← Back to the article

Ingredient & advertising guide

This page has two jobs. First, it explains both of the ingredients printed on the label of the chewable tablets we sell, what each is, and what the research and the public record do and do not say about it. Second, and this is the part most advertising pages leave out, it lists the headlines we run, tells you which ones are exaggerated, and separates the small number of things that are genuinely supported by evidence from the many that are not.

1. Our headlines, and what is actually true

These are the headlines we have run, grouped by the claim they make. The right-hand column is our own plain assessment. We have marked each family of headlines as Exaggerated, Partly true, Withdrawn or Broadly supported.

The headline as you saw it	What is actually behind it
"Mental Decline Begins When Seniors Can't Spell These 3 Words. Test Now""Top Doctors Say Mental Decline Begins When Seniors Can't Pronounce These 3 Phrases. Can You?""MDs Say Mental Decline Begins When Seniors Can't Pronounce These 3 Phrases. Can You?""Memory Decline Begins When Seniors Say These 3 Phrases (See The List)""Declining Memory Begins When Seniors Say These 7 Phrases. See Which Ones"	Exaggerated There is no set of three words, three phrases or seven phrases whose spelling or pronunciation marks the beginning of mental decline. Nothing "begins" at a word. Word-finding and naming tasks do appear inside real cognitive screening tools, but those tools are administered and interpreted by a clinician alongside your history, your medications and a physical exam. Failing a word online means nothing on its own: plenty of people with perfectly healthy brains stumble over a word when they are tired, anxious, or being timed. "Top doctors" and "MDs" refer to no specific doctor. See section 5.
"Japan's Oldest Doctors Say Memory Loss Isn't Age: Just Avoid Drinking These 3 Beverages""Japan's Greatest Doctors Say Memory Loss Isn't Age: Just Avoid Drinking These 3 Beverages""Japan's Oldest Doctors Say Memory Loss Isn't Age: Just Avoid Eating These 3 Foods""Japan's Oldest Doctors Say Memory Loss Isn't Age: Just Stop Eating These 3 Foods"	Exaggerated No group of Japanese doctors issued this statement. There is no such panel, no such list, and no source we can point you to. Japan appears in the headline because it is widely associated with long life, which makes the claim feel credible. That is a marketing decision, not a citation. The second half is also wrong in an important way. Memory loss is strongly related to age. Age is the single largest risk factor for dementia, and no diet removes it. What is true is narrower: certain long-term drinking and eating patterns are associated with faster cognitive decline in large population studies. Association is not proof of cause, and "just avoid these three" is not how any of it works.
"Nobel Prize's Doctors Say Memory Loss Isn't Age: Just Stop Eating These 3 Foods"	Withdrawn We retract this one outright. No Nobel laureate has endorsed this page, this product, or any list of three foods on our behalf. Attaching the Nobel Prize to an advertisement implies an authority that does not exist and we should not have run it.
"The Overlooked Boxed Cereal Now Tied to 8 Out of 10 Memory Cases"	Our headline was wrong There is no such statistic. No study ties any cereal to eight out of ten cases of anything, "memory cases" is not a category any researcher uses, and no cereal has been "overlooked" by anyone: the sugar figure is printed on the side of every box. The number was invented for the headline and we withdraw it. The grain of truth is the same as for the other cereal headlines below: sugary cereals are mostly refined starch and added sugar, and diets heavy in both are associated in population studies with poorer memory scores [1] and with faster cognitive decline over years. [2] That is a modest association across thousands of people, not eight in ten of anyone. See section 3.
"Brain Experts Now Say These 3 Cereals Age the Brain Faster Than Time""Scientists Now Say This 1 Cereal Ages the Brain Faster Than Time"	Exaggerated No food ages the brain "faster than time." That phrase was written for effect and it is not a finding from any study. It is also internally inconsistent: in one version it is three cereals, in another it is one, because the number is something we test for click-through, not something we measured. The grain of truth: diets high in added sugar and refined starch are associated with poorer memory scores and greater cardiovascular risk over years. That is a modest effect across a population, not a fate sealed by a bowl of cereal. See section 3.
"Doctors Now Say This Popular Evening Drink Is Behind Memory Loss""Doctors Now Say This Popular Evening Drink Is Behind Brain Health Decline"	Partly true The "evening drink" is alcohol, and of everything our ads point at, this is where the evidence is strongest. Heavy and even moderate regular drinking has been linked in long-running studies to worse brain outcomes, including shrinkage of the hippocampus, the region most involved in forming memories. Excessive alcohol is one of the risk factors named in the 2024 Lancet Commission on dementia. [3] [4] What is overstated is the word "behind." Alcohol is one contributing risk factor among many, not the cause of memory loss. Cutting back is a genuinely good idea. It is not a cure, and it will not undo damage already done. It is also worth saying plainly: the gel pack we sell contains no alcohol; it contains 40 milligrams of caffeine, about half a cup of coffee, and two grams of added sugar.
