Almanac A1C

Why the Form of Your Supplement Matters More Than You Think

Posted

by

A1C Medical Team

Table of Contents
Keywords: , , , ,

Introduction

The contemporary supplement industry prioritizes cost-effectiveness and shelf stability over bioavailability and metabolic efficiency. This structural preference has created a fundamental misalignment between supplement formulations and human physiology, a problem that becomes critically apparent in aging populations. Most conventional supplements rely on synthetic compounds and low-bioavailability forms that require extensive hepatic and intestinal conversion before the body can utilize them. For aging populations with declining enzymatic capacity, this metabolic burden represents a preventable obstacle to optimal nutrient status.

Research into age-related changes in hepatic metabolism reveals substantive declines in enzymatic function. The liver, the primary organ responsible for supplement metabolism, undergoes marked structural and functional changes with advancing age. Specifically, studies demonstrate a 32% decrease in total cytochrome P450 (CYP450) content in aged livers, enzymes responsible for metabolizing over 65% of pharmaceutical compounds and synthetic supplement precursors. Additionally, hepatic blood flow and liver volume decrease significantly with age, reducing metabolic clearance capacity by approximately 30% in older adults. CYP-dependent drug metabolism declined by 37-60% in senescent organisms, with particular reductions in CYP1A2 and CYP2C19 activity, enzymes critical for metabolizing B vitamins and folate precursors.

Concurrent with declining hepatic function, intestinal absorption of micronutrients deteriorates markedly in aging. Stomach acid levels decline (hypochlorida), reducing intrinsic factor secretion and pepsin production, both essential for B12 bioavailability. The intestinal epithelium thins, intestinal blood flow diminishes, and beneficial microbial populations decline, creating a dysbiotic environment that further impairs nutrient absorption. This dual impairment, reduced hepatic conversion capacity combined with compromised intestinal absorption, creates a physiological context where the form of supplementation becomes as critical as the dose. A conventional synthetic supplement requiring multi-step enzymatic conversion now faces a metabolic system operating at substantially reduced capacity.

This metabolic reality challenges the conventional supplement paradigm. Most fortified foods and widely distributed supplements deliver compounds that are metabolically inert until the body transforms them into bioactive forms, a conversion process that depends on hepatic and intestinal enzymatic machinery demonstrably compromised by aging. The clinical consequences is predictable: inadequate nutrient bioavailability despite adequate dose. Simultaneously, the unabsorbed synthetic compounds accumulate in the intestinal lumen, potentially promoting dysbiosis, inflammation and compromised microbiota-mediated metabolic signaling- mechanisms increasingly recognized as central to aging, metabolic disease, and accelerated longevity decline.

The article will examine the evidence base distinguishing supplement forms that burden aging physiology from those designed with bioavailable efficiency. The distinction centers on a foundational principle: supplements delivering pre-metabolized, biologically active forms bypass the enzymatic conversion bottleneck entirely, delivering immediate bioavailability while respecting the physiological constraints of aging metabolism. Specifically, we evaluate five critical micronutrient categories which are vitamin B12, folate, magnesium, iron and vitamin E, where evidence clearly demonstrates superior clinical outcomes with bioavailable forms over their synthetic, lower-bioavailability alternatives. Beyond active ingredient selection, we address the often-overlooked additive crisis: excipients and fillers that compromise absorption, promote dysbiosis, or introduce genotoxic risk. For practitioners implementing preventive medicine and longevity strategies in aging populations, form selection is not a cosmetic marketing distinction, it is a clinical decision that directly impacts nutrient delivery efficacy, mitochondrial health, metabolic signaling, and ultimately, the capacity to achieve and sustain metabolic wellness.

Key Evidence-Based

Cyanocobalamin: Why Synthetic Doesn’t Mean Sufficient

While cyanocobalamin remains the industry standard due to its cost-effectiveness and shelf stability, its physiological utility is fundamentally limited by its synthetic nature. Unlike bioavailable forms, cyanocobalamin is metabolically inert upon ingestion and requires a multi-step enzymatic conversion process to transform into methylcobalamin or adenosylcobalamin, the active coenzyme forms utilized at the cellular level. This obligate conversion demands the removal of the cyanide molecule (decyanation) and subsequent methylation, a process that places an additional burden on hepatic metabolic pathways [1,2].

