biopharm, first I was not convinced about charged PS. I know you brought that up quite early (several years ago now). goodJohn has commented on it to.
However, PS is indeed negatively charged which means its receptor environment must be neutral or positive otherwise the binding force (other then ionic) would have to overcome the repulsion OR the negative charge is used to favorize a PS-molecule rotation before the binding in other ways (e.g. covalent). Receptor binding is protein driven.
And there is no possible doubt about the fact that there where there is a potential difference in charge there is a voltage as it is the very definition of it in physics. Of cource the negative PS molecules are channel-negative and not to be confouned with negatively charged free radicals (which are harmfull to us).
I was just wondering why this PS charge topic seems to be in the center of your attention as you bring it up at regular intervals?
PS: On a side note NOTICE how soybeans have been removed (possibly lobbied away) from the top of the list as a source of Phosphotidylserine. I am talking about soybean-derived phosphatidylserine from soybean lecithin which has levels about 5 to 10 times higher then what is on the top of the list now.
wiki It has been there for years and there is scientific consensus about it. Yet it is gone. Reason why wiki CANNOT be relied on (and I never donate anymore). We have seen that some simply have an agenda in ruining wiki-pages (see PPHM/Bavituximab, Sunrise and other well documented topics by some posters on here that were all, almost overnight, changed a one controversial (previously suspended) free-lance wiki-editor with an agenda).
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
