). Trials using Prostaphane ran higher than 10 mg (memory tier — I didn’t re-search dose trials), so 27 mg isn’t out of range, even weight-adjusted for you.
Cost: SulfoMax $99.99, $1.67 per serving for 60. BROQ ~$55 for 60 tablets (forum tier) ≈ $0.92. Per milligram they’re close.
Hassle: SulfoMax is a scoop, stir, wait five minutes, drink with breakfast. BROQ is a tablet.
**Your specifics **
Potassium: SulfoMax adds 234mg potassium daily. You’re on telmisartan (PROTOCOL E8 says “watch potassium”; K+ 4.0, Jun 2026, LAB TRENDS A73). Not a stop sign; worth naming.
Fiber: 1.8 g acacia per scoop, on top of your 12 g PHGG. Fine, just GI-aware.
Thyroid: this is a brassica extract at a dose far below “eating a head of raw kale.” I didn’t search thyroid-specific data for sulforaphane; unverified, low concern at this dose.
Greens
The recommendation holds: lettuce is mostly water; arugula is a brassica (has its own sulforaphane-type compounds) plus nitrates — training knowledge, low stakes. Nothing I found changes “arugula + supplement, lettuce optional.”
… bonus info:
Fact-level answer: Yes — arugula daily plus lutein (and BROQ) covers every specific nutrient the research has been able to name. What it doesn’t cover is the part the research can’t name.
What’s covered
- Vitamin K1, nitrate, folate, kaempferol → arugula (training knowledge on nutrient content)
- Lutein → supplement (pick one with zeaxanthin; that’s the standard pairing)
- Sulforaphane → BROQ
- Fiber → beans
What isn’t
The 11-years-younger finding (human observational, Morris 2018) measured greens, not nutrients. When the researchers tested the nutrients one at a time, folate, vitamin K1 and lutein explained most of it — but not all. The remainder is either unmeasured compounds or the nutrient combination in a whole food. Nobody has shown a supplement stack reproduces the greens result. That’s a gap in the evidence, not evidence of a gap — but it’s real.
Second, variety. Different plants feed different gut bacteria — this is community consensus with mixed human data, not a proven target. Arugula every day is one plant. Beans, other vegetables and fruit already cover most of that; more greens variety is a small bonus, not a requirement.
So: for the named nutrients, you’re done. For the unnamed remainder, the occasional other green you’ll “probably still have” is exactly the right insurance — no need to force it.
1 Like
I’d avoid any other brand, none of the marketing on any other brand makes any sense if you take a closer look.
That brand isn’t pre-formed, and the comparison between it and different products on their page is with hydrolysis, i.e dissolved in water. You’re presumably not doing that.
1 Like
Thx, but can you dumb that down a little for me, please 
I didn’t see anything on their site that mentioned BROQ, and Fable seemed to say they are equal, but I get you are saying you feel Nootropics is better, but I don’t understand why.
I am happy to switch but just trying to understand… thx
There’s little to no sulforaphane in broq, it’s just like any other brand, with glucoraphanin and myrosinase. So like any on ND’s list.
What you get with ND is the same thing, except you’re sure it’s formed as you do so yourself in a glass of water + it’s made that way.
1 Like
Here is the one I am trying. It has a decent amount of sulforaphane and comes in an “acid-resistant capsule” with zero fillers. It is expensive. But from what I can tell, any legitimate product containing a significant amount of sulforaphane is not going to be cheap. I did buy it from Amazon. I did consider Thorne, but the label didn’t break down the actual sulforaphane content and had other ingredients that I am not interested in.
