The human equivalent dose of luteolin would be about 3g/day, which is a lot -- but this makes it more interesting, for although luteolin has been available as a nutritional supplement for decades, I don't think that people have normally taken it at that sort of dose. Or anywhere near that sort of dose.
Luteolin is a weak yellow dye, but there are presumably ways to formulate it for topical use so that it's colorless. In general, it's usually pretty easy to get chemicals into follicles. (As opposed to through the skin, e.g. with a nicotine patch, which is possible but more difficult.) If this stuff works, it'll be a staple of haircare and anti-aging products for decades.
It's not in that particular study, but more potent analogs appear to exist. They lack luteolin's easy off-the-shelf availability, though, and presumably the mechanism of action is the same at any rate.
There are a lot of issues with this study, but I'll start with the obvious one: They exposed those stem cells to a concentration of 15μM luteolin. That's grossly non-physiological. There's no way that you're ever going to see a 15µm plasma concentration following luteolin supplementation, at any reasonable dose.
What's more: "Luteolin exhibits limited blood-brain barrier permeability (−0.907) and CNS permeability (−2.251), indicating poor penetration into the brain."
So if 15µm concentrations are unattainable in plasma, the brain would be exposed to much less still.
In animal experiments, as noted in your link, luteolin appears beneficial. There could be a dose-response-curve thing, where reasonable (physiological) amounts are neuroprotective, whereas exposing cells to very high concentrations directly is damaging.
Luteolin itself doesn't require cofactors as it is not enzymatic and the human body does not produce it. To humans, it's simply an exogenous small molecule... Like, e.g., aspirin.
S-adenosylmethionine is presumably involved in its metabolism and excretion. This doesn't imply that you'd want to take SAMe with your luteolin dose.
> If this stuff works, it'll be a staple of haircare and anti-aging products for decades.
You’re over thinking it.
I tried Luteolin at clinically insignificant doses both as a nutritional supplement and in this really expensive hair care product and not only did it regrow my receding hair line, colour my hair unnaturally black, and marry someone half my age, if you buy one month supply right now at this exorbitant priced we’ll throw in a set of stake knives.
> Luteolin was applied to the skin on their backs for 16 weeks. The results showed that mice developed gray hair less frequently than those that did not receive luteolin. Oral administration of luteolin provided similar results.
Broccoli, due to high surface area, captures more fertiliser and pesticides that are difficult to wash out without soaking, which no one does. For this reason table broccoli is usually very high in added toxins.
Readit News
> https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3921/13/12/1549
The human equivalent dose of luteolin would be about 3g/day, which is a lot -- but this makes it more interesting, for although luteolin has been available as a nutritional supplement for decades, I don't think that people have normally taken it at that sort of dose. Or anywhere near that sort of dose.
Luteolin is a weak yellow dye, but there are presumably ways to formulate it for topical use so that it's colorless. In general, it's usually pretty easy to get chemicals into follicles. (As opposed to through the skin, e.g. with a nicotine patch, which is possible but more difficult.) If this stuff works, it'll be a staple of haircare and anti-aging products for decades.
It's not in that particular study, but more potent analogs appear to exist. They lack luteolin's easy off-the-shelf availability, though, and presumably the mechanism of action is the same at any rate.
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/molecular-neuroscience/...
"The Dietary Flavonoid, Luteolin, Negatively Affects Neuronal Differentiation"
Stem cells, but still ...
What's more: "Luteolin exhibits limited blood-brain barrier permeability (−0.907) and CNS permeability (−2.251), indicating poor penetration into the brain."
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S222541102...
So if 15µm concentrations are unattainable in plasma, the brain would be exposed to much less still.
In animal experiments, as noted in your link, luteolin appears beneficial. There could be a dose-response-curve thing, where reasonable (physiological) amounts are neuroprotective, whereas exposing cells to very high concentrations directly is damaging.
S-adenosylmethionine is presumably involved in its metabolism and excretion. This doesn't imply that you'd want to take SAMe with your luteolin dose.
You’re over thinking it.
I tried Luteolin at clinically insignificant doses both as a nutritional supplement and in this really expensive hair care product and not only did it regrow my receding hair line, colour my hair unnaturally black, and marry someone half my age, if you buy one month supply right now at this exorbitant priced we’ll throw in a set of stake knives.
IT REALLY WORKS!
Radicchio looks to have the highest content of Luteolin.
Dead Comment
And it was applied topically by rubbing the substance on their fur.
> Oral administration of luteolin provided similar results.
So taking it as a pill might be good enough.
I read, somewhere, that Cleopatra had lead combs.
Never really paid much attention, other than being annoyed by the ads.