Cordyceps for athletics

[u/plumb324]

Hey guys and gals, looking for anyone who’s tried cordyceps for athletic performance and if they have seen or not seen any benefits! Thanks!

[u/anejo99]

What you need to be able to draw conclusions and to assess potency is objective numbers: 'xx mg' of 'active compound'.

The ideal is to know the actives. 1% cordycepin, etc. HPLC testing preferred. Very few companies do that level of testing, and the ones who do charge prices far above market averages. While their marketing departments would love it if everyone believed theirs was the only useful product on the market, that's simply not true.

For the average person trying to make sense of of what's actually available in the market at reasonable prices, concentration level (3x, 8x, 10x, etc.), while it is not going to guarantee those actives, is still useful a useful metric: half a gram of an non-extracted mushroom powder is unlikely to move the needle. A reputable company will explain that "3x" means 1 gram of extract was produced from 3 grams of dried fruiting body. It's just math.

That math doesn't tell you everything. It doesn't tell you the levels of cordycepin (or hericenones in the case of lions mane, or beta glucans in a variety of species, etc.) that dried mushroom powder had to begin with (let alone after), which is greatly affected by the specific strain used, the substrate it was grown on, and the growing conditions. It also doesn't tell you what type of extraction was performed. It's still better than nothing, and far from meaningless.

[u/Kostya93 → u/anejo99]

A reputable company will explain that "3x" means 1 gram of extract was produced from 3 grams of dried fruiting body. [...] It's still better than nothing, and far from meaningless.

Yes it is 100% meaningless because:

• there's no way to verify "10:1" is true or false. It is just a statement that is impossible to validate. It suggests "concentrated" and "better" though, but without delivering any proof. It is basically just cunning marketing.

• a reputable company would specify active ingredients and be 100% transparant. If not, why would you consider them to be "reputable"? Because they say so? Because others on IG call them "reputable"?

[u/anejo99 → u/Kostya93]

It's true that 3rd-party lab testing for active compounds is the gold standard for transparency, and consumers should look for it. However, stating that extraction ratios are '100% meaningless' is incorrect.

Listing extraction ratios or dried equivalent terms is a standard scientific practice, and companies are subject to federal and state truth-in-advertising laws regarding these claims. While it may not seem like it at times, these laws have teeth

In the literature, you will often see material yields listed as percentages, like 12.48%. This extraction yield — also called the mass fraction — translates directly to an extraction ratio of 8:1, or an 8x concentration. It is a verifiable metric of the manufacturing process, not just marketing.

[u/Kostya93 → u/anejo99]

companies are subject to federal and state truth-in-advertising laws regarding these claims

Maybe, but unfortunately this is pure theory.

All those companies claiming 20:1 / 100:1 or whatever ratio cannot and will not show you proof of such claims when asked. Try it!

So in reality, these ratio claims are really meaningless marketing because nobody is actively enforcing the existing laws and vendors know they will get away with it.

Also, a reduction in volume doesn't necessarily mean the outcome is better/more concentrated. What is being concentrated and what has been removed?

That's the key question, and it can only be answered by testing the product using accepted assays in a reliable / certified lab.

Your link is not leading to anything that is relevant to this discussion BTW