Methylcobalamin vs Hydroxocobalamin ?

[pipple]

Does anyone else find they do better on methylcobalamin than hydroxocobalamin?

I've done some major googling but not been able to find out much and would like to ask if anyone has had the same experience as me?

I started SI for years with Methylcobalamin and was doing great. When stocks became impossible to get last year, I switched to hydroxocobalamin and apart from a bit of stinging when injecting I didn't notice a difference.

However fast forward a year- I had the flu and the covid and then spent the last year almost back to where I started. I wracked my brain trying to figure out what I changed and eventually remembered I changed B12. Managed to get some more methylcobalamin and within a week HUGE change to my energy and general wellness. Still improving.

So long story (not very short! apologies!) - I wonder if I have trouble converting hydro (synthetic) to methyl (natural) in my body and does anyone else find the same?

Thanks 😊.

[Nackapan]

Again it's individual.My friend in Canada bought methylcobalabin at a very high cost thinking it would be better than cyanocobalamin .

It made no difference to her . If anything made hef impatient snd ratty ( her words)

She has tried all available forms .

Back to cyanocobalamin as more available and just as effective for her.

I think the conversion once Injected is the same process,??

I queried it several times at appointments .

I was told cobalmin is cobalamin its how long you retain it.

The additives/ preservatives can differ.

[pipple in reply to Nackapan]

Thanks. I guess maybe it is just an individual thing then as I can't see any research about the conversion process and if synthetic makes any difference or why that might be.

[scnuke]

As Nackapan said, it is completely an individual outcome. Some do well on cyano, others find that hydroxo lasts a bit longer, some swear that methyl is the way to go. I do twice a day with hydroxo and it helped me improve a lot, but now a couple years down the road, and due to a shortage of hydroxo, I am using cyano in the morning and hydroxo in early evening, but it probably doesn't matter. Also, I think you will find a lot of people will call the theory that methyl is "natural" while the others are synthetic complete bunk. They are all manufactured in a laboratory from synthetic ingredients. Just because methyl is found in nature does not mean the supplements or injections you take are "natural". It is, however, a great marketing tool if you are selling methyl supplements. That doesn't mean the methyl may not be the best one for you, but you may find one of the others works just as well and is much less expensive, if that is a concern to you. Best of luck to you.

[pipple in reply to scnuke]

Thank you! Yes, this makes a lot of sense!

I guess I'm a bit frustrated that I don't do so well on the more available and cheaper option 😀 but also I'm just always searching for the "why" when there probably isn't an answer to find!

Thanks though, and good luck to you also.

[WIZARD6787]

Methylcobalamin SL the best of the 4 forms of B12 for me. It works for me much better with Adenosolcobalamin SL

What is the most successful for me is all three excepting Cyno.

It seems to me that we are all different in that our body utilizes B12 in different ways. That there is a lot known about how the human body processes B12. There is little study of how a body that is not processing B12 normally and the understanding is not complete of normal B12 processing.

I allow that my body changes and what may be successful at one time may not successful later and this is confirmed by those that share here.

[am111]

The body certainly reacts differently to different cobalamin forms. Although all are converted to active forms, the rate of conversion and even retention of a dose is different from one form to another and from one individual to another. In general, cyano takes more time to convert and is retained the least in higher doses.

Hydroxy does not suit me at all, as I had very bad symptoms just before the next shot was due. Methyl was much better. Cyano is more diffuse and takes slightly more time to act but is also more forgiving if one misses a dose. I have switched to cyano due to these reasons and also because it is easier to obtain for me.

If methyl works better for you than hydroxy, by all means go for it.

[Rexz]

Hi Pipple, I've not used hydroxocobalamin. But I did start on cyanocobalamin and switched to methyl cobalamin after the first year. I too saw a huge improvement. I still si with methyl today.

[Technoid]

Just a clarification. Hydroxocobalamin is a natural form of B12, as is Methylcobalamin and Adenosylcobalamin. However, the kinds of B12 used for injection are produced by large scale bacterial fermentation. Not really a natural process but it can produce "natural" B12 so I dont know how that would best be labeled. Cyanocobalamin is often described as synthetic but in fact it is also found in some foods, although in comparatively much smaller amounts than adenosyl/methyl.

Even if you had a genetic disorder affecting the processing of cobalamin it would not necessarily follow that taking an active form (methyl or adenosyl) would make any difference. This is because, before B12 is used, it is broken down to the base cobalamin molecule and loses the methyl or adenosyl parts. It is then rebuilt to methylcobalamin or adenosylcobalamin but the methyl and adenosyl parts that were stripped off are not used in this rebuild process.

So it doesn't make a lot of sense that methylcobalamin would be better for you than hydroxocobalamin even if you had a genetic defect with cobalamin processing since the active forms are never used directly anyway. Some people do react better to one form than another and thats certainly a good reason to stick with what works best for you. But from a purely biochemistry perspective, its not clear that there's any availability advantage to any specific form even if a genetic cobalamin processing defect was present.

[thyr01d in reply to Technoid]

What a super, interesting explanation, thank you Technoid

[WIZARD6787 in reply to Technoid]

Thank you for that!

>>This is because, before B12 is used, it is broken down to the base cobalamin molecule and loses the methyl or adenosyl parts. It is then rebuilt to methylcobalamin or adenosylcobalamin but the methyl and adenosyl parts that were stripped off are not used in this rebuild process.

That is in a normal body is it not?

I like the concept of self treating for my unique body chemistry.

[Technoid in reply to WIZARD6787]

Yes. Genetic defects in cobalamin processing do exist. They are rare and severe cases mostly present in infancy although adult-onset is possible.

ref :

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl...

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl...

[WIZARD6787 in reply to Technoid]

Hey Technoid,

Rare as measured by the % diagnosed of those tested, it does not follow that it is rare in the demographic of those diagnosed with B12 decency. Nor are all genetic disorders discovered. Nor are issues with transcobalamin necessarily a genetic issue.

I find it likely that any issues with transcobalamin are mistakenly diagnosed as general B12 deficiency and treated the same way which conforms to current understanding and fails the ones being treated based on current understanding.

The standard treatment based on current understanding works for some. It in no way is effective for me and it does follow that the reason may be the standard treatment for B12 only works for those without transcobalamin issues.

It does not follow that because a treatment works for some it will work for all and it does follow that the reason may be we are different in ways that are not scientifically known due the the limits of scientific knowledge.

I can state that for whatever reason 5 to 6 injections per day of 1 mg of methylcobalamin and .25 mg of hydroxocabalamin leads to weekly improvement. Which cannot be attributed to current understanding or being all in my head.

The concept of really really bad B12 as an explanation for why some people suffer when following current understanding is not scientifically sound. Nor is "it takes time". People are suffering long after following the most robust standard treatment for reasons unknown. Many are not suffering to the same degree when they do not go with standard understanding.

Anyone that is treating with more than EOD and not suffering as much as when treating with with EOD are outside current understanding in some way and I do not find it credible that it is all in their head only because the reason is out side current scientific understanding.

We have a saying in the environmental field. The sun never revolved around earth. Meaning astronomy was very advanced and many predictions could be made prior to the earth being accepted as revolving around the sun.

[pipple]

Thank so much everyone for your feedback. I really appreciate it!

I was hoping there's some science or tangible reasoning behind it but I think it's clear it's just random individual reactions.

Thank you all again!