According to the new version (v2.1) label, vitamin B12 comes solely from cyanocobalamin. However, the previous version used both cyanocobalamin and the more expensive methylcobalamin. What was the rationale behind this change when considering that the former is not considered to be as healthy as the latter? I know you might say that cyanocobalamin gets ultimately converted to methylcobalamin, but it’s easy to realise that it would be better without any conversion.
I was under the impression that with each iteration you want to make the product better, but this looks like a step back.
There are many things that convert to other things in the body, but the important thing is where that happens. It may be that taking it directly means it doesn’t reach the right place… For example, 5-HTP may be better than Tryptophan because more converts past the blood/brain barrier, which is where it’s needed.
Since the launch of v2.0, we also made two other changes to the formula: Firstly, on launching v2.0, we used methycobalamin rather than cyanocobalamin as our vitamin B12 source. However, we were unsure that its bioavailability was as efficient so, within two weeks, we switched back to cyanocobalamin and we have continued to use this as our B12 source in v2.1.
I remember I checked the debate cyanocobalamin vs methylcobalamin a few years ago, and the article I read about it had a clear reference to why methylcobalamin was superior. Now, I must admit I remember it was a reference to a paper, however I have been searching again for that website and it looks like the reference is … to another website, quite a disappointment.
Now, the statement from the Huel page is not really convincing me either, cause it only says “we were unsure that its bioavailability was as efficient”, but there’s mention about how where this conclusion came from, nor it references any tests/data to support the claim. In the world of nutrition, is easy to state something just because you want people to believe this is the case, e.g. it turns out that the article I read in the first instance on why methylcobalamin was superior to cyanocobalamin was supported by a company that actually sells methylcobalamin supplements…
Having said that, I’ve checked for some accurate information on this debate. It turns out that Huel is right in this case, and indeed there are no differences between methylcobalamin and cyanocobalamin. A good reference to this is http://veganhealth.org/b12/noncyanob12 which does indeed have references to relevant papers to support your claim.