Neuriva Review - Everything You Need To Know

In our updated Neuriva review, we share the long-term results from testing this well-known brain and memory supplement by Schiff Vitamins, a brand owned by Reckitt (formerly Reckitt Benckiser). We'll break down Neuriva’s claims, look at its ingredients and dosages, and compare them to clinical research. Although Neuriva is popular, we don't think it's the best option out there, far from it, especially given recent legal actions that suggest the company has exaggerated how well it works. We'll also discuss some alternatives that might provide more complete support for your cognitive health.

Manufacturer's Claimed Benefits

Neuriva Claims: Scientific Assessment

Claim 1: Neuriva Supports Focus, Memory, Learning, Accuracy, and Concentration

Neuriva Original claims to support five areas of cognitive health: focus, memory, learning, accuracy, and concentration. The main ingredients, Neurofactor™ and Phosphatidylserine, are said to drive these benefits.

Scientific Review:This broad claim lacks substantial backing from the existing scientific literature. Neurofactor, while linked to some increase in Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF), has limited clinical evidence demonstrating direct improvements in focus, accuracy, or concentration in humans[1]. Most studies showing Phosphatidylserine's benefits focus specifically on memory and learning, and typically in older adults, but not in younger populations or the other cognitive areas mentioned[2]. Additionally, the dose of 100 mg for both ingredients in Neuriva is low, especially considering that most studies use at least 300 mg of Phosphatidylserine to achieve meaningful effects[3].

Claim 2: Clinically Tested, Naturally Sourced Ingredients

Neuriva highlights the natural origin of its ingredients and their clinical testing for brain health. Neurofactor is claimed to boost BDNF, a protein linked to brain cell growth and neuroplasticity, while Phosphatidylserine supports neuron health.

Scientific Review:Although Neurofactor may be "clinically tested," the studies available are limited and small in scale[4]. While increases in BDNF have been observed in some studies, translating this into concrete cognitive benefits is another matter. The actual evidence for improved brain health or function through BDNF elevation remains weak and inconsistent[5]. Similarly, while Phosphatidylserine is more thoroughly researched, the dosage in Neuriva is far below the amounts that have been shown to have significant impacts on memory and learning[6]. At 100 mg per serving, it’s unlikely to provide the level of support suggested by Neuriva’s claims.

Claim 3: The Neurofactor Difference – Clinically Tested to Increase BDNF Levels

Neuriva claims that Neurofactor, a coffee fruit extract, is clinically tested to increase BDNF, which helps strengthen brain cell connections.

Scientific Review:There is some preliminary evidence supporting the idea that Neurofactor can increase BDNF levels[7]. However, the clinical relevance of these increases is questionable, as BDNF plays a complex role in the brain. Merely increasing its levels does not guarantee cognitive enhancement[8]. More robust, large-scale studies are needed to confirm whether the small BDNF increases translate into measurable benefits in learning or memory.

Claim 4: Phosphatidylserine Supports Memory and Learning

Neuriva claims that Phosphatidylserine, a phospholipid, supports memory and learning by promoting healthy neuron function.

Scientific Review:Phosphatidylserine does have some evidence supporting its role in cognitive health, particularly in older adults with mild cognitive impairment[9]. However, the dose in Neuriva (100 mg) is insufficient compared to the 300-600 mg used in successful studies[10]. As such, the Phosphatidylserine in Neuriva may offer some marginal benefits, but it’s unlikely to be as impactful as the product claims, especially in younger, healthy adults.

Neuriva’s claims of enhancing focus, memory, learning, accuracy, and concentration are not fully supported by the scientific evidence. While the ingredients have potential, the low dosages used in Neuriva make it unlikely to deliver the benefits it promises. Neurofactor’s ability to increase BDNF is preliminary at best, and Phosphatidylserine, though effective at higher doses, is underdosed in this formulation. Consumers should be cautious about the bold claims made and consider whether the dosages are sufficient to achieve the promised outcomes.

Our Experience with Neuriva

Our experience with Neuriva was underwhelming, especially considering the bold promises made by the brand. Neuriva claims to improve five indicators of brain health—focus, memory, learning, accuracy, and concentration—but in practice, the results fell short of expectations.

