Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Have Neurocept founders published scientific papers or patents and which ones?
Executive summary
Available sources in the search results do not provide a single, authoritative list of scientific papers or patents published specifically by the founders of "Neurocept" or the founders of "Neuro" / "NeuroGum" (Kent Yoshimura and Ryan Chen). Profiles and company pages mention founders and products (e.g., NeuroGum founders Ryan Chen and Kent Yoshimura) but do not list authored scientific publications or inventor-assigned patents for those individuals in the provided material [1] [2]. Third‑party patent lists exist for other entities named “Neurotech” or “Neurotech USA, Inc.” but those appear unrelated to the consumer supplement or gum brands in the search results [3] [4].
1. What the available reporting explicitly shows about founders and publications
Company and profile pages in the results identify founders and describe consumer products and company histories—NeuroGum’s “Our Story” highlights founders and product mission [1], and Gold House’s bio for Kent Yoshimura and Ryan Chen profiles them as co‑founders of Neuro (health & wellness gum business) but does not list academic papers or patents attributed to them [2]. The Neurocept product sites promote a supplement formula and marketing claims but do not provide a bibliography of peer‑reviewed papers or inventor patent listings in the snippets provided [5] [6].
2. Patent records in the results are for different entities named “Neurotech”
Search results include patent-assignee pages and patent documents tied to companies named “Neurotech” or “Neurotech USA, Inc.” (e.g., Justia listings for patents assigned to Neurotech and Neurotech USA, Inc.)—these show specific patent filings and inventors for those companies [3] [4]. The results do not connect those patents to the founders named on the NeuroGum/Neuro or Neurocept websites; therefore, associating those patent records with the consumer‑facing founders would be unsupported by the supplied sources [3] [4].
3. Academic and patent coverage in the broader neurotech field (context)
The search results include broader reporting and analyses of neurotechnology patents and publications—academic reviews and news stories document a rapid rise in neurotech patenting and detailed patent portfolios for specialized neurotechnology firms [7] [8]. These items provide context that neurotech companies commonly file patents and that some companies publicize publication/patent counts (e.g., Neurosoft Bioelectronics cites “20+ peer‑reviewed articles & 25+ patents” for its tech) but these are examples from other firms, not the founders you asked about [9] [8] [7].
4. What the sources do not say (limitations)
Available sources do not mention any specific scientific journal articles authored by Kent Yoshimura, Ryan Chen, or the people named as Neurocept founders; they also do not list patents assigned to those individual founders in the provided snippets [2] [1] [5]. The search results include patent lists for companies with “Neurotech” in their name, but the documents do not tie those filings to the consumer brands or their founders in the material given [3] [4]. Therefore, direct claims that the named founders have published particular papers or hold particular patents are not verifiable from these search results.
5. How to verify authorship and inventorship (practical next steps)
To produce a definitive list, consult these primary sources: (a) academic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar) to search each founder’s name for peer‑reviewed papers; (b) patent databases (USPTO, Espacenet, Google Patents, Justia) to search inventorship and assignee records for each founder’s legal name; and (c) company SEC/ Companies House filings or press releases that sometimes enumerate founders’ IP and publications. The current search snippets show patent listings for other neurotech firms that can be used as models for what to look for [3] [4] [9].
6. Competing interpretations and potential hidden agendas
Company marketing pages naturally emphasize product benefits and may omit rigorous bibliographies; supplement sites often highlight “research‑backed ingredients” without linking to primary trials [5] [6]. Conversely, patent lists and academic reviews focus on technical and ethical aspects of neurotechnology innovation and can be leveraged by startups for credibility; however, the presence of patents for a company named “Neurotech” does not prove scientific authorship by consumer‑brand founders unless explicitly documented [8] [3]. Be wary that affiliate or promotional articles in the results may have commercial motives and are not the same as peer‑reviewed science [10].
If you want, I can (A) perform targeted searches of PubMed and Google Scholar for specific founder names (please confirm full legal names), and (B) query USPTO/Google Patents records for inventor names or company assignees you specify—using that approach we can assemble a verifiable list of publications and patents.