• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Sinclair and New Resveratrol Product


  • Please log in to reply
101 replies to this topic

#31 Anthony_Loera

  • Life Member
  • 3,130 posts
  • 714
  • Location:Miami Florida

Posted 13 August 2008 - 04:55 PM

On that note, a bigwig for a major pharama co was once asked if they used GMP standards in manufacturing their food supplements. His response was something like, "Oh no. That would be too expensive and our stockholders wouldn't go for that."


Pharma's are required higher standards, SusanK this is total marketing nonsense now. I really don't see a reason why I should consider the rest of your post to be correct as well.


a

#32 DaffyDuck

  • Guest
  • 85 posts
  • 11

Posted 13 August 2008 - 05:01 PM

I see lots of people on this board trying different products to see what happens. Why not this one? It has a 100% satisfaction, money-back guarantee. (Doesn't include shipping cost tho, which is standard), the local health food stores won't give me my money back. If I don't like something, I'm out the money. So this is a better deal, I think. Then people who really want to say how awful this product is, they have a leg to stand on. For me, it's only been a few days and I'm loving how I feel. My mood is sooo much better too! I don't think DH is going to let me go with out it! Heh heh. (and before anyone flames me... please note the absence of website links).


I'm taking Resveratrol (alone, by itself) based on the published studies that show increased healthspan in small mammals. When I see similar published studies using the same exact compound in Vivex which show the same or greater increase in healthspan then I will consider the product.

I just don't like the way it is being marketed. Also, it is too expensive when compared to the competition. Personally, I'd rather not pay for fancy packaging.

I see lots of people on this board trying different products to see what happens.


I think you are misinterpreting what is actually happening here.

Click HERE to rent this advertising spot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#33 Alistair

  • Guest
  • 33 posts
  • 8
  • Location:London

Posted 13 August 2008 - 05:16 PM

Susan,

I'm not having a go at you here, I think you believe what you are saying. But I still don't believe it.

But Dr. Sinclair, world famous bleeding edge scientist involved in the launch of new product and there is absolutely no press coverage.

"(and before anyone flames me... please note the absence of website links)."

I think that is the problem. No substantiation whatsoever from a reputable source.

If I start to see this, maybe I'll start believing it.

Best Regards,

Alistair

#34 krillin

  • Guest
  • 1,516 posts
  • 59
  • Location:USA

Posted 14 August 2008 - 03:47 AM

I like the education with this company.

I checked out Shaklee's Vitalizer multi and despite claims of being "bio-optimized" it's just another cruddy formulation. Niacinamide, dicalcium phosphate, calcium carbonate, magnesium oxide, no K2, and cosmetic doses of lycopene, lutein, zeaxanthin, and mixed tocopherols stand out. It seems that they went out of their way to use the cheapest form of every nutrient.

The good news is that you can read through the archives here and get de-programmed.

#35 Anthony_Loera

  • Life Member
  • 3,130 posts
  • 714
  • Location:Miami Florida

Posted 14 August 2008 - 03:36 PM

Vivix... $100 for 30 day supply

Vivix Key Ingredients:
trans-Resveratrol (Polygonumcuspidatum) (root) standardized to a minimum of 98% purity
Muscadine Grape extract (Vitis rotundifolia) (fruit pomace)
European Elderberry extract (Sambucus nigra) (fruit)
Purple Carrot extract (Daucus carota sativus) (root)


Elderberry extract? That sounds vaguely familiar....
I am proceeding with our Capsugel formulation, as these ingredients are not an issue.

The whole Vivix 30 day supply = 3,000 glasses of red wine or 500 Bottles of wine
While....

A single 300mg Capsule = 900 Glasses of red wine or 150 Bottles of Wine

Interesting marketing.
A


Ahh.. @##$@%!!!

I just got off the phone with a very helpful P*izer formulator.

We were talking about gelatin vs hpmc (vegetarian) capsules and the aim of our resveratrol application in a Licaps capsule.

Too make a long story short, the formulator (after hearing our aim to provide the best and quickest absorption) basically let me know that the vegetarian version of Licaps requires the addition of beeswax, which creates a thick paste with our ingredients that will not be suitable for our application. He suggested that if our application (absorption) is the aim, to use the gelatin capsule where the beeswax is not used. Of course, this is only specific to our application and what we want to achieve with it, so this type of capsule would likely be great for things that aren't metabolized as quickly as resveratrol is.