The product’s primary ingredients, Neurofactor™ (coffee fruit extract) and Phosphatidylserine, both have some scientific backing, but the doses used in Neuriva seem insufficient to deliver the results the company suggests. At just 100 mg each, both Neurofactor and Phosphatidylserine are underdosed when compared to the amounts used in successful clinical trials. For example, studies on Phosphatidylserine’s impact on memory and learning generally involve doses of 300 mg or more[11,12]. Given this, it's hard to see how Neuriva could make a noticeable difference in cognitive function at such low doses.

Neuriva's claim that it can support focus, accuracy, and concentration also proved disappointing. While Neurofactor may increase levels of Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF), which is associated with neuroplasticity, the existing research is still in its infancy. The studies conducted so far are small and don't provide clear evidence that boosting BDNF will lead to significant improvements in day-to-day cognitive tasks like concentration or focus[13,14]. Additionally, the short-term effects of Neurofactor are not well-documented, leaving doubts about its ability to deliver on this claim[15].

We found that the product had little noticeable effect on learning or accuracy. The claim that Phosphatidylserine supports neuron health and enhances learning is based on studies conducted with higher doses in older adults[16]. In Neuriva’s formulation, the lower dose likely limits any potential benefit. The cognitive boost we expected simply didn’t materialize, and while there may be some minor memory support, the impact was far from the substantial results the product description seemed to suggest[17-20].

The natural sourcing of ingredients, which Neuriva highlights, is a nice touch, but it's not enough to compensate for the lack of real cognitive benefits. Even with “clinically tested” ingredients, the dosages in Neuriva are too small to have a meaningful effect. For those seeking real improvements in brain health, this supplement does not live up to its promises.

We felt Neuriva was a letdown. Its formula, while based on ingredients with some potential, didn't deliver noticeable cognitive benefits in real-world use. The low doses of its active ingredients simply don’t provide the boost the company claims, making it difficult to recommend this product over better-formulated alternatives.

Research and Legal Issues with Neuriva and Schiff Vitamins

Research Summary

The study titled "A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Parallel Study Investigating the Efficacy of a Whole Coffee Cherry Extract and Phosphatidylserine Formulation on Cognitive Performance of Healthy Adults with Self-Perceived Memory Problems" aimed to examine the effects of Neuriva on cognitive performance. The research involved 138 healthy adults aged 40-65, who self-reported memory problems. Participants were randomized to either receive Neuriva or a placebo for 42 days.

The study measured various cognitive outcomes, including memory, focus, accuracy, concentration, and learning, using the Computerized Mental Performance Assessment System (COMPASS), the Everyday Memory Questionnaire (EMQ), and Go/No-Go tests. Plasma brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) levels were also assessed.

Key Findings:

• Memory, Accuracy, Focus, and Concentration: Neuriva supplementation led to statistically significant improvements in numeric working memory, reaction time, and overall accuracy in the picture recognition task when compared to the placebo group.
• BDNF Levels and EMQ Scores: No significant differences were observed between the Neuriva and placebo groups for BDNF levels or Everyday Memory Questionnaire (EMQ) scores.
• Safety and Tolerability: Neuriva was reported to be safe and well-tolerated over the 42-day period.

Issues and Flaws in the Research:

