That + I think UA is unstable in its normal form and therefore useless (or at least that’s what Timeline claims) and Timeline developed a version that is stable. Is that true? I don’t know.
1 Like
This is what chatGPT says: Q: how unstable is urolithin a?
Short version: as a dry powder, urolithin A is quite stable; in water it’s not. Heat and extreme pH speed its breakdown.
What’s known about stability
- Solid state: Commercial specs list ≥4‑year stability at −20 °C for the neat powder; vendors also ship it at room temperature without loss of activity over short periods. (SelleckChem)
- Solutions: It dissolves well in DMSO/DMF but is sparingly soluble in aqueous buffers. Suppliers advise dissolving in DMSO, diluting into buffer for use, and not storing aqueous solutions for more than one day (they even suggest purging stock solvents with inert gas). That’s a good practical indicator that urolithin A is unstable in water over time.
- pH & temperature: Reviews note it is stable under physiological conditions but prone to degradation at extreme pH or at high temperatures—so avoid strong acid/base and heat. (PMC)
- Formulation helps: Encapsulation (e.g., liposomes) has been shown to improve stability and bioaccessibility relative to the free compound. (ScienceDirect, ResearchGate)
Practical handling tips (lab or supplement prep)
- Keep the powder sealed, cool, dry, and protected from light; −20 °C storage is standard.
- Make fresh aqueous working solutions; for longer storage, keep concentrated DMSO stocks in small aliquots, minimize air exposure, and dilute right before use.
- Avoid heat and extreme pH during processing. (PMC)
If you’re asking about consumer shelf life (capsules/powders) versus lab solutions/formulations, tell me which context you care about and I’ll tailor the specifics (e.g., expected shelf life, packaging, and handling steps).
1 Like
The correct word is probably not “stable” but if I remember correctly they were claiming something about their UA being superior to others. Might be total BS of course.
1 Like
This is one of the hard things about the whole process. It is difficult to get really useful IP on things like UA. Hence if people are going to spend serious money on research they need to find some way of getting an extra marketing argument.
It may not be total BS. However, it may not be worth the price variation.
I am not persuaded by UA.
2 Likes
We don’t know what UA does in the body. Without a clear understanding of the mechanisms involved, I am staying away from it simply because I take other agents, like rapamycin, and I don’t want any unexpected interactions. Even if it is shown conclusively that UA results in life/healthspan extension, with no clue about the mechanism I’d have no idea how to fit it into the rest of my health/longevity stack. And I’m not clearing the rest of my stack just to accommodate UA. Rapamycin is still the best validated drug in the ITP - I’m sticking with what’s proven and not risking undermining it with unknown interactions.
I’ll wait for science to tell me more about UA. Until then I’m not chasing dodgy supply sources at high cost and unknown effectiveness. Way outside of my risk/reward ratio at this point in time. YMMV.
Is anyone who is taking Urolithin A cycling their administration? I see no clinical research on the topic but there is at least a theoretical case to be made, as well as some implications from animal research, to consider the possibility of adaptive downregulation.
I took a large dose, but I didn’t notice anything to encourage me to buy any more.
I don’t think one should expect to see primary benefits for a few months. Four weeks for measurable molecular effects; 8–12 weeks is typical for functional benefits. As I recall, steady state levels are more important than a peak/trough protocol.
1 Like