Nattokinase supplementation can naturally help reduce LDL cholesterol.
"As a result, I decided to start supplementing with nattokinase, which can naturally help reduce LDL cholesterol, and it did." (said at 1:17:38)
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) found that nattokinase supplementation does not reduce LDL cholesterol. In pooled analyses of RCTs, lower doses were associated with a statistically significant slight increase in LDL-C compared to control (MD = 6.49 mg/dL), while higher doses showed no significant difference in LDL-C levels compared to controls. Additionally, double-blind RCT evidence demonstrates that lipid-lowering effects observed in commercial supplement formulations are driven by co-ingredients such as red yeast rice (which contains natural statin compounds like monacolin K), whereas nattokinase alone does not produce a significant reduction in LDL cholesterol compared to placebo.
- contradicts: Combined nattokinase with red yeast rice but not nattokinase alone has potent effects on b… (Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition 2009) · cited 26x in the literature
"After controlling for baseline levels, only the combined group, but not mono group, showed a significant difference (p<0.0001) in TC, LDL-C and TC/HDL-C ratio when compared with the placebo group." (abstract, results)
pubmed - contradicts: Nattokinase Supplementation and Cardiovascular Risk Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-… (Reviews in cardiovascular medicine 2023) · cited 9x in the literature
"Relatively low total dosage of nattokinase had a negative effect on blood total cholesterol (MD [mean difference] = 5.27, 95% CI [confidence intervals]: 3.74 to 6.81, p < 0.00001), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD = -2.76, 95% CI: -3.88 to -1.64, p < 0.00001), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD = 6.49, 95% CI: 0.83 to 12.15, p = 0.02)... Nattokinase group with relatively high total dosage also had a higher total cholesterol (MD = 3.18, 95% CI: 2.29 to 4.06, p < 0.00001) than control interventions, but no significant differences were found in levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol." (abstract, results)
pubmedfull study (doi)
Circulating BDNF does not cross the blood-brain barrier into the brain.
"though circulating BDNF doesn't actually get into the brain" (said at 1:39:35)
Preclinical transport studies directly contradict the assertion that circulating BDNF cannot enter the brain. Experimental pharmacokinetic investigations in animal models (e.g., Pan et al., 1998) demonstrated that intact BDNF in the peripheral circulation rapidly and completely crosses the blood-brain barrier into brain parenchyma via a saturable, high-capacity transport mechanism.
A randomized trial in older adults showed that Norwegian 4x4 high-intensity interval training produced superior improvements in hippocampal function and structure maintenance compared to moderate-intensity training, with benefits maintained for 5 years.
"And the third group did a high-intensity interval training intervention, which is the Norwegian 4x4 protocol... But what they showed was that that high-intensity interval training group, they improved their fitness just as well as the zone 2 group, interestingly, but they had much better improvements in hippocampal function and maintenance of hippocampal structure on an MRI scan. And they maintained that benefit for 5 years after the six-month intervention." (said at 1:40:05)
The speaker appears to refer to the brain MRI substudies of the Generation 100 trial (a randomized controlled trial in older adults aged 70–77 comparing 5 years of Norwegian 4x4 HIIT, moderate-intensity continuous training [MICT], and national physical activity guidelines). The speaker makes multiple factual errors that contradict the published findings: (1) the intervention was a 5-year randomized trial, not a 6-month intervention followed for 5 years; (2) HIIT did not produce superior preservation of hippocampal structure—in fact, the 5-year intervention and post-intervention follow-up showed greater hippocampal volume loss in the HIIT group compared to controls following national guidelines, with the control group showing the lowest rate of hippocampal volume loss over time; and (3) long-term cognitive tests for hippocampal-dependent memory (verbal memory, pattern separation) showed no superior benefit for the HIIT group over the other groups.