"Doctors Name 5 Popular Drinks Now Tied To Memory Decline. Coffee Tops The List""Seniors: These 4 Drinks May Be Aging Your Brain Faster""The 4 Drinks Brain Doctors Want Seniors to Quit""Neurologists Say Cognitive Decline Isn't Age: Just Stop Drinking These 2 Popular Drinks""Doctors: 3 Popular Drinks Now Tied to Memory Loss in Seniors"	Exaggerated Notice that the count changes: two drinks, three, four, five. It changes because it is an advertising variable we rotate, not a number that came out of a study. No neurologist is named in any version, because none was consulted. "Coffee tops the list" is the clearest thing we have got wrong. Large reviews of coffee and cognition have generally not found ordinary coffee drinking to be a risk factor for dementia; several report a neutral or modestly favourable association. If you drink coffee and enjoy it, this headline gave you a reason to worry that the evidence does not support. Our own article about this extract suggests no coffee after two in the afternoon, for the sake of sleep. That is a timing point, not a claim that coffee harms memory. See section 2.
"Brain Doctors: Quit These 4 Drinks Before It's Too Late"	Exaggerated No brain doctor was consulted for this headline, and there is no "too late." The deadline was invented to make you click. The four drinks are the ones in section 2: alcohol, sugar-sweetened soft drinks, energy drinks and sweetened coffee-shop drinks. Cutting back on them is sensible for your heart, your sleep and your weight, and long-running population studies link heavy use of the first two to poorer cognitive outcomes over years. There is no evidence that quitting them on any particular day changes anything about your memory, and there is no age after which the change stops being worth making. See section 2.
"Memory Slipping? Check These 4 Everyday Drinks First"	Partly true Half right, in the wrong order. If your memory is slipping, the first thing to check is not a drink; it is your doctor, because several treatable causes listed in section 6 look exactly like memory loss and none of them is fixed by changing what you pour. The four drinks are the everyday ones in section 2: alcohol, sugary soft drinks, energy drinks and sweetened coffee drinks. Reviewing them is a reasonable second step, mostly for sleep and for your heart. Not enough plain water belongs on the list too, and it is the one our own article dwells on. See sections 2 and 6.
"America's Top Experts Say Mental Decline Isn't Aging: Just Avoid These 5 Kitchen Drinks"	Exaggerated The same construction as the "Japan's doctors" headline above, with the country changed. No panel of American experts issued this statement, and we cannot point you to one. Mental decline is strongly tied to age, and no drink removes that. The five kitchen drinks are alcohol, sugar-sweetened sodas, diet sodas, energy drinks and sweetened coffee-shop drinks, all in section 2, where the honest version of each is written out. "Just avoid" overstates what any of that evidence shows. See section 2.
"Still Sharp at 90? Seniors Are Rethinking These 3 Everyday Foods"	Partly true The gentlest of our headlines, and still an overstatement. Nobody knows what keeps a particular person sharp at 90. The largest studies point to blood pressure, hearing, physical activity, social contact and education far more than to any food; see section 7. The three everyday foods are sugary breakfast cereals, processed meats and packaged baked goods, all in section 3. Eating less of them is associated in population studies with better long-term brain and heart outcomes. That is a modest, slow effect across a population, and no food is a guarantee at any age. See sections 3 and 7.
"Drink one cup a day and watch your memory change"	Exaggerated There is no cup; the product is one chewable tablet in the morning. Nothing in it has been shown to change memory: the protein's only trial is the company's own, [5] the government alleged that trial failed to beat a placebo on any measure, [6] and a federal court ordered the challenged claims stopped in 2024; [7] the vitamin D is a real nutrient at 2,000 IU, the dose that a three-year trial in 2,157 older adults found did nothing on a thinking test. [8] What one daily tablet can honestly give you is a vitamin D habit and a thirty-day test with a notebook. "Watch your memory change" should not have been written. See sections 7 and 9, and the ingredients below.
"One chewable a day of a protein first found in a jellyfish, with two and a half days' vitamin D beside it: what the company's own study reported, what a federal court ordered seven years later, and why this page won't say what the box says"	Broadly supported This is the reading our article is built on, and it is on the label and in the public record. The panel prints apoaequorin 20 mg and vitamin D 50 mcg, 250 percent of the Daily Value. The company's own ninety-day study in 218 adults with memory concerns reported an improvement on a computerized verbal-learning task; [5] the Federal Trade Commission and the New York Attorney General alleged in 2017 that the same study failed to show the product worked better than a placebo on any measure; [6] and in December 2024 the Commission stated that a federal court, after a jury trial, had ordered the makers to stop making the challenged memory claims. [7] The headline is meant to lower expectations, not raise them. It is not a claim that the tablet works.
"Neurologists Name 5 Popular Prescriptions Now Tied to Memory Decline"	Partly true, and the most dangerous to act on This one is closest to real research. Several widely prescribed drug classes have been linked in large studies to higher dementia risk, and prescribing guidelines already flag some of them as poor choices for older adults. [9] [10] [11] But an advertisement is the worst possible reason to change a prescription. Stopping some of these medicines suddenly can cause seizures, dangerous rebound anxiety, or a return of the condition being treated. Never stop or change a prescribed medicine because of something you read in an ad, including ours. Read section 4 before you do anything.