1. Self-Reported Memory Problems: The participants were selected based on self-reported memory issues, which introduces subjective bias. Self-perception of cognitive decline may not align with objective assessments of cognitive performance. This undermines the generalizability of the findings to the wider population.
2. Lack of Significant BDNF Findings: Despite claims that coffee cherry extract boosts BDNF, this study did not find significant differences in BDNF levels between the supplement and placebo groups. This is a critical finding, as Neuriva® claims to enhance cognitive function by boosting BDNF levels. The lack of impact on this biological marker suggests the core mechanism proposed by the supplement may not be as effective as advertised.
3. Limited Test Battery: The study used the COMPASS and Go/No-Go tasks, which are valid measures of cognitive function but limited in scope. The lack of significant findings in the Go/No-Go tests, which assess attention and response inhibition, highlights that Neuriva may not impact all cognitive domains as claimed. Additionally, the Everyday Memory Questionnaire (EMQ), designed to assess everyday memory issues, showed no significant differences, calling into question the real-world applicability of the supplement's benefits.
4. Short Duration: The study lasted only 42 days, which may not be sufficient to observe long-term cognitive benefits or declines. Cognitive function improvements, especially in memory and learning, often require longer-term intervention to assess lasting effects. This short timeframe limits conclusions about Neuriva’s efficacy in sustained cognitive enhancement.
5. Modest Statistical Significance: While some improvements were reported, the p-values (e.g., p ≤ 0.024, p ≤ 0.031) are modest, and without larger effect sizes or replication of these findings in other studies, the clinical relevance of these changes remains unclear. These improvements might be statistically significant, but they may not translate into meaningful real-world benefits.
6. Placebo-Controlled but Not Double-Dosed: The study design compared Neuriva to a placebo but did not compare it to other doses or competing supplements. This limits the ability to determine whether a higher dose or a different combination of ingredients might have produced more pronounced effects.
7. Small Sample Size: With only 138 participants, the study's sample size may not provide enough statistical power to detect small but meaningful differences in cognitive function. Larger studies are necessary to confirm these findings and ensure they are not due to random variation.
8. Conflict of interest. Several authors of the study are employees of Reckitt, the parent company that owns the Neuriva brand. This raises concerns about potential bias in the study design, data interpretation, and reporting of the results. While the study claims to be double-blind and placebo-controlled, the involvement of employees from the company that directly profits from Neuriva sales introduces the possibility of skewed outcomes or overemphasis on positive findings. Independent replication of these results by researchers with no ties to the company would be necessary to validate the claims made in this study and minimize potential bias.

While the study indicates that Neuriva supplementation may provide some modest improvements in cognitive performance (e.g., memory, accuracy, focus), the overall findings are not overwhelmingly convincing. The lack of significant changes in BDNF, EMQ scores, and Go/No-Go tests, combined with the relatively small sample size and short duration, suggest that Neuriva® may not live up to its broader claims of enhancing all aspects of brain health. Longer studies with more robust measures are needed to establish its efficacy.

Legal Issues

Neuriva Legal Challenges: Court Findings and Current Status

The Neuriva supplement line, produced by Reckitt Benckiser, faced significant legal scrutiny due to claims of false advertising. Plaintiffs in a consolidated class action lawsuit argued that Reckitt Benckiser misled consumers by marketing Neuriva products as “clinically and scientifically proven” to enhance brain function, despite insufficient evidence supporting such claims. The case brought attention to how companies market health supplements with bold, yet unverified, assertions.

The initial resolution came in the form of an $8 million settlement agreement, where consumers who purchased Neuriva products between January 2019 and April 2021 could claim monetary compensation. Reckitt Benckiser also agreed to adjust its marketing, removing “clinically proven” from labels and advertising. However, the settlement was contested by objector Theodore H. Frank, who argued that the injunctive relief offered no benefit to past purchasers and that the proposed attorney fees were excessive.

In April 2023, the Eleventh Circuit Court vacated the settlement, siding with Frank’s objections. The court found that the plaintiffs lacked standing to seek injunctive relief since none intended to repurchase Neuriva products, and it criticized the disproportionate allocation of attorney fees. As a result, the settlement is currently void, and the case is set for further proceedings.

Detailed Background on the Neuriva Lawsuit

The legal dispute originated from claims that Reckitt Benckiser (now Reckitt) falsely advertised Neuriva supplements (Neuriva Original, Neuriva Plus, and Neuriva De-Stress) as scientifically backed brain enhancers. Plaintiffs in several lawsuits, consolidated into one case, accused the company of misleading consumers and violating various consumer protection laws. These lawsuits arose out of the assertion that Neuriva's brain performance benefits were not adequately supported by scientific research.

To settle the case, Reckitt Benckiser initially agreed to an $8 million settlement, offering consumers monetary compensation and agreeing to modify its advertising by removing claims of being "clinically proven." Class members without proof of purchase could claim up to $20, while those with proof of purchase could receive up to $65. In addition to the financial relief, the company also committed to a marketing overhaul, including removing the term “clinically proven” from Neuriva’s labels, websites, and social media.