Pharmacokinetic data underscore the inefficiency of this synthetic form. Comparative bioavailability studies demonstrate that while intestinal absorption rates between forms may be comparable, tissue retention differs significantly. Specifically, cyanocobalamin exhibits a urinary excretion rate approximately three times higher than that of methylcobalamin, indicating vastly inferior cellular uptake and tissue storage. This rapid elimination profile suggests that despite elevating serum B12 levels transiently, cyanocobalamin fails to integrate effectively into the intracellular pool where metabolic function occurs [3,4].

For aging populations, this bioavailability gap is clinically consequential. The decline in hepatic enzymatic capacity and renal function associated with aging further compromises the body’s ability to convert and retain synthetic B12. In patients with metabolic syndrome or heightened oxidative stress, the demand for methyl-donors is elevated, yet the conversion machinery is often rate-limited. By contrast, methylcobalamin bypasses these metabolic bottlenecks entirely, delivery the active coenzyme directly to tissues. This direct delivery mechanism supports immediate neurological protection, homocysteine regulation, and mitochondrial respiration without the metabolic tax required to process its synthetic counterpart [5,6].

Folic Acid Supplementation in the era of Precision Nutrition

The historical reliance on folic acid, a synthetic, fully oxidized monoglutamate is increasingly challenged by pharmacogenomic evidence revealing its metabolic limitations.  Unlike natural folates found in food or the bioactive form used in clinical applications, folic acid is not biologically active upon ingestion. It requires a multi-step enzymatic conversion pathway to become utilizable, primarily relying on dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) and methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) to produce the circulating bioactive form, 5-methyltetraydrofolate (5-MTHF). Crucially, research demonstrates that DHFR activity in the human liver is extremely slow and easily saturated, operating at less than 2% of the efficiency observed in rodent models. This enzymatic bottleneck means that even moderate doses of folic acid (above ~200-400 mg) can exceed the liver’s conversion capacity, leading to accumulation of unmetabolized folic acid (UMFA) in the systemic circulation [7,8,9].

This inefficiency is significantly compounded by genetic variability. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the MTHFR gene, particularly the C677T and A1298C variants, are prevalent in 30-40% of global population and directly impair the enzyme’s ability to methylate folate. For heterozygous carriers, enzyme efficiency may be reduced by 30-40%, while homozygous carriers can experience reduction of up to 70%. In these individual, standard folic acid supplementation fails to reliably elevate adequate tissue levels of 5-MTHF, potentially leaving methylation pathways under-supported despite “adequate” intake. Furthermore, the presence of circulating UMFA is not benign: emerging evidence links high UMFA levels to potential immune dysfunction, specifically the inhibition of natural killer (NK) cell cytotoxicity, and uncertain long-term effects on cellular homeostasis [9,10,11,12,13]

In contrast, supplementation with 5-MTHF (L-methylfolate) represents a bypass strategy that aligns with precision nutrition principles. As the pre-methylated, biologically active form, 5-MTHF requires no hepatic activation and is transported directly across the blood-brain barrier. Clinical pharmacokinetic data confirm that 5-MTHF demonstrates superior bioavailability and more effectively elevates plasma folate levels compared to folic acid, particularly in individuals with MTHFR polymorphism. By decoupling folate status from enzymatic variability, 5-MTHF directly supports the one-carbon metabolism cycle ensuring the availability of methyl groups critical for DNA synthesis homosysteine remethylation, and epigenetic regulation, a molecular process central to decelerating biological aging and preventing age-related metabolic decline [14,15].

Elemental Content vs Absorbed Content: why Label Claims Mislead

A pervasive misconception in clinical nutrition is that higher elemental weight equates to superior supplementation. This is nowhere more evident or misleading than in magnesium and iron formulations. Magnesium oxide, the most commercially prevalent form, boasts in impressive ~60% elemental magnesium content by weight. However, this pharmaceutical density is deceptive; pharmacokinetic studies reveal a fractional absorption rate of merely 4-10% in the small intestine. The vast majority of the ingested compound remains unabsorbed in the intestinal lumen, where it exerts a potent osmotic effect drawing water into the colon and frequently causing diarrhea rather than repleting systemic magnesium stores [16,17].