2. Every drink our ads point at

Our headlines have referred, in different versions, to "3 beverages", "4 drinks", "5 popular drinks", "2 popular drinks" and "this popular evening drink" without ever naming them. Here is the complete list of what we were pointing at, and what the research actually supports for each one. Where a study is cited, it is observational unless stated otherwise: it can show that two things travel together in a population, not that one causes the other.

3. Every food our ads point at

The food headlines referred to "3 foods" and to "cereals": one cereal in some versions, three in others. Again, the number was ours, not a finding. Here is what was meant, and what stands behind it.

4. The "5 prescriptions" headline

Our headline said "5 popular prescriptions now tied to memory decline." It named none of them. These are the drug classes that research has actually flagged. "Tied to" means associated in observational studies, not proven to cause.

What this section is not. It is not a claim that these medicines cause dementia, not medical advice, and not a suggestion that a chewable tablet of a jellyfish protein and vitamin D is an alternative to any of them. It is a prompt to have one specific conversation with a professional who knows your history. One thing in the tablet we sell deserves a mention in that conversation of its own accord: 2,000 IU of vitamin D, worth naming if you already take vitamin D or a multivitamin, because the doses add up. One more reason to have that conversation before you make it a daily habit.

5. The "3 words" and "7 phrases" tests

Several of our headlines invite you to test yourself on words or phrases: spell these three words, pronounce these three phrases, see whether you say these seven phrases. There is no such validated test, and we cannot give you a real one, because a real one does not work that way.

What actual cognitive screening looks like. Clinicians use short structured tools. The Mini-Cog, the MoCA (Montreal Cognitive Assessment) and the MMSE are the common ones. They do include word tasks: recalling three unrelated words after a delay, naming animals, repeating a sentence. But three things make them different from an online quiz:

• They are administered in person, in a standard way, by someone trained to do it.
• The score is interpreted against your age and education, not against a fixed pass mark.
• A low score is a reason for further evaluation (bloodwork, medication review, history from a family member, sometimes imaging), never a diagnosis by itself.

Screening tools also produce false alarms. Anxiety, poor sleep, hearing loss, depression, pain and simply being nervous all lower scores in people whose brains are fine. This is precisely why an online word quiz is meaningless: it has none of the context that makes the real instrument useful.

