13 replies to this topic

[glexia]

http://www.resveratr....com/page50.htm

Dosage
Advice on how much resveratrol to take as a dietary supplement is quite sparse.  A website advises chiropractors that “while a recommended daily allowance has yet to be established, researchers believe a minimum of 500 milligrams of resveratrol should be taken to help reduce the risk of cancer.”  [ www.chiroweb.com ]  That would be the equivalent of hundreds of glasses of red wine or a jar full of pills! 

Dosages of resveratrol range from 5 to 50 milligrams per pill in brands surveyed by ResveratrolNews.  There seems to be no consensus on how much is enough or too much.  A 300-milligram per day dose given to animals produced no side effects.  [Toxicolog Science 82:614-9, 2004]  The relatively short half life of resveratrol, about 30 minutes, combined with its rapid metabolism in the liver, probably minimizes any side effects from overdosage.

Most animal studies involve massive doses, ranging from 1600-80,000 milligrams in equivalent human doses, to prove the effect of resveratrol in the laboratory, but are obviously not in the dietary or supplement range.  But a recent study involving prostate cancer says “the relatively low concentration of resveratrol in grapes or wine will likely make it necessary for it to be given as a dietary supplement.”  [Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers 14: 596-604, 2005]

Manufacturers sometimes fool consumers into thinking their products provide more resveratrol than perceived by the consumer.  How much resveratrol is provided by the following description? (obtained from an actual product label)
Polygonum cuspidatum extract (standardized to 50% trans-resveratrol)
32 mg


We believe consumers are led to believe they are purchasing 32 mg of resveratrol, when a 50% extract would actually provide 16 mg!




Can you decipher how much resveratrol is provided by the label at left?  One hundred milligrams of resveratrol extract provides how much resveratrol?  The label doesn’t say.  Resveratrol extracts are offered as 5%, 15%, 25%, 50%, 90% extracts, etc.  

One hundred milligrams of pure resveratrol would cost far beyond what it costs to rent an apartment for a month.  Do you think it misleads consumers into thinking the product provides 100 milligrams of resveratrol?

[:o] Anybody knows more about this topic?? If the dosages are so high to make effect ....are we wasting our time buying brands that contains Low doses? Or will we have to buy several bottles of pills a month to reach the suggested dose?? [mellow]

[jaydfox]

In my mind, if the recommended dosage of resveratrol is equivalent to 100 glasses of wine, then resveratrol can't be the "active" ingredient in red wine that has been established in epidemiological studies to add years to lifespan.

[glexia]

Ya, i think so, but...what about resveratrol and its ability to activate the gen Sirtuin 1 ?

Resveratrol has been demonstrated to increase the activity of the Sirt1 gene the same way caloric restriction does. When resveratrol increased lifespan, caloric restriction failed to increase it any further. This provides evidence that caloric restriction acts by increasing the activity of the gene Sirt1 and that the benefits of caloric restriction might be had with the use of resveratrol. ( http://www.answers.c...pic/resveratrol

[Brainbox]

We should be aware of the fact that most natural products provide their beneficial effects through synergy among several ingredients. It's our wishful thinking (and perhaps "studies" and marketing that have a highly commercial backgroud? [wis] ) that causes the development of some substances to accelerate to a speed that is beyond any normal product or medicine development cycle. In such an environment errors are easily made.

Natural products (plants, fruits) almost always have beneficial and harmful ingredients. The harmful ingredients seem to have it’s use in the survival of the species, so that they are not eaten quicker than the rate of reproduction can compensate for. Natural selection and development in optima forma.

It’s the task of our medical and supplement industry to isolate the beneficial ingredients, not to focus on one sole ingredient that seems to have a lot of promises.

I'm very sceptical regarding some extracts of natural products, especially in the case of resveratrol.

[opales]

Indeed, I trust epidemiologies as a safer bet and thus consume daily/every other day a glass of red wine, however, it is technically possible that the benefits of higher intake of resveratrol through wine is offset by the excessive amount of alcohol. My view is that most of the daily red wine positive effect is via (moderate) alcohol and some attributable to multitude of substances in the wine.

Edited by opales, 03 June 2006 - 12:09 PM.

[Shepard]

I know Sardi cites something showing that the longest lifespans were seen with 4-7 glasses of wine daily. I'll see if I can dig it up.

I agree on it not being the best idea to replacing something that we know is good with something that might be just as good or better.

According to Sardi's studies: Best Alzheimer's prevention is 1-6 drinks/week, best rise in HDL from 6-8 glasses of red wine per day. I can't find the 4-7 reference that I remembered in any of the graphs....I'm almost sure I read it in the book, though. I found it surprising that it was that high.

[scottl]

In my mind, if the recommended dosage of resveratrol is equivalent to 100 glasses of wine, then resveratrol can't be the "active" ingredient in red wine that has been established in epidemiological studies to add years to lifespan.

So you're basing your opinion on the stuff on the manufactures suggested dose (which could be a marketing decision or some other less then scientific way of deciding)?

I realize there is controversy and I have not kept up with all the sir 1 not sir 1 etc, but??