Similarly, inorganic iron salts like ferrous sulfate and ferrous fumarate are widely prescribed despite their well-documented bioavailability limitations and adverse effect profiles. These forms typically exhibit absorption rates below 20% and are associated with significant gastrointestinal toxicity, including nausea, constipation, epigastric pain, and oxidative irritation of the gastric mucosa, occurring in up to 30% of the patients. These side effects are not merely discomforts; they are the primary driver of poor adherence, leading to treatment failure in iron-deficiency anemia protocols [18,19].

In contrast, amino acid chelates represent a significant advancement in mineral delivery. Forms such as magnesium bisglycinate and ferrous bisglycinate protect the mineral ion within a stable ring structure formed by glycine molecules. This chelation prevents the mineral from binding to dietary inhibitors (like phytates) and allows it to be absorbed intact via dipeptide transport channels, effectively bypassing the competitive uptake pathways used by free mineral ions. Clinical data confirm that magnesium bisglycinate achieves 80-90% bioavailability while significantly improving gastrointestinal tolerance compared to oxide forms. Likewise, ferrous bisglycinate has been shown to be 2-4 times more bioavailable than ferrous sulfate, achieving equivalent hematological outcomes at significantly lower doses (e.g., 20 mg vs. 50mg) with a markedly reduced incidence of GI side effects. For aging populations, where preserving gastrointestinal integrity and maximizing metabolic efficiency is paramount, the clinical choice is clear: prioritize bioavailable chelated forms over high-dose inorganic salts [17,18,20,21,22,23].

Why Natural D-Alpha-Tocopherol Outperforms Synthetic DL-Blend

The fundamental distinction between natural and synthetic vitamin E lies in their molecular stereochemistry. Natural vitamin E, derived from plant sources, exists exclusively as the RRR-alpha-tocopherol isomer (historically labeled as d-alpha-tocopherol). This single isomer possesses the specific 2R stereochemical configuration that is fully recognized by human transporter proteins. In contrast, synthetic vitamin E (dl-alpha-tocopherol or all-rac-alpha-tocopherol) is a racemic mixture created through petrochemical synthesis, comprising eight distinct stereoisomers in equal proportions. Of these eight, only one (RRR-alpha-tocopherol) is chemically identical to the natural form, meaning that only 12.5% of a synthetic formulation consists of the biologically optical molecule. The remaining seven isomers (such as RSS-, SRS-, and SSS-alpha-tocopherol) exhibit significantly reduced biological activity and do not align with the body’s specific retention mechanisms [24,25,26].

This structural difference dictates metabolic fate. The liver regulates vitamin E status via the alpha-tocopherol transfer protein (a-TTP), a carrier protein with a high binding affinity specifically for the 2R-stereoisomers found in natural vitamin E. The a-TTP preferentially selects RRR-alpha-tocopherol for incorporation into very-low density lipoproteins (VLDL) and subsequent secretion into the systemic circulation. Conversely, the synthetic isomers found in dl-alpha-tocopherol bind poorly to a-TTP and are instead preferentially degraded or excreted in bile. Pharmacokinetic data confirm that this selective retention results in natural vitamin E having approximately twice the systemic bioavailability of its synthetic counterpart, with comparative studies showing a 2:1 ratio in plasma concentrations for equivalent oral doses [26,27,28,29].

For clinical applications focused on longevity and oxidative defense, this bioavailability gap is critical. The “internation unit” (IU) system was originally designed to equalize these differences, but modern research indicates it significantly underestimates the disparity in tissue retention. While synthetic forms may transiently raise blood levels, they are excreted three times faster than natural forms, failing to build the sustained tissue reserves necessary for chronic protection against lipid peroxidation. In the context of preventive medicine, relying on synthetic dl-alpha-tocopherol essentially provides a product that is 87.5% “metabolic noise”, isomers that the body actively works to eliminate rather than utilize, underscoring the necessity of specifying natural RRR-alpha-tocopherol for therapeutic efficacy [25,30,31].