6. Real warning signs, and the causes worth ruling out

The genuinely useful list is not about spelling. It is about whether memory or thinking has changed enough to interfere with everyday life. Signs that deserve a medical appointment include:

• Memory loss that disrupts daily life: repeatedly asking for the same information, relying on notes and family for things you used to handle yourself.
• Difficulty completing familiar tasks: a routine recipe, a regular route, paying the usual bills.
• New trouble following or joining a conversation, stopping mid-sentence, or calling things by the wrong name.
• Confusion about time or place: losing track of dates or seasons, or how you got somewhere.
• Trouble judging distance, or reading. Worth checking, since it can also be vision.
• Putting things in unusual places and being unable to retrace steps, sometimes with a sense that others are to blame.
• Noticeably poorer judgement, especially about money.
• Withdrawing from work, hobbies or social life; changes in mood, personality, suspicion or apathy.

Ordinary ageing looks different: occasionally forgetting a name and recalling it later, misplacing your glasses and finding them, needing help with an unfamiliar device, taking a moment to find a word, rereading a paragraph after lunch and getting it on the second pass. That is normal and common at every age.

7. What actually has the best evidence

If we only had one section to be useful in, this would be it. The 2024 report of the Lancet standing Commission on dementia concluded that nearly half of dementia cases worldwide, around 45%, could potentially be prevented or delayed by addressing fourteen modifiable risk factors across the life course. ^[3] Not one of them is a supplement, a liquid extract, or a list of three foods.

• Treat hearing loss. Use hearing aids if you need them.
• Control blood pressure from mid-life onward. Take the medication as prescribed.
• Treat high LDL cholesterol and manage diabetes.
• Do not smoke.
• Stay physically active. Regular walking counts, and it is free.
• Limit alcohol.
• Treat depression, and take it seriously in older adults.
• Stay socially connected. Isolation is a measured risk factor, not a soft one.
• Correct vision loss: get cataracts treated, keep the prescription current.
• Protect your head from injury; reduce fall risk at home.
• Sleep properly. Persistently short sleep in mid-life has been associated with higher dementia incidence. ^[13]
• Keep learning: education and continued mental engagement across life.
• Maintain a healthy weight and reduce exposure to air pollution where you can.

These are unglamorous. They cannot be delivered in a headline, they take years, and none of them can be sold to you by us. They are also, by a wide margin, the best-supported things on this entire page.

---

8. Ingredient guide: what is actually in the tablets we sell

What each of the two ingredients printed on the label of Prevagen Extra Strength Chewables is, what it is traditionally used for, and what the cited research and the public record say. The panel prints an amount for both lines, per tablet: apoaequorin 20 milligrams and vitamin D (as cholecalciferol) 50 micrograms, 250 percent of the Daily Value, in a chewable tablet sweetened with sorbitol, mannitol, a stevia extract and a little sugar, colored with beet juice, and containing milk and soy peptones; no caffeine. Where a study is cited below, it is either the company's own trial of the protein, cited for the record, or a trial of vitamin D on its own; none of it supports a memory claim for these tablets, and a federal court has ordered the company to stop making the claims the government challenged. Read the statement at the end of this section before you buy anything.

Apoaequorin

A protein first found in a glowing jellyfish, where it binds calcium and gives off light; the supplement version is made by bacteria engineered to produce it. It is the only active ingredient in Prevagen.

Traditional and everyday use. None; it was a laboratory tool before it was a supplement.

What the research says. The maker's own 90-day trial of 218 adults with memory concerns reported gains on a computerized verbal-learning task.^[5] In 2017 the Federal Trade Commission and the New York Attorney General alleged that the same study failed to show the product worked better than a placebo on any measure,^[6] and in December 2024 the FTC stated that a federal court, after a jury trial, ordered the maker to stop making the challenged memory claims.^[7]

Amount per serving in Prevagen Extra Strength Chewables · Berry · 30 tablets. 20 mg (a jellyfish protein made by bacteria; the maker's own 90-day trial is the one behind the claims, and a federal court ordered the challenged claims stopped in 2024)

Good to know. Proteins eaten by mouth are digested like any other protein; the maker cites its own safety studies. The chewable contains milk and soy.

Vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol)

The 'sunshine vitamin': the skin makes it from sunlight, and it is added to milk and found in fatty fish and egg yolk. It regulates calcium and bone. Many older adults in northern latitudes have low blood levels in winter.

