60% Faster Reaction Time
in 90 Days:
What a University Study Revealed
A peer-reviewed 90-day RCT tracked reaction time and attention in 80 healthy adults. Three groups, five cognitive markers, one dramatic finding. Here is exactly what the data showed.
What Valverde et al. (2023) actually measured —
and why the design matters
Most supplement research is conducted poorly. Underpowered samples. No placebo arm. Self-reported outcomes. Funding by the manufacturer. When you encounter a supplement study that is double-blind, placebo-controlled, independently conducted, and published in a peer-reviewed journal, it's worth paying close attention.
The Valverde et al. (2023) study, published in the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Integrative Medicine, was a 90-day randomized controlled trial with 80 participants. The researchers measured five validated cognitive markers at baseline, day 30, day 60, and day 90. Three groups: quantum-enhanced formula, same formula without enhancement, and placebo.
For reaction time specifically, they used Thorndike's attention test — a well-validated assessment in which participants identify and mark specific symbols within a large, dense grid as quickly as possible. It's not a self-report measure. It's a timed performance task with a clear, objective output: seconds.
Reaction time is a proxy for executive function in the real world.
The ability to quickly identify a target in a field of noise is a direct proxy for selective attention — the executive function that allows you to separate signal from distraction in high-complexity environments. It's the cognitive skill most under pressure in leadership roles, creative work, and complex decision-making.
Thorndike's test has been used in cognitive research for decades precisely because it measures something real and generalizable — not isolated memory recall, but the kind of rapid, accurate attentional processing that distinguishes high-performers under load from high-performers under optimal conditions.
The numbers — unfiltered,
in context
Thorndike Reaction Time · Enhanced Group · Valverde et al., 2023
Unenhanced group: Day 0: 327s → Day 30: 250s → Day 60: 193s → Day 90: 184s (+44% improvement, then plateau). Placebo group: Day 0: 256s → Day 30: 242s → Day 60: 268s → Day 90: 270s. Placebo reaction time got slower over 90 days. The enhanced group was still improving at study close. T-test p<0.001**.
at Day 90**
at Day 90**
than Day 0**
The placebo group's result deserves slow attention. These were healthy adults. Their reaction time degraded over the 90-day study period. This is normal age-related cognitive change — but happening in real time, in people who were probably not thinking about their cognitive trajectory until they agreed to be part of a research study. The status quo is not neutral.
Reaction time was one of five metrics.
All five moved.
The reaction time data is the most dramatic single finding. But the five-marker cognitive battery at day 30 shows the scope of what was measured:
30-Day Cognitive Improvement · All Three Groups · Valverde et al., 2023
"The enhanced group showed improvements across every single cognitive marker measured. The consistency across different cognitive domains suggests a systemic neurochemical effect, not a specific single-pathway intervention."
Valverde et al. · J. Altern. Complement. Integr. Med. · 2023What a 60% reaction time reduction
means outside a research lab
Reaction time data sounds like a sports performance metric. In elite athletes, it's directly linked to competitive advantage — the difference between a 200ms and a 170ms response being the difference between first and second place.
But for the population this study recruited — healthy adults aged 35–65, not athletes — a 60% reaction time reduction maps to a different set of practical outcomes:
What 60% faster selective attention looks like in a professional context.
In a board discussion with five simultaneous conversation threads, the speed at which you can identify the signal — the relevant argument, the flaw in the logic, the opportunity being missed — is selective attention under load. That's Thorndike's test. That's what the enhanced group improved 60% on over 90 days.
In a negotiation where the other party is strategically ambiguous, the capacity to track multiple possible interpretations simultaneously and identify the most likely one quickly — that's the same skill.
In a creative problem-solving session where the solution requires synthesizing three seemingly unrelated inputs — that's also the same cognitive mechanism. Selective attention isn't just attention. It's pattern recognition under pressure. And it improves.
The detail most people miss: The enhanced group's improvement curve hadn't plateaued by day 90. The unenhanced group plateaued between days 60 and 90. The enhanced group was still descending (still improving) at study close. The researchers didn't run the study to day 120 or 180. The ceiling of what's possible wasn't reached within the study window.
This data came from
IgniCognition™'s exact formula.
Same six compounds. Same doses. Quantum-enhanced via cold plasma igniton technology. 90 days. 80 healthy adults. These results.