What’s Really In Your Supplement: Fillers, Binders, and Genotoxic Concerns

Beyond active ingredients, the inactive pharmaceutical excipients used to stabilize, bulk, and lubricate supplements represent a significant, yet frequently overlooked, source of metabolic disruption. Magnesium stearate, ubiquitous in capsule and tablet manufacturing as a flow agent, has been shown to compromise bioavailability by altering dissolution kinetics. Its hydrophobic nature allows it to form a water-repellent film around active ingredient particles during the blending process. Research indicates this film prolongs disintegration time and retard the dissolution rate of water-soluble nutrients, potentially reducing the total fraction of the dose available for absorption. In formulations with high stearate concentrations (>1%), this “hydrophobic envelope” effect can significantly delay nutrient liberation, rendering rapid-release claims physiologically invalid [32,33,34].

Of greater toxicological concern is titanium dioxide (E171), a whitening agent historically considered inert but recently re-evaluated by regulatory bodies. In 2021, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) declare titanium dioxide unsafe for use as a food additive, citing its accumulation in tissues and the inability to rule out genotoxicity. Studies demonstrate that a fraction of ingested titanium dioxide exists as nanoparticles (<100nm) that can translocate across the intestinal barrier, accumulate in the liver and spleen, and potentially induce DNA strand breaks and chromosomal damage. Despite this, it remains a common opacifier in supplement capsules marketed in regions with less stringent regulation [35,36].

Furthermore, common preservatives and texturizers introduce specific metabolic risks. Sodium benzoate, a preservative, poses a unique chemical hazard when paired with vitamin C (ascorbic acid). Under conditions found in liquid formulations (acidic pH and metal ion catalysis), these two compounds can react to generate benzene, a confirmed human carcinogen directly within the product matrix. Similarly, emulsifiers and thickeners like carrageenan and carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) have been identified as potent disruptors of the gut-mucosal barrier. Preclinical models consistently show that these additives erode the protective mucus layer and promote the translocation of pro-inflammatory bacteria, triggering a low-grade inflammatory response (metabolic endotoxemia) that directly contradicts the anti-inflammatory goals of preventive health supplementation [37,383,39].

Summary

The contemporary supplement industry has constructed a systematic framework that prioritizes manufacturing efficiency and profit margins over human biochemistry and therapeutic efficacy. This prioritization is evident in every layer of product design: from the selection of low-bioavailability synthetic compounds that require extensive hepatic conversion, to the incorporation of questionable excipients that compromise absorption and introduce genotoxic risk. The industry’s defense that “label claim” represent adequate nutrient delivery conflates pharmaceutical density with biological utility, creating a fundamental misalignment between marketed potency and actual tissue status.

The review demonstrates that supplement form selection is not a cosmetic distinction but a foundational clinical decision. The evidence is unambiguous: bioavailable, pre-metabolized forms of micronutrients consistently outperform their synthetic counterparts across multiple pharmacokinetic and clinical parameters. Methylcobalamin achieves three times superior tissue retention compared to cyanocobalamin, despite identical “B12” labeling. 5-MTHF bypasses the enzymatic conversion bottleneck entirely, delivering immediate bioavailability regardless of MTHFR polymorphisms affecting 30-40% of populations. Magnesium bisglycinate achieves 80-90% bioavailability compared to magnesium oxide’s 4-10%, while simultaneously improving gastrointestinal tolerability and compliance. These distinctions are not minor refinements; they are the difference between a supplement that replicates tissue status and one that merely raises serum levels transiently before being excreted.

For practitioners implementing precision medicine and longevity strategies in aging populations, this evidence base compels a fundamental shift in supplementation philosophy. The emerging paradigm of precision nutrition demands matching supplement forms to individual metabolic constraints. Aging is characterized by predictable declines in hepatic enzyme capacity (32% reduction in CYP450 content), declining renal function, and compromised intestinal absorption. Under these physiological constraints, the conventional strategy of relying on synthetic compounds that require extensive enzymatic transformation is not merely inefficient, it is metabolically irrational. A 70-year-old with documented MTHFR polymorphism and declining hepatic function derives minimal clinical benefit from standard folic acid supplementation; the conversion machinery is demonstrably insufficient. Conversely, 5-MTHF supplementation directly supports the one-carbon metabolism cycle and methylation pathways, delivering the intended therapeutic benefit regardless of enzymatic limitations.