I saddens me to say that this will probably be the only non-vegetarian capsule we will make. But our aim is different than our competition, so we will proceed with the gelatin capsule instead.

A

#36 TianZi

  • Guest
  • 519 posts
  • -0

Posted 19 August 2008 - 10:04 AM

Since it seems the claim of Sinclair's support was as false as the other claims made by the marketing rep in this thread, I do hope that Sinclair sues the pants of this company.

#37 TianZi

  • Guest
  • 519 posts
  • -0

Posted 20 August 2008 - 04:40 PM

Since it seems the claim of Sinclair's support was as false as the other claims made by the marketing rep in this thread, I do hope that Sinclair sues the pants of this company.


Oops, typo I can't correct. "... pants off..."

#38 DaffyDuck

  • Guest
  • 85 posts
  • 11

Posted 21 August 2008 - 12:42 AM

I was told last night that in the next few days, Dr. Sinclair's name will be on the company websites, his bio will be added and the 10 minute address will also be online.


Is a few days more than 7? Where did Susan go?

#39 TianZi

  • Guest
  • 519 posts
  • -0

Posted 21 August 2008 - 09:02 AM

I was told last night that in the next few days, Dr. Sinclair's name will be on the company websites, his bio will be added and the 10 minute address will also be online.


Is a few days more than 7? Where did Susan go?


My guess? Susan is seeking a new employer.

#40 Crepulance

  • Guest
  • 269 posts
  • -2

Posted 21 August 2008 - 09:13 AM

Seems Sinclair's new Elixir is going to be big. I can only assume he took everything into consideration as his name and $ is on the line. I like the idea of him preformulating it into liquid. I've been reading a lot of these posts and there are so many different methods people are using to blend the res so it's most properly absorbed, however people like me who aren't as informed on the science of it all wouldn't mind all that done for us, and I'm assuming, he took absorbtion into consideration when he made his tonic. If this was someone else, I'd be very remissed to buy it, but it's Sinclair, so. I know there's a lot of doubters and haters out there, but the man discovered the stuff, and with that comes innate respect, and 'dibs', as it were, on product. Listen if Thomas Edison came out with a new lightbulb, you think I'm listening to Joe Shmo knocking this and that, chances are, I'm buying that lightbulb. (PS, yes I know there's controversy as to wether or not Edison invented the lightbulb, you're missing the point! :) ) On another note, I was able to catch five or so minutes of his speech he gave at the Shaklee Global convention on youtube where he debuted his product and right as he was about to go into detail on it, the tape cut. Does anyone have, or know where to find the remainder of that speech? Would love to hear what he has to say. Hope the stuff tastes good, would hate to drink cough medicine every day. Peeeeeeeeeeeeeace all.



I was told last night that in the next few days, Dr. Sinclair's name will be on the company websites, his bio will be added and the 10 minute address will also be online.


Is a few days more than 7? Where did Susan go?



#41 DaffyDuck

  • Guest
  • 85 posts
  • 11

Posted 21 August 2008 - 11:18 PM

I was able to catch five or so minutes of his speech he gave at the Shaklee Global convention on youtube


Can you post a link to this? I am still doubtful about his connection to Shaklee. The video just might convince me.

#42 krillin

  • Guest
  • 1,516 posts
  • 59
  • Location:USA

Posted 22 August 2008 - 05:32 AM

I was able to catch five or so minutes of his speech he gave at the Shaklee Global convention on youtube


Can you post a link to this? I am still doubtful about his connection to Shaklee. The video just might convince me.

You can almost taste the Kool Aid.

#43 DaffyDuck

  • Guest
  • 85 posts
  • 11

Posted 22 August 2008 - 11:06 AM

You can almost taste the Kool Aid.


Interesting. Thanks.

#44 TianZi

  • Guest
  • 519 posts
  • -0

Posted 22 August 2008 - 11:23 AM

I was able to catch five or so minutes of his speech he gave at the Shaklee Global convention on youtube


Can you post a link to this? I am still doubtful about his connection to Shaklee. The video just might convince me.


Could the quality of the video have been any worse? I cannot see the face of the man identified as Sinclair; are we 100% positive it is him? If so, he has destroyed his own reputation--utterly and completely.