Traditional and everyday use. No traditional use; identified in the 1920s.

What the research says. In the three-year DO-HEALTH trial of 2,157 adults aged 70 and older, 2,000 IU a day of vitamin D3 produced no statistically significant benefit on a cognitive screening score, alone or combined with omega-3s and exercise.^[8] Correcting a real deficiency is a matter for a blood test and a doctor, not for a memory page.

Amount per serving in Prevagen Extra Strength Chewables · Berry · 30 tablets. 50 mcg (250 % DV) (two and a half days' worth in one tablet; the line with decades of research, none of it about memory in a tablet)

Good to know. Safe at label doses; the tolerable upper level for adults is 100 mcg (4,000 IU) a day. Too much over time raises blood calcium.

*These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. This information does not constitute medical advice and it should not be relied upon as such. This product is not a substitute for medication or other treatment prescribed by a physician or health care provider. Consult your doctor before starting any dietary supplement.

9. What we can and cannot promise

Set against the headlines that brought you here, this is the complete and honest position.

Things we cannot promise, and that nobody selling you a supplement can:

• That these tablets will improve your memory.
• That it will prevent, delay, slow or reverse dementia or Alzheimer's disease.
• That it offsets alcohol, sugar, processed food, or any drink or food named on this page.
• That it can replace a prescribed medicine, or make a medication review unnecessary.
• That any doctor in Japan, any Nobel laureate, any neurologist or any "brain expert" recommends it. None has.
• That a word or phrase quiz can tell you anything about your brain.
• That the company's study shows the tablets work. The company reported an improvement on a computer task; the Federal Trade Commission and the State of New York alleged that the same study failed to show the product worked better than a placebo on any measure; and in December 2024 the Commission stated that a federal court had ordered the company to stop making the challenged memory claims.
• That "Extra Strength", the jellyfish, or any quote on the seller's page describes anything that has been shown. "Extra Strength" means 20 milligrams of the protein instead of 10; the jellyfish is where the protein was first found; and the customer quotes on the seller's page carry no date, no count and no system we could check. They are a product name and sales words, and the same label carries the FDA disclaimer.

Things we can say honestly:

• It is a chewable tablet of two listed ingredients, sold in a bottle of thirty by Quincy Bioscience of Madison, Wisconsin, a company with a street address, a toll-free number and a customer-service email; the label carries an independent certification seal for its contents, which speaks to what is in the tablet and not to what it does. Both ingredients printed on the label are listed above with their amounts.
• It contains no caffeine and no alcohol. It contains one gram of carbohydrate, sorbitol and mannitol, a little sugar, and milk and soy peptones, which is why the label says it contains milk and soy.
• The label's direction is one tablet in the morning, with or without food; a bottle is thirty days.
• The price, the shipping terms (only within the United States; at no charge on orders over fifty dollars in the forty-eight contiguous states) and the refund terms (a refund of the purchase price, after discounts and including taxes and shipping, up to 45 days after the date of purchase, with the original receipt and the original bottle with any unused product, arranged by telephone and paid by check in six to eight weeks) are exactly what is written on the seller's pages. Nothing more, and no promise made elsewhere overrides them.
• The customer reviews we quote are real and public on the seller's site; we quote them word for word, we mark "Verified Buyer" only where the seller's review system does, and we left out reviews that made claims we cannot check. Individual experiences are not evidence.
• We earn a commission if you buy. That is our interest in this, stated plainly.
• Nothing here is medical advice, and none of it replaces your doctor.

10. Questions people ask us

Did a Japanese doctor, a Nobel laureate or a neurologist really say this?

No. Those attributions are advertising language. No named or identifiable expert made those statements, and none has endorsed this product.

So is coffee bad for my memory or not?

Ordinary coffee is not an established risk factor for cognitive decline, and reviews generally find neutral to modestly favourable associations. Our "Coffee Tops The List" headline overstated it. What is worth watching is added sugar in coffee drinks, and caffeine late enough in the day to spoil your sleep. That last point is the only reason our article suggests no coffee after two.

Should I stop my sleeping tablet or my anxiety medication?

Not on your own, and not because of an advertisement. Some of these drugs cause seizures or severe rebound symptoms if stopped abruptly. Take your full medication list to your doctor or pharmacist and ask whether anything on it is a poor fit for your age. See section 4.

