Memopezil Ingredients: every row on the panel, with the dose its research used

The largest row on the panel by a wide margin. Two parts leucine to one part isoleucine to one part valine is the standard sports-nutrition ratio, and it is here because of a serotonin argument rather than a memory one: branched-chain amino acids compete with tryptophan for the same transporter into the brain, so raising them is proposed to blunt the serotonin rise behind central fatigue. the central fatigue hypothesis set that hypothesis out in 1995 and it has been argued over in exercise physiology ever since.

The cognition file is thin and it is mixed. the 2026 systematic review of BCAAs and cognition found eight studies in 353 participants: five reported no significant change, three reported improvement, and the review notes that some studies suggest detrimental effects. The strongest single result is the brain-injury rehabilitation trial, where supplementation improved disability scores in people recovering from severe traumatic brain injury, which is a different population and a different question. the BCAA concussion trial is the trial that escalated the dose: 30 g, 45 g and 54 g a day for 21 days.

Against 30 grams, 540 milligrams is under two per cent. An ordinary chicken breast supplies several grams of the same three amino acids, which is the context a reader deserves before deciding what this row is doing on a memory label. the 2023 review of amino-acid upper intake levels reviews where the safe ceiling for individual amino acids sits, and 540 mg is nowhere near any of them, so this is a question about effect rather than about safety.

The row that earns this product its category. Bacopa is the botanical with the largest and most consistent human file for memory specifically, and it is also the slowest thing on the panel. Pase's systematic review reviewed the randomised trials and put the finding precisely: the effect appears in memory free recall, with little evidence of enhancement in other cognitive domains, at doses of 300 to 450 mg of extract a day.

The three trials behind that conclusion all ran twelve weeks at 300 mg a day. the first chronic Bacopa trial measured the first chronic effects in healthy adults. the 2008 trial in older adults repeated it in older adults with anxiety and depression measures alongside. Morgan and Stevens' memory trial asked the question directly in older people and answered it in the affirmative for recall. the 2014 meta-analysis pooled them, and Brimson's analysis of the clinical data went back over the available clinical data more sceptically. The newest entry, the 2026 network meta-analysis, compares bacopa against ginkgo across the whole literature.

Two hundred milligrams is two-thirds of the amount every one of those trials used. That is a real gap and it is also the smallest gap on this panel. Nobody should expect a trial result from two-thirds of a trial dose, and nobody should pretend the difference between 200 and 300 is the difference between something and nothing.

An adaptogen, researched against fatigue and mental work capacity rather than against memory. the night-duty crossover study is the trial most often cited: 56 healthy physicians took one standardised SHR-5 tablet a day for two weeks while working night duty, and their fatigue index improved significantly over the first fortnight. the two-dose cadet trial gave cadets two or three capsules as a single dose against a background of fatigue and found a pronounced anti-fatigue effect at both, with no significant difference between the two amounts.

the 2012 systematic review of Rhodiola is the honest summary of the whole field: the research is contradictory, some of it suggests the herb helps with physical and mental fatigue, and the methodological quality across the literature is uneven.

Two details about this particular row matter more than the milligram figure. The first is standardisation. Rhodiola extracts in the trials were generally standardised to rosavins as well as salidroside; this label prints salidroside only, at three per cent, which describes a different material from the ones that were tested. The second is supply-chain variability. the analysis of commercial Rhodiola products measured constituent content across six commercial Rhodiola preparations and found wide variation between them, including one product containing none of the rosavin markers at all, and the UK authentication survey found species substitution in UK retail products. Neither finding is about this bottle. Both are reasons a certificate of analysis would be worth more here than on most panels.

The one row on this panel with a fast, repeatable, well-pooled finding. the 2026 meta-analysis of 31 theanine trials brought together 31 randomised trials in 1,168 people and reported that a single 200 mg dose taken 30 to 60 minutes before testing improved choice reaction time, with a standardised mean difference of 0.51. That is attention measured within the hour, not memory built over months.

The same meta-analysis was more cautious about everything else: the reduction in acute stress was modest and driven partly by studies at high risk of bias, there was no significant effect on fatigue, and no serious adverse events were reported anywhere in the pooled data. the four-week theanine trial ran 200 mg a day for four weeks against stress-related symptoms and cognitive function. the multitasking stressor study gave a theanine drink before a multitasking stressor and found the subjective stress response reduced, while cognitive performance itself did not change. the 2020 review of theanine and stress is the narrower review of stress and anxiety, and the tea and theanine meta-analysis pools the tea literature, where theanine alongside caffeine performs better than theanine alone.

This panel carries 100 mg and no caffeine. That is half the dose behind the reaction-time finding, without the companion the tea literature suggests helps. It is also the reason the product does not interfere with sleep, which is a trade a fair number of buyers would make deliberately.

The smallest row, and the one with the most contradictory file. the single-dose G115 study gave healthy volunteers 200 mg or 400 mg of the G115 extract and found improved cognitive performance during sustained mental activity, alongside a fall in blood glucose. the eight-day working-memory trial repeated it over eight days at the same two doses and found effects on working memory and self-rated calmness that varied by dose and by hour.

Against that sits the Cochrane review of ginseng for cognition, which concluded there is a lack of convincing evidence for a cognitive enhancing effect of Panax ginseng in healthy participants, and no high-quality evidence about its efficacy in dementia. the 2024 ginseng meta-analysis pooled more recent work and found a small overall effect that was larger at high doses. The clinical trials in dementia populations, such as the Korean red ginseng dementia trial, used Korean red ginseng at 4.5 and 9 grams a day, which is fifty to a hundred times what is on this panel.

Ninety milligrams is well under half the smallest dose in the positive healthy-volunteer trials. It is also the row with the one documented interaction worth raising with a prescriber: the ginseng and warfarin trial found American ginseng reduced warfarin's effect in healthy patients, and the stroke-clinic warfarin study examined the same combination in stroke patients.