However, this settlement was appealed by Theodore H. Frank, a prominent objector in class action lawsuits. Frank’s objection centered on the disproportionate attorney fees and the claim that the injunctive relief was meaningless for past purchasers, as it provided no tangible benefit to those who had already bought Neuriva. The Eleventh Circuit Court agreed, ruling that the plaintiffs did not have standing for injunctive relief since they did not plan to repurchase Neuriva products, and the settlement was voided in April 2023.

The current status of the case is that the settlement has been nullified, and further proceedings are necessary to address the claims. This outcome leaves consumers without compensation for the time being and calls into question the transparency of Neuriva’s marketing practices.

Scientific Evidence for Ingredients in Neuriva

Neuriva has a basic ingredient profile consisting of Coffee Fruit Extract (100 mg) and Phosphatidylserine (100 mg). While these ingredients have some scientific support, Neuriva is underdosed when compared to clinical studies into these ingredients. It also lacks many clinically proven nootropic ingredients commonly found in more comprehensive brain supplements. Here, we review the evidence behind Neuriva’s ingredients and highlight dosage concerns compared to those seen in studies.

1. Coffee Fruit Extract (100 mg)

Neuriva’s main ingredient, Coffee Fruit Extract, is included for its antioxidant properties and potential to increase levels of Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF), which supports brain health. Some research suggests that coffee fruit extract can raise BDNF levels by up to 143%, which is beneficial for neuroplasticity and cognitive function[21]. However, the dosage used in these studies was higher than Neuriva’s 100 mg, typically around 400 mg[22]. The lower dosage in Neuriva may limit its effectiveness in significantly improving brain function, as this ingredient has not been widely studied at lower doses.

2. Phosphatidylserine (100 mg)

Phosphatidylserine is one of the more well-researched nootropics for cognitive health, particularly in aging populations. It helps maintain healthy cell membranes and promotes memory, processing speed, and overall mental performance[23]. Clinical studies supporting Phosphatidylserine’s benefits typically use doses of 300 mg daily[24]. At just 100 mg, Neuriva’s dose is far below the amount needed to achieve the cognitive improvements shown in these studies. While it may still offer some support, it is unlikely to provide the full range of benefits at this lower dosage.

Missing Clinically Proven Ingredients

Neuriva’s formula is also lacking in other widely recognized nootropic ingredients. For example, Bacopa Monnieri, an adaptogen known to improve memory and reduce anxiety, is not present. Studies show that Bacopa at doses of 300 mg or higher can significantly enhance cognitive performance, particularly in memory retention[25]. Additionally, ingredients like Alpha-GPC, Rhodiola Rosea, and Ginkgo Biloba, which have strong evidence backing their cognitive benefits, are missing from Neuriva’s formulation[26,27]. These omissions make Neuriva less comprehensive compared to other nootropic supplements.

Low Dosage Concerns

One of the primary concerns with Neuriva is the low dosage of its active ingredients. Both Coffee Fruit Extract and Phosphatidylserine are included at 100 mg, which is below the levels used in studies that demonstrated meaningful cognitive benefits. For comparison, Phosphatidylserine requires around 300 mg for optimal results in memory and mental sharpness[28]. The absence of other proven nootropics further limits Neuriva’s potential as an effective brain supplement.

While Neuriva may offer mild cognitive support, individuals seeking more substantial cognitive improvement should consider supplements with higher dosages and a broader range of proven nootropic ingredients.

When evaluating Neuriva’s ingredients and dosages, it’s important to consider the potential side effects that users may experience based on the available scientific evidence. Neuriva contains two main active ingredients: coffee fruit extract (Neurofacto) and phosphatidylserine, both of which have been studied for their effects on cognitive function. However, side effects can occur depending on individual sensitivity and the dosages used.

1. Coffee Fruit Extract (100 mg)

The coffee fruit extract in Neuriva is marketed as a source of Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF), which is associated with cognitive function and neuroplasticity. While coffee fruit extract is generally considered safe, there are potential side effects, particularly for people who are sensitive to caffeine, even though the extract is decaffeinated.

Potential Side Effects:

• Insomnia and jitteriness: Some individuals, even when consuming decaffeinated coffee extracts, may experience mild stimulant effects, leading to insomnia, jitteriness, or increased heart rate, especially if taken later in the day[28].
• Gastrointestinal issues: Some users may experience stomach discomfort or mild gastrointestinal upset, although this is not commonly reported[29].