If it's him, I have to wonder what's actually going on here. Did Glasko never have any intention to sell Sirtris' product, but instead purchased it defensively to bury it (I have noted with interest the non-resveratrol drugs debuted by Glasko in the past couple of months, with effects similar to those Sirtris claimed to have achieved in trials with its resveratrol based and resveratrol mimetic products)? If not, why would they allow the key man in the deal, Sinclair, to promote a potentially competing product (and a poor quality one at that)? A standard non-compete agreement signed by Sinclair and the other principals almost had to be part of the acquisition.

Edited by TianZi, 22 August 2008 - 11:30 AM.


#45 VP.

  • Member
  • 451 posts
  • 170

Posted 22 August 2008 - 03:19 PM

Of course it is Dr. Sinclair. This could really screw up the Resveratrol boards as hundreds of MLM morons start posting how they "feel" 25 younger. Did you notice the silence when Dr. Sinclair thought some of the audience members may have read the Scientific American article he wrote?

#46 Alistair

  • Guest
  • 33 posts
  • 8
  • Location:London

Posted 22 August 2008 - 05:33 PM

OK, SusanK, I saw the video on Youtube. It seems that Sinclair made an appearance at a Shaklee presentation and endorsed this product. What you claimed to be true seems to be true.

I still don't understand why. Around every piece of anti-aging research with any credibility, there spins up a vortex of unrealistic expectation. We all have to find a distance from it where we don't get sucked in and feel comfortable. If you get sucked in, looking from the inside out, it feels like 'rapture of the nerds'. Looking from the outside in it looks more like a 'geek tragedy'. Sinclair and Westphal have been unafraid to get quite close to the centre. If they didn't get close enough, no one would have paid any attention to them. So far I think Sinclair has done this quite well - he has courted investors and media alike and build up a multi-million dollar business that has the potential to deliver a blockbuster. Suddenly, we are confronted with this endorsement of what appears to be a mediocre at best product, and it mystifies me. Surely, he doesn't have any need for either more publicity or more money. He has enjoyed a good reputation. Why do this now?

Alistair

#47 krillin

  • Guest
  • 1,516 posts
  • 59
  • Location:USA

Posted 23 August 2008 - 03:48 AM

Ames and Packer haven't suffered reputation losses in connection with their sub-par supplement offerings, why should Sinclair? We can all grumble about them selling out, but we'll still cite their research.

I don't think Sinclair is in competition with GSK. GSK's product will be a proven therapy while Shaklee's is just a way to separate rubes from their money. In fact, I'd think that it would be in GSK's interest to steer supplement users towards ineffective resveratrol products so that they'll get diabetes and need to take the GSK formulation.

#48 Alistair

  • Guest
  • 33 posts
  • 8
  • Location:London

Posted 23 August 2008 - 10:00 AM

Hi Krillin,

Ames and Packer haven't suffered reputation losses in connection with their sub-par supplement offerings, why should Sinclair? We can all grumble about them selling out, but we'll still cite their research.


Fair point. Their reputations in each case is built upon the quality of the studies they have produced and each have a good record, and yes, of course we will continue to cite their research. In the case of Ames (I don't know enough about Packer), I can understand it more. After a few decades in academia, he is probably looking to provide for himself in retirement. Sinclair, on the other hand, has just pocketted whatever million dollars from GSK...

Perhaps he feels it wasn't enough and I guess he feels that he should continue to make hay while the sun is shining.

Perhaps he is right.

Alistair

#49 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,941 posts
  • 1,615
  • Location:New York

Posted 23 August 2008 - 01:36 PM

product label: http://www.shaklee.n..._vivix_deco.pdf

Edited by maxwatt, 23 August 2008 - 01:37 PM.


#50 inawe

  • Guest
  • 653 posts
  • 3

Posted 23 August 2008 - 04:59 PM

As far as RSV:
"3000 glasses of red wine: A 30-day supply of Vivix delivers the
equivalent amount of resveratrol found in 3,000 glasses of red wine."
So now the amount of RSV is measured in "glasses of red wine" (not mgr
or gr). Is Sinclair going to use this new unit in his publications?
They offer carrots, but not sticks?

#51 Alistair

  • Guest
  • 33 posts
  • 8
  • Location:London

Posted 23 August 2008 - 05:41 PM

product label: http://www.shaklee.n..._vivix_deco.pdf


So no indication of how much trans-resveratol is actually in each serving then?

Hmmm....