The role of excipients adds further clinical urgency. The hidden epidemic of genotoxic additives like titanium dioxide (E171) classified as unsafe bye the EFSA due to DNA damage potential, sodium benzoate converting to carcinogenic benzene when paired with vitamin C, carrageenan and polysaccharide emulsifiers promoting dysbiosis and metabolic endotoxemia represents an unacknowledged sabotage of supplementation’s therapeutic intent. For practitioners attempting to restore metabolic homeostasis and prevent age-related disease, incorporating supplements filled with dysbiosis, promoting additives creates a direct contradiction: the active ingredient attempts to support metabolic health while the matrix actively promotes inflammation and dysbiosis. This is not a theoretical concern: emerging research in precision nutrition demonstrates that personalized interventions delivering high-quality, bioavailable nutrients demonstrate significantly superior cardiometabolic outcomes which are weight loss, triglyceride reduction, improved HbA1c, and favorable microbiome shifts, compared to standard supplementation approaches.

In the context of metabolic disease prevention and longevity medicine, supplement form selection has moved from the realm of marketing optimization into clinical necessity. Evidence-based supplementation in aging populations demands: (1) bioavailable, pre-metabolized active forms that bypass enzymatic conversion bottlenecks; (2) chelated mineral delivery systems that respect both absorption physiology and gastrointestinal integrity; (3) stringent exclusion of genotoxic, dysbiosis-promoting excipients: and (4) transparent communication of form selection rationale to clinicians and patients. The supplement industry’s reliance on synthetic, low-bioavailability forms represents a preventable barrier to optimal nutrient status, a barrier that can dismantled through informed prescribing and product selection. For practitioners committed to precision medicine and evidence-based longevity strategies, form selection is not a marketing nuance. It is clinical decision that directly impacts nutrient delivery efficacy, mitochondrial health, metabolic signaling, and ultimately, the achievable trajectory of aging itself.