[DukeNukem]

I've been taking around 110mg of resveratrol daily for 20 or so months, spread throughout the day, including one Longevinex in the morning and one at night (40mg each). My HDL is right at 80, the highest my doctor has seen. I have no idea if there's a correlation, as I also take 70+ other supplements, eat well, and workout. I strongly agree with Jay's simple observation that the French clearly benefit from as little as 15mg daily, or even less. My bet, though, based on my "wisdom of crowds" approach I use (i.e. I average all of the information I receive from many reliable sources), is that more resveratrol is better than less, and that the amount I'm taking is entirely reasonable and should not cause negative concerns.

I do not concern myself with the argument of whether resveratrol extends life in the same was as CR. My primary concern is that resveratrol appears to improve health.

[xanadu]

There seems to be an unfortunate tendency to believe that more is better. I see that over and over in many fields and many areas. If moderate excercise is good, then more is better. If a lot is good then more and more to no end. We see body builders with damaged joints who look like a cartoon character or the Michelin man but who have bad knees, bad backs and so on. The health benefits of red wine came from moderate consumption which equals probably 1 or 2 mg of resveratrol a day. How people can think that hundreds of milligrams is what they need is an example of the more = better state of mind. My approach is that less is better. Take the least that gives the benefit and see how you do. We talk about synergy. What about the synergy of all the supplements we take? Many of them are going to overlap in some of their effects and will synergise with other things we consume.

In another thread I saw 1000mg of r-ala mentioned as a good amount to take per day. The comments others made were should it be time release or divided doses. No one suggested taking a smaller amount. If Duke takes 110mg of resveratrol, then the next person wants to take 200. Isn't there a chance that too much of a good thing is no good at all? I admit this is unscientific since I don't have specific evidence yet that more is bad of these substances. It's been my and many people's observation that overdoing things usually leads to poor results. End of rant.

Glexia, eres una buena adicion a nuestro forum. Me gusta tu punto de vista.

[FunkOdyssey]

In another thread I saw 1000mg of r-ala mentioned as a good amount to take per day. The comments others made were should it be time release or divided doses. No one suggested taking a smaller amount.

The 600mg - 1200mg range that MR advocates for r-ala is based not only on extrapolation from animal studies, but on the dosages used in human trials that demonstrated clinical benefit. People taking smaller amounts has more to do with expense than science.

Resveratrol is a completely different story -- there is no data in humans supporting dosages beyond that obtained from moderate red wine consumption. Apples vs. oranges

[zoolander]

I'm holding off with resveratrol.

In the latest addition of Nature reviews: Drug discovery

Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2006 May 26;:1-14

    Therapeutic potential of resveratrol: the in vivo evidence.

    Baur JA, Sinclair DA.

    Paul F. Glenn Laboratories for the Biological Mechanisms of Aging, Harvard Medical School, 77 Avenue Louis Pasteur, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.

    Resveratrol, a constituent of red wine, has long been suspected to have cardioprotective effects. Interest in this compound has been renewed in recent years, first from its identification as a chemopreventive agent for skin cancer, and subsequently from reports that it activates sirtuin deacetylases and extends the lifespans of lower organisms. Despite scepticism concerning its bioavailability, a growing body of in vivo evidence indicates that resveratrol has protective effects in rodent models of stress and disease. Here, we provide a comprehensive and critical review of the in vivo data on resveratrol, and consider its potential as a therapeutic for humans.

    PMID: 16732220 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

It's a great review. There's no excuse not to read it *wink*wink*

A good point by jaydfox,

In my mind, if the recommended dosage of resveratrol is equivalent to 100 glasses of wine, then resveratrol can't be the "active" ingredient in red wine that has been established in epidemiological studies to add years to lifespan.

Lets not forget the other polyphenols in red wine. Quercetin is one example. However, like resveratrol, quercetin is also quickly metabolised in vivo to various inactive metabolites. Here is a link to topic I posted recently regarding polyphenols and their ability to stimulate SIRT1.

Hopefully in the coming years a resveratrol delivery system will be developed that makes the resveratrol more bioavailable. I'm not talking about a system that simply minimises resveratrol oxidation. I'm talking about a delivery system that minimises sulphation and glucuronidation.

[Shepard]

Patrick Arnold hinted that he knew a way to make resveratrol more bioavailable on M&M, but he never elaborated. I think transdermal application has also been suggested.

[xanadu]

Funk wrote:

"The 600mg - 1200mg range that MR advocates for r-ala is based not only on extrapolation from animal studies, but on the dosages used in human trials that demonstrated clinical benefit. People taking smaller amounts has more to do with expense than science."

Lets say vit C was newly discovered. Lets say the studies used 10gm a day and found benefit. I believe there are such studies on C. Would that mean 10gm is the best dosage? No harm was found from it. Studies have been done on far smaller amounts of r-ala than your 600 to 1200mg dose and found benefit. I'm not saying that high a dose will hurt you or do no good but I think there is more invovled here than saving money.

As far as saving money goes, I see comments like "$1 to $2 a day isn't much for ----" That's fine if you are rich but what about the people taking 30 to 60 or more supplements a day? At the end of the year the supplement bill begins to look like the national debt at that rate. I see nothing wrong in saving money if you can get just as much or comparable benefits with a smaller dose. That is in addition to the possiblility of harmful side effects showing up from the larger dose. People have gotten side effects from plain old C let alone new stuff.