Is this product a treatment for Alzheimer's or dementia?

No. It is not a treatment for any disease. If you or a family member is facing a diagnosis, the people to talk to are your doctor and a support organisation such as the Alzheimer's Association helpline listed above.

What did the court order, and why does it matter here?

In January 2017 the Federal Trade Commission and the New York Attorney General charged the marketers of the product with false and unsubstantiated memory claims, alleging that the company's own study failed to show the product worked better than a placebo on any measure. In December 2024 the Commission stated that, after seven years of litigation including a jury trial, a federal court had ordered the makers to stop making the deceptive memory claims the lawsuit challenged. It matters because this guide and our article therefore make no claim about memory for the product: they describe the tablet and the record. The same label carries the statement that its claims have not been evaluated by the FDA and that the product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Does it contain caffeine, sugar or alcohol?

No caffeine and no alcohol. One gram of carbohydrate, including a little sugar and two sugar alcohols, in each chewable tablet.

Which of the two lines does something?

The vitamin D is a real nutrient at a real dose, 2,000 IU, which a three-year trial in 2,157 adults over seventy found did nothing on a thinking test; its reasons are a blood test and your clinician's say-so, and the same dose is sold cheaply anywhere. The protein has one trial, the company's own, which the government alleged failed to beat a placebo and which a federal court has now ruled on. The article goes through both lines.

Why does this page talk about medicines if the product is not one?

Because one of our headlines pointed at "5 prescriptions", and you deserve to know what was behind it. Nothing in section 4 is advice to change a medicine, and the product is not an alternative to any of them.

If your own headlines are exaggerated, why should I believe this page?

A fair question. Do not take our word for it. The references below are real, published sources you can look up yourself, and nothing in sections 5, 6 and 7 requires you to buy anything or trust us. If this page and our headlines disagree, believe this page.

Does this page cost anything?

No. It is free, there is nothing to sign up for, and you are welcome to read it, close the tab and never come back.

Can I check these claims myself?

Yes, and you should. Every numbered reference below can be found by searching its title. For general information, the National Institute on Aging (nia.nih.gov) and the Alzheimer's Association (alz.org) publish plain-language material and sell nothing.

References

These are the sources behind the claims marked with a number above. Most are observational studies, which can show association but not cause; the protein's trial is the company's own and is cited so that you can read what the company reported and what the government alleged about it; the two Federal Trade Commission documents are the announcement of the 2017 complaint and the statement of December 2024 about the court's order; the vitamin D trial was three years in 2,157 older adults and found nothing on a thinking test. We have deliberately not cited anything for the claims we describe as exaggerated, because there is nothing to cite.

1. Pase M.P. et al. (2017). Alzheimer's & Dementia 13(9):955-964 doi.org
2. Gonçalves N.G. et al. (2023). JAMA Neurology 80(2):142-150 doi.org
3. Livingston G. et al. (2024). The Lancet 404(10452):572-628 doi.org
4. Topiwala A. et al. (2017). BMJ 357:j2353 doi.org
5. Moran D.L. et al. (2016). Advances in Mind-Body Medicine 30(1):4-11 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
6. Federal Trade Commission press release (January 9, 2017) ftc.gov
7. Federal Trade Commission statement (December 2024) ftc.gov
8. Bischoff-Ferrari H.A. et al. (2020). JAMA 324(18):1855-1868 doi.org
9. Gray S.L. et al. (2015). JAMA Internal Medicine 175(3):401-407 doi.org
10. Coupland C.A.C. et al. (2019). JAMA Internal Medicine 179(8):1084-1093 doi.org
11. American Geriatrics Society 2023 Beers Criteria Update Expert Panel (2023). Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 71(7):2052-2081 doi.org
12. Pase M.P. et al. (2017). Stroke 48(5):1139-1146 doi.org
13. Sabia S. et al. (2021). Nature Communications 12:2289 doi.org
14. Morris M.C. et al. (2015). Alzheimer's & Dementia 11(9):1015-1022 doi.org

Citing a study does not mean the study is about this product. The vitamin D trial did not test Prevagen Extra Strength Chewables, and the company's own trial of the protein is cited here for the record, not as support.

---