Reference

  1. Methylcobalamin vs. Cyanocobalamin [Internet]. Healthline. 2020. Available from: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/methylcobalamin-vs-cyanocobalamin
  2. Zugravu CA, Macri A, Belc N, Bohiltea R. Efficacy of supplementation with methylcobalamin and cyancobalamin in maintaining the level of serum holotranscobalamin in a group of plant‑based diet (vegan) adults. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine. 2021 Jul 14;22(3).
  3. Viktorija Kuncyte. Using the best form of vitamin B12: cyanocobalamin vs methylcobalamin [Internet]. Feel. 2021 [cited 2025 Dec 17]. Available from: https://wearefeel.com/en-int/blogs/learn/best-form-of-b12-cyanocobalamin-vs-methylcobalamin
  4. What is Methylcobalamin? [Internet]. Mayo Clinic Store. 2025 [cited 2025 Dec 17]. Available from: https://store.mayoclinic.com/education/what-is-methylcobalamin/
  5. Bawa AS, Anilakumar KR. Genetically Modified foods: safety, Risks and Public Concerns—a Review. Journal of Food Science and Technology. 2012 Dec 19;50(6):1035–46.
  6. Team MA. Excipients and Vitamin Fillers to Avoid [Internet]. Allergy Research Group. 2025 [cited 2025 Dec 17]. Available from: https://allergyresearchgroup.com/blogs/nutrition-in-focus/excipients-and-vitamin-fillers-to-avoid
  7. National Institutes of Health. Magnesium [Internet]. National Institutes of Health. 2022. Available from: https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Magnesium-HealthProfessional/
  8. White E. 8 Magnesium Interactions You Should Know About [Internet]. GoodRx. 2024. Available from: https://www.goodrx.com/well-being/supplements-herbs/magnesium-interactions
  9. 7 ingredients in supplements to avoid [Internet]. DR.VEGAN. 2025 [cited 2025 Dec 17]. Available from: https://www.drvegan.com/blogs/articles/7-ingredients-in-supplements-to-avoid
  10. Morton K. Nutrient Bioavailability: Food-Based vs. Synthetic Vitamins [Internet]. Funk It Wellness. 2025 [cited 2025 Dec 17]. Available from: https://funkitwellness.com/blogs/seedcycling/nutrient-bioavailability-food-based-vs-synthetic-vitamins
  11. Kasar GN, Rasal PB, Upaganlawar AB, Pagar DS, Surana KR, Mahajan SK, et al. Navigating dysbiosis: Insights into gut microbiota disruption and health outcomes Gaurav. Community Acquired Infection [Internet]. 2025 Jun 20 [cited 2025 Dec 17];12. Available from: https://www.hksmp.com/journals/cai/article/view/778
  12. Argalys Contact. Which form of magnesium should you choose? Bisglycinate, marine, citrate [Internet]. ARGALYS. 2025. Available from: https://www.argalys.com/en/blogs/advices/magnesium-bisglycinate-vs-citrate-vs-marine
  13. Carr A, Vissers M. Synthetic or Food-Derived Vitamin C—Are They Equally Bioavailable? Nutrients [Internet]. 2013 Oct 28;5(11):4284–304. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3847730/
  14. White E. 8 Magnesium Interactions You Should Know About [Internet]. GoodRx. 2024. Available from: https://www.goodrx.com/well-being/supplements-herbs/magnesium-interactions
  15. Amerikanou C, Kalea AZ, Papada E. Nutraceuticals in the Management of Intestinal Inflammation—Current Advances and Future Challenges. Nutrients. 2025 Mar 28;17(7):1171.
  16. Obeid R, Warnke I, Hecht C, Troesch B, Barbanti L, Tanadini M, et al. Dependence of bioavailability of folic acid and (6S)-5-methyltetrahydrofolate on baseline red blood cell folate concentrations in infants. Human Nutrition & Metabolism [Internet]. 2025 Dec [cited 2025 Dec 17];42:200335. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666149725000398
  17. Carboni L. Active Folate Versus Folic Acid: The Role of 5-MTHF (Methylfolate) in Human Health. Integrative Medicine: A Clinician’s Journal [Internet]. 2022 Jul;21(3):36. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9380836/
  18. Health S. The Complete Guide to Folic Acid, Folate, and L-Methylfolate [Internet]. Seeking Health. 2024 [cited 2025 Dec 17]. Available from: https://www.seekinghealth.com/blogs/education/the-guide-to-folic-acid-folate-and-l-methylfolate
  19. Tsetsekos S. What is the Difference Between Folate, Folic Acid, Folinic Acid, and Methylfolate? [Internet]. fratnow.com. 2025. Available from: https://autism.fratnow.com/blog/what-is-the-difference-between-folate-folic-acid-folinic-acid-and-methylfolate/
  20. Fischer JAJ, Cherian AM, Bone JN, Karakochuk CD. The effects of oral ferrous bisglycinate supplementation on hemoglobin and ferritin concentrations in adults and children: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nutrition Reviews. 2023 Feb 2;81(8).
  21. Milman NT, Bergholt T. Low‐Dose Prophylactic Oral Iron Supplementation (Ferrous Fumarate, Ferrous Bisglycinate, and Ferrous Sulphate) in Pregnancy Is Not Associated With Clinically Significant Gastrointestinal Complaints: Results From Two Randomized Studies. Lapaire O, editor. Journal of Pregnancy. 2024 Jan;2024(1).