From Gemini:
Pure TheraPro Rx is a highly reputable, premium brand within the consumer and functional medicine community. Founded in Denver, Colorado, the company is widely recognized for producing “clean,” pharmaceutical-grade supplements with an emphasis on maximal bioavailability. [1, 2, 3]
Third-Party Testing & Manufacturing Standards
While major consumer review platforms like Labdoor or ConsumerLab have not published high-profile, standalone reviews specifically targeting Pure TheraPro Rx, the company’s internal transparency and adherence to strict verification protocols give it a strong reputation:
- Independent Testing: Pure TheraPro Rx subjects all products to post-production independent third-party laboratory analysis to verify raw ingredient potency and screen for heavy metals, microbial pathogens, and environmental contaminants. [1, 2]
- Facility Certifications: Their manufacturing takes place exclusively in the USA within facilities that are FDA-inspected and audited/certified to NSF/ANSI GMP standards (Good Manufacturing Practices). [1, 2]
- Ingredient Transparency: A key component of their brand reputation is “China-free” sourcing, ensuring their raw materials originate outside of China, along with the utilization of branded, clinically-backed raw ingredients (such as Albion chelated minerals and MenaQ7 Vitamin K2). [1, 2, 3, 4]
What Customers & Professionals Say
Customer feedback across online retailers (averaging 4.6 out of 5 stars over thousands of ratings) is highly consistent: [1, 2]
- The Pros: Users frequently highlight that the supplements do not contain common fillers, flow agents (like magnesium stearate), or allergens (gluten, soy, corn). Customers with sensitive digestive tracts or those with the MTHFR gene mutation highly praise their highly bioavailable, methylated B-complex and multivitamin formulations. [1, 2, 3, 4]
- The Cons: Because the brand avoids cheap synthetic ingredients, fillers, and mass-market shortcuts, their products sit at a higher premium price point than standard drugstore vitamins. [1]
If you are looking for highly pure, allergen-free formulations and are willing to pay a premium for verified clean manufacturing, Pure TheraPro Rx is considered a very safe and reliable choice. [1, 2]
1 Like
Fable said you were correct and he gave me old info… (even though my project instructions say not to use training knowledge! Grrr)
I’ll post this incase it’s helpful to anyone.
The forum poster is right, and I was wrong. BROQ changed its formula. The stabilized-sulforaphane version I described is the original BROQ, sold 2021–2024. Your pouches are the new one.
What BROQ says about itself now (manufacturer tier, its own product page): the only product now sold in the U.S. that contains sulforaphane itself, not precursors, is BrocElite. That sentence is on BROQ’s site, about BROQ. New BROQ is glucoraphanin (precursor) plus myrosinase (enzyme) from a special broccoli seed. The sulforaphane forms in your stomach, not in the capsule. It has a new pouch, same capsules inside, and each serving is guaranteed to deliver a minimum of 25mg sulforaphane — measured by their commissioned lab tests, presumably after conversion in a test tube, not in a person.
Other numbers I gave you were stale too: it’s 30 servings a bottle at $2.15/serving on subscription, not 60 tablets at $0.92.
Fresh verdict: SulfoMax now has the edge — lean. Switch when this pouch runs out.
Why the call flips
New BROQ is in the same category as Avmacol. Avmacol’s human bioavailability came out around 20% on average with a wide spread between people (human trial, Panjwani, Nutrients 2019). BROQ’s seed is more potent, but the stomach-conversion problem is the same. The 70% bioavailability figure I cited belongs to Prostaphane — a product you are no longer taking.
SulfoMax does the conversion in the glass, so what you swallow is already sulforaphane. That sidesteps the variable stomach step. Still no human data for SulfoMax, but the mechanism now favors it instead of being a wash.
Cost: SulfoMax 27 mg pre-formed for $1.67 vs BROQ “≥25 mg, if your stomach converts it” for $2.15.
Weakest point: I haven’t seen BROQ’s lab-test methods page or their “new vs original” page. If their 25 mg was measured under stomach-like acid conditions and holds up, the gap narrows — but not the person-to-person variability.
1 Like
FWIW…
“Brassica Protection Products LLC is a Baltimore-based company founded in 1997 by Paul Talalay, MD , Jed W. Fahey, ScD , and Talalay’s son Tony Talalay (who now serves as CEO). It was spun out of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine research on glucoraphanin and sulforaphane , the chemoprotective phytochemicals in broccoli and broccoli sprouts.”
1 Like
All very interesting and I agree that sprouting is a pain and I quit, as they said, after a few weeks. But now that I see this I’m wondering whether sprouting can actually even work. Stomach acid should kill this option too. I tried it a few years ago when Rhonda went on with Fahey and they talked all about the glucoraphanin and myrosinase in the gut making sulforaphane. Now we find out myrosinase can’t survive the gut.
1 Like