As an aside, I found this quite interesting...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbalife

"In 1986 Herbalife became a publicly traded company via NASDAQ."
"In 1996 Herbalife reached $1,000,000,000 in annual sales."

Perhaps Shaklee, as another MLM company, have similar aspirations and see Sinclair's credibility as a stepping stone to this end.

Brgds,

Alistair

Edited by Alistair, 23 August 2008 - 05:42 PM.


#52 Crepulance

  • Guest
  • 269 posts
  • -2

Posted 24 August 2008 - 09:04 AM

Hey all, I think he mentioned it in the video, not sure, but I believe he mentioned it somewhere. This new product is in place, because it will be 5-7 years before his GSK product is available, and so he wants the public to have the technology without having to wait in the meantime. Knock him all you want, but it's a capitalist society, and he's making capital. I think he has good intentions, and even though it may not be up to par with his GSK venture, I'm sure it's substantial in regards to current supplements out there, if not superior.

Crep




product label: http://www.shaklee.n..._vivix_deco.pdf


So no indication of how much trans-resveratol is actually in each serving then?

Hmmm....

As an aside, I found this quite interesting...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbalife

"In 1986 Herbalife became a publicly traded company via NASDAQ."
"In 1996 Herbalife reached $1,000,000,000 in annual sales."

Perhaps Shaklee, as another MLM company, have similar aspirations and see Sinclair's credibility as a stepping stone to this end.

Brgds,

Alistair



#53 Anthony_Loera

  • Life Member
  • 3,130 posts
  • 714
  • Location:Miami Florida

Posted 24 August 2008 - 02:07 PM

Superior... Not with that price....

If we take out resveratrol from the product, what do we have? Could someone duplicate it? Could someone make it better?

Take out resveratrol from the product, and I find it difficult to believe. It reminds me of the longevin** marketing, which is based on adding more ingredients to resveratrol and saying it's better, when the extra ingredients can be bought separately for a much cheaper price.

Again, if you take out resveratrol... do the other ingredients stand on their own?

Look up this one and tell me if they appear similar:

LifeTime - Resveratrol Life Tonic


A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 24 August 2008 - 02:21 PM.


#54 Alistair

  • Guest
  • 33 posts
  • 8
  • Location:London

Posted 24 August 2008 - 03:46 PM

This new product is in place, because it will be 5-7 years before his GSK product is available, and so he wants the public to have the technology without having to wait in the meantime. Knock him all you want, but it's a capitalist society, and he's making capital. I think he has good intentions, and even though it may not be up to par with his GSK venture, I'm sure it's substantial in regards to current supplements out there, if not superior.

Crep


Hi Crepulance,

Thanks for your post and your point of view. Regarding your comments:

He wants the public to have the technology without having to wait - resveratrol is available already, isn't it?

He's making capital. I don't have a problem with this. Good luck to him. Not full of admiration for his choice of method, but it is his choice and having read the wikipedia article on Herbalife, probably not a bad one for making money.

I think his are intentions are good too, and that making money is pretty close to the top of his list of intentions. Again, no objections from me.

Substantial compared to current supplements, if not superior. Hmm... Not sure about that one. I agree with the points Antony just made. Also, why doesn't it say how much trans-resveratrol is in the product? If all the science is about resveratrol, why not tell people how much they are getting? OK, other agents may help the resv pass through the liver, there is plenty of discussion on this topic in this forum. Is there any evidence to support the choices Shaklee have made to do this? The claim that the combination makes resv ten times more powerful - again, any evidence to support this?

By taking resveratrol you are still buying Sinclair's lightbulb, as you put it. By buying Shaklee, I think you are buying into helping bankroll Shaklee to become the same scale of financial success as Herbalife. Again, no objections from me, it's your choice and I hope it is one that works out well for you. For me, I will need some more evidence and convincing before it becomes mine. Until then, I will stick with products and brands that tell me how much trans-resveratrol are in them, how pure they are and demonstrate good value for money.

Best Regards,

Alistair

#55 DukeNukem

  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 137
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 24 August 2008 - 05:22 PM

>>> Why this company?: My opinion: They do the research, they have super-strict quality controls <<<

Susan,

Looking at some of Shaklee's other products, it's very clear to me that they use many of the least effective ingredients, such as in their Vitalizer mutli formulation. It's barely better than grocery brand level crap, IMO, and comes no where close what you'll find in some of the best brands, like AOR