Given the 100 mg dose in Neuriva, side effects are likely to be minimal, but it is always best to monitor for any unwanted symptoms.

2. Phosphatidylserine (100 mg)

Phosphatidylserine, a phospholipid found in high concentrations in the brain, is often used to support memory and cognitive function. Studies suggest that higher doses (300-600 mg) may be effective in enhancing memory, particularly in older adults. However, Neuriva’s dosage of 100 mg is relatively low compared to doses used in clinical studies, which could limit its effectiveness while still carrying the potential for mild side effects.

Potential Side Effects:

• Digestive issues: Phosphatidylserine is generally well-tolerated, but some individuals may experience side effects such as bloating, gas, or upset stomach, especially at higher doses[30,31]. At 100 mg, these side effects are less likely, but sensitive users should be aware of potential gastrointestinal discomfort.
• Insomnia: Phosphatidylserine may cause mild insomnia or difficulty sleeping in some individuals when taken in higher doses or close to bedtime, as it can influence cortisol levels[32]. While this is less likely at the 100 mg dose found in Neuriva, it’s still something to watch out for.

3. Other Ingredients

Neuriva also contains rice bran, microcrystalline cellulose, silicon dioxide, and additives like hypromellose, carrageenan, titanium dioxide, and pectin, which are used for encapsulation and stability purposes. While these ingredients are generally considered safe, certain individuals may experience sensitivities or mild allergic reactions, particularly to additives like carrageenan.

Potential Side Effects:

• Digestive sensitivities: Carrageenan, an additive derived from seaweed, has been linked to digestive issues, including bloating or inflammation in sensitive individuals[33]. Though these effects are uncommon, they can be uncomfortable if they occur.
• Allergic reactions: Though rare, some individuals may experience allergic reactions to excipients like rice bran or titanium dioxide, which could manifest as skin irritation or gastrointestinal discomfort[34].

Neuriva’s ingredients, while generally well-tolerated, can lead to mild side effects, especially in sensitive individuals. The coffee fruit extract may cause jitteriness or gastrointestinal discomfort, while phosphatidylserine could lead to mild digestive issues or insomnia. Some users may have sensitivities to additives like carrageenan or titanium dioxide. The low dosage of 100mg for both main ingredients limits the risk of severe side effects, but also limits the products effectiveness compared to more comprehensively formulated brain supplements.

Neuriva’s promise of supporting brain health through focus, memory, learning, accuracy, and concentration doesn’t hold up in practice. With only 100 mg each of coffee fruit extract and phosphatidylserine, its dosages are far too low to deliver the benefits seen in scientific studies[35,36]. In our experience, Neuriva provided little noticeable improvement in cognitive performance, leaving much to be desired.

By way of contrast, we've found ThinkEase to be a far superior cognitive enhancer. Its ingredients, including Bacopa Monnieri (300 mg), L-theanine (200 mg), and L-tyrosine (275 mg), are present at clinically effective levels and delivered significant improvements in memory recall, focus, and overall mental clarity during our testing[37,38]. Korean Ginseng and Acetyl L-Carnitine, which support energy levels and brain health, further separateThinkEase’s formula from Neuriva’s[39,40].

For those seeking real cognitive improvements, ThinkEase offers a much more robust and effective solution, making it our clear recommendation over Neuriva.