  22. Unlocking the superiority of natural vitamin E – BTSA [Internet]. Btsa. 2024. Available from: https://www.btsa.com/en/benefits-of-natural-vitamin-e-vs-synthetic/
  23. National Institutes of Health. Office of Dietary Supplements – Folate [Internet]. Nih.gov. National Institutes of Health; 2022. Available from: https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Folate-HealthProfessional/
  24. NATURAL VS. SYNTHETIC VITAMIN E [Internet]. chiro.org. Available from: https://chiro.org/Graphics_Box_NUTRITION/FULL/Natural_vs_Synthetic_Vitamin_E.shtml
  25. Subash S, Prasad B. Age-Dependent Changes in Cytochrome P450 Abundance and Composition in Human Liver. Drug Metabolism and Disposition [Internet]. 2025 Jan 2;52(12):1363–72. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0090955624159399
  26. Konstandi M, Johnson EO. Age-related modifications in CYP-dependent drug metabolism: Role of stress. Frontiers in Endocrinology. 2023;14.
  27. Williams SN, Ding WX. The impact of aging on liver health and the development of liver diseases. Hepatology Communications [Internet]. 2025 Sep 22;9(10). Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12456491/
  28. Parvez MM, Thakur A, Mehrotra A, Stancil S, Pearce RE, Basit A, et al. Age‐Dependent Abundance of CYP450 Enzymes Involved in Metronidazole Metabolism: Application to Pediatric PBPK Modeling. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2024 Jul 2;116(4):1090–9.
  29. Goldman GS, Cheng RZ. The Immature Infant Liver: Cytochrome P450 Enzymes and their Relevance to Vaccine Safety and SIDS Research. International journal of medical sciences [Internet]. 2025;22(10):2434–45. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40386062/
  30. Silva Figueiredo P, Inada AC, Ribeiro Fernandes M, Granja Arakaki D, Freitas K de C, Avellaneda Guimarães R de C, et al. An Overview of Novel Dietary Supplements and Food Ingredients in Patients with Metabolic Syndrome and Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. Molecules : A Journal of Synthetic Chemistry and Natural Product Chemistry [Internet]. 2018 Apr 11 [cited 2022 Jul 11];23(4):877. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6017470/
  31. for I. What Is Nutrient Absorption, and How Does It Change with Age? – Institute for Natural Medicine [Internet]. Institute for Natural Medicine. 2025. Available from: https://naturemed.org/what-is-nutrient-absorption-and-how-does-it-change-by-age/
  32. Wauthier V, Verbeeck R, Buc Calderon P. The Effect of Ageing on Cytochrome P450 Enzymes: Consequences for Drug Biotransformation in the Elderly. Current Medicinal Chemistry. 2007 Mar 1;14(7):745–57.
  33. Zhang H, Wu D, Wu Q, Wu Y, Guo Z, Wang L, et al. The Role of Hepatic SIRT1: From Metabolic Regulation to Immune Modulation and Multi-target Therapeutic Strategies. Journal of Clinical and Translational Hepatology [Internet]. 2025 Sep 3 [cited 2025 Dec 17];000(000). Available from: http://www.xiahepublishing.com/2310-8819/JCTH-2025-00259
  34. Kassis A, Fichot MC, Horcajada MN, Horstman AM, Duncan PI, Bergonzelli G, et al. Nutritional and lifestyle management of the aging journey: A narrative review. Frontiers in Nutrition [Internet]. 2023 Jan 24;9. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9903079/
  35. Behringer CR, Kulkarni A, Weinstein A. Vitamin B12: A Comprehensive Review of Natural vs Synthetic Forms of Consumption and Supplementation. Cureus [Internet]. 2025 Nov 6; Available from: https://www.cureus.com/articles/403180-vitamin-b12-a-comprehensive-review-of-natural-vs-synthetic-forms-of-consumption-and-supplementation#
  36. comparative study on the cellular retention of methylcobalamin and cyanocobalamin [Internet]. [cited 2025 Dec 17]. Available from: https://www.benchchem.com/pdf/comparative_study_on_the_cellular_retention_of_methylcobalamin_and_cyanocobalamin.pdf
  37. Pratama S, Lauren BC, Wisnu W. The efficacy of vitamin B12 supplementation for treating vitamin B12 deficiency and peripheral neuropathy in metformin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus patients: A systematic review. Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews. 2022 Oct;16(10):102634.
  38. Sobczyńska-Malefora A, Delvin E, McCaddon A, Ahmadi KR, Harrington DJ. Vitamin B12 status in health and disease: a critical review. Diagnosis of deficiency and insufficiency – clinical and laboratory pitfalls. Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences. 2021 Apr 21;58(6):399–429.
  39. Mayer G, Kröger M, Meier-Ewert K. Effects of vitamin B12 on performance and circadian rhythm in normal subjects. Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology [Internet]. 1996;15(5):456–64. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8914118