2000 mg Club
geo12the
13 Jan 2008
I was always wondering about those people who live in France drinking lots of Wine and living over 100. I
It's called the French paradox:
http://en.wikipedia..../French_paradox
From what I recall, the effect is linked specifically to people who drink red, but not white wine. The exact cause of the French paradox is controversial, but it's a good bet that polyphenols like resveratrol, quercitin, procyanidins, and the tannins that give red wine it's color contribute to the effect. Although the resveratrol concentration in wine is not that high, there probably is a synergistic effect with the other compounds.
edward
13 Jan 2008
Since this Winter I have been taking between 2000 and 2700 mg per day. Currently 1/5th of my daily dosage is from BAC 50% Resveratrol and 4/5th of my daily dosage is from Mega-Res 99% product. I now take Res 3 times a day, but I only make the "ghetto SIRT-501" in the morning . At present I have no joint/tendon pain but then again it has been too cold to play much tennis. (I still workout at least 4 times a week, weights, running and gym cardio) which during the summer and fall I was doing on top of playing a lot of tennis.
So, maybe it was just the fact that I was playing a lot of tennis, hitting the ball harder or whatever and not the Resveratrol. Thats the problem with anecdotal evidence, there are so many variables unaccounted for. Note also that my endurance and strength has gone up dramatically in the past year and maybe I am just able to play more tennis and thus overuse injuries are perhaps more likely. Annectdotaly my increase in fitness could be in part attributed to Resveratrol or any number of other supplements that I have added in the past year. Again anecdotal.
edit:
Does anyone know the dosing schedules (qd, bid, tid, qid) for the Sirtis studies offhand, I'm sure I could dig around and find something but I'm being lazy. The last I looked at the Res forums, our collective consensus was that what was needed was first a large enough single dose to ensure blood levels and overcome absorption and metabolism issues and as long as the single dosage were large enough then taking multiple doses per day was good to ensure a more constant blood level?
Edited by edward, 13 January 2008 - 06:39 PM.
krillin
13 Jan 2008
That's the osteoarthritis people.I thought people were reporting less arthritis.
sUper GeNius
13 Jan 2008
What about curcumin w/ bioperine, half an hour before the t-res?
zawy
13 Jan 2008
On a skeptical note concerning the fish: they are the shortest lived vertebrate, shorter than expected for their size, and humans are one of the longest lived, longer than expected for their size. Since the fish evolved in a dry/rainy season climate where they lay eggs in mud that hardens, the rainy season in their historical environment should be about 12 weeks, their maximum lifespan. The fish have no evolutionary incentive to live longer, so they don't. Humans live longer than other mammals of their size because they have had fewer environmental ways of getting killed early so that women who live and breed longer have more offspring (see the famous fruit fly experiement). Even humans who evolved in remote locations where there is less war (such as okinowa and > 10,000 feet) tend to live 10% or longer than other humans. I still haven't seen a good report that contradicts the January 1973 national geographic article that interviewed many of the mountain areas that had people who were supposedly 130 years old. It is believed some of them were lying to get more tourism or attention. Although you have to also consider the smallness of the okinawins and the decreased oxygen in mountains leads to fewer calories consumed, so that the fruit fly results do not necessarily apply. Chihuahas and siamese cats are about the smallest of their breed and therfore have longest lifespans of their species (fewer calories).
Anyway, my point is that the fish have evolved so that any life-extension genes have been neglected and weeded out in favor of the "live hard and fast" genes. Humans are largely just the opposite. So it's possible RESV could have much more potential in the fish.
ilanso
14 Jan 2008
zawy: I just tried 1-cup, 70 calories of blueberry blended with 200 mg RESV (50%, 400 mg total) to see if 5000 mg/ 2000 calories is consumable by lab animals and humans. It's completely tolerable but seems to take away the blueberry taste. My chihuaha loves blueberries, but the smell scared her away from the bowl. She showed fairly odd and funny behavior in approaching the bowl. Kind of like a skinny guy trying to approach a gorgeous woman in a bar. Strong desire mixed with fear. Approach, retreat, approach, retreat. With 98% it should be possible to mix it in animal food at 2500 mg / 2000 calories. I reduced the 50% to 1000 mg / 2000 calorie (4 times the maximum fish dose) , and she reluctantly consumed 1/3 of it
The 50% repels me too. You need to switch to the 98-99% version (although, now that, as pointed out by hedgehog_pathway, we can't be sure what these percentages mean any more). My dog (also, small breed) gets her 98% daily dose mixed in one spoonful of Essential Fatty Acids (for dogs and gerbils), which she's always liked. It dissolves almost entirely and apparently its smell cannot trump the fishy one. I don't suppose the same trick would work on fish (maybe dog oil liposomes?