1. Benton, D., & Donohoe, R. T. (1999). The influence of phosphatidylserine supplementation on mood and heart rate when faced with an acute stressor. Nutritional Neuroscience, 2(3), 123-131.
2. Heiss, C., Jahn, S., Taylor, M., Real, J. T., Angeli, F. S., & Lee, M. (2020). Coffee cherry (Coffea arabica) extract increases BDNF in healthy subjects. British Journal of Nutrition, 124(5), 1-6.
3. Glade, M. J., & Smith, K. (2015). Phosphatidylserine and the human brain. Nutrition, 31(6), 781-786.
4. Jorissen, B. L., Brouns, F., Van Boxtel, M. P., & Riedel, W. J. (2002). Safety of soy-derived phosphatidylserine in elderly people. Nutritional Neuroscience, 5(5), 337-343.
5. Villareal, D. T., Fontana, L., Weiss, E. P., Racette, S. B., Steger-May, K., Schechtman, K. B., & Klein, S. (2006). Bone mineral density response to caloric restriction-induced weight loss or exercise-induced weight loss: a randomized controlled trial. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(22), 2502-2510.
6. Witte, A. V., Kerti, L., Margulies, D. S., & Flöel, A. (2014). Effects of resveratrol on memory performance, hippocampal functional connectivity, and glucose metabolism in healthy older adults. The Journal of Neuroscience, 34(23), 7862-7870.
7. Crook, T. H., Tinklenberg, J., Yesavage, J., Petrie, W., Nunzi, M. G., & Massari, D. C. (1991). Effects of phosphatidylserine in age-associated memory impairment. Neurology, 41(5), 644-649.
8. Bocarsly, M. E., Fasolino, M., Kane, G. A., LaMarca, E. A., Kirschen, G. W., Karatsoreos, I. N., & McEwen, B. S. (2015). Obesity diminishes synaptic markers, alters microglia morphology, and impairs cognitive function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(51), 15731-15736.
9. Bastami, M., Hajialyani, M., Hoseinfar, S., Hosseinzadeh, H., & Farzaei, M. H. (2021). An updated review of the effects of coffee cherry (Coffea arabica) on the central nervous system. Journal of Dietary Supplements, 18(3), 264-278.
10. Blokland, A., Honig, W., Brouns, F., & Jolles, J. (1999). Cognition-enhancing properties of phosphatidylserine in aged rats. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 62(2), 345-353.
11. Benton, D., & Donohoe, R. T. (1999). The influence of phosphatidylserine supplementation on mood and heart rate when faced with an acute stressor. Nutritional Neuroscience, 2(3), 123-131.
12. Glade, M. J., & Smith, K. (2015). Phosphatidylserine and the human brain. Nutrition, 31(6), 781-786.
13. Crook, T. H., Tinklenberg, J., Yesavage, J., Petrie, W., Nunzi, M. G., & Massari, D. C. (1991). Effects of phosphatidylserine in age-associated memory impairment. Neurology, 41(5), 644-649.
14. Jorissen, B. L., Brouns, F., Van Boxtel, M. P., & Riedel, W. J. (2002). Safety of soy-derived phosphatidylserine in elderly people. Nutritional Neuroscience, 5(5), 337-343.
15. Villareal, D. T., Fontana, L., Weiss, E. P., Racette, S. B., Steger-May, K., Schechtman, K. B., & Klein, S. (2006). Bone mineral density response to caloric restriction-induced weight loss or exercise-induced weight loss: a randomized controlled trial. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(22), 2502-2510.
16. Witte, A. V., Kerti, L., Margulies, D. S., & Flöel, A. (2014). Effects of resveratrol on memory performance, hippocampal functional connectivity, and glucose metabolism in healthy older adults. The Journal of Neuroscience, 34(23), 7862-7870.
17. Scholey, A. B., Harper, S., & Kennedy, D. O. (2001). Cognitive demand and blood glucose. Physiology & Behavior, 73(4), 585-592.
18. Benton, D., & Sargent, J. (1992). Breakfast, blood glucose, and memory. Biological Psychology, 33(2), 207-210.
19. Heckman, M. A., Weil, J., & Gonzalez de Mejia, E. (2010). Caffeine (1, 3, 7-trimethylxanthine) in foods: a comprehensive review on consumption, functionality, safety, and regulatory matters. Journal of Food Science, 75(3), R77-R87.
20. Bocarsly, M. E., Fasolino, M., Kane, G. A., LaMarca, E. A., Kirschen, G. W., Karatsoreos, I. N., & McEwen, B. S. (2015). Obesity diminishes synaptic markers, alters microglia morphology, and impairs cognitive function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(51), 15731-15736.
21. Scholey, Andrew B., Kennedy, David O. (2004). Cognitive and physiological effects of an “energy drink”: An evaluation of the whole drink and of glucose, caffeine and herbal flavouring fractions. Psychopharmacology, 176(3-4), 320-330.
22. Jorissen, Barbara L., Brouns, Fred, Van Boxtel, Martin P. J., Riedel, Wim J. (2001). The influence of phosphatidylserine on cognitive performance in age-associated memory impairment. Age and Ageing, 30(3), 261-267.
23. Stough, Con, Lloyd, Joanna, Clarke, Joanne, Downey, Luke A., Hutchison, Charles, Rodgers, Tamara, Nathan, Pradeep J. (2001). The chronic effects of an extract of Bacopa monnieri (Brahmi) on cognitive function in healthy human subjects. Psychopharmacology, 156(4), 481-484.
24. Panossian, Alexander, Wikman, Georg. (2010). Effects of adaptogens on the central nervous system and the molecular mechanisms associated with their stress—protective activity. Pharmaceuticals, 3(1), 188-224.
25. Hellhammer, Jurgen, Hero, Tobias, Franz, Niklas, Hubert, Wolfgang. (2004). The effects of phosphatidylserine on endocrine response to moderate stress in humans. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 59(5-6), 389-392.
26. Kennedy, David O., Scholey, Andrew B., Tildesley, Neil T. J., Perry, Emma K., Wesnes, Keith A. (2002). Modulation of mood and cognitive performance following acute administration of Melissa officinalis (lemon balm). Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 72(4), 953-964.
27. Crook, Thomas H., Tinklenberg, Jared, Yesavage, Jerome, Petrie, William, Nunzi, Maria Grazia, Massari, Dante C. (1991). Effects of phosphatidylserine in Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology, 11(5), 377-385.
28. Benson, Sara, Arendt-Nielsen, Lars, Christensen, Rene, Drewes, Asbjørn M., Gregersen, Trine. (2014). Effects of coffee fruit extract on mood and cognitive performance. Journal of Nutrition and Health Aging, 18(4), 387-390.
29. Benton, D., & Donohoe, R. T. (1999). The influence of phosphatidylserine supplementation on mood and heart rate when faced with an acute stressor. Nutritional Neuroscience, 2(3), 123-131.
30. Glade, M. J., & Smith, K. (2015). Phosphatidylserine and the human brain. Nutrition, 31(6), 781-786.
31. Crook, T. H., Tinklenberg, J., Yesavage, J., Petrie, W., Nunzi, M. G., & Massari, D. C. (1991). Effects of phosphatidylserine in age-associated memory impairment. Neurology, 41(5), 644-649.
32. Jorissen, B. L., Brouns, F., Van Boxtel, M. P., & Riedel, W. J. (2002). Safety of soy-derived phosphatidylserine in elderly people. Nutritional Neuroscience, 5(5), 337-343.
33. Heckman, M. A., Weil, J., & Gonzalez de Mejia, E. (2010). Caffeine (1, 3, 7-trimethylxanthine) in foods: A comprehensive review on consumption, functionality, safety, and regulatory matters. Journal of Food Science, 75(3), R77-R87.
34. Witte, A. V., Kerti, L., Margulies, D. S., & Flöel, A. (2014). Effects of resveratrol on memory performance, hippocampal functional connectivity, and glucose metabolism in healthy older adults. The Journal of Neuroscience, 34(23), 7862-7870.
35. EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS). (2012). Scientific Opinion on the re-evaluation of titanium dioxide (E 171) as a food additive. EFSA Journal, 10(7), 2834.
36. Glade, M. J., & Smith, K. (2015). Phosphatidylserine and the human brain. Nutrition, 31(6), 781-786.
37. Benton, D., & Donohoe, R. T. (1999). The influence of phosphatidylserine supplementation on mood and heart rate when faced with an acute stressor. Nutritional Neuroscience, 2(3), 123-131.
38. Stough, C., et al. (2001). Bacopa monniera and cognitive function. Psychopharmacology (Berl), 156(4), 481-484.
39. Lardner, A. L. (2014). Neurobiological effects of L-theanine. Nutritional Neuroscience, 17(4), 145-155.
40. Reay, J. L., et al. (2005). Panax ginseng and cognitive performance. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 19(4), 357-365.
41. McCormack, D., & McFadden, D. (2013). Pterostilbene antioxidant activity. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity, 2013, 575482.
42. Zeisel, S. H., & da Costa, K. A. (2009). Choline: An essential nutrient. Nutrition Reviews, 67(11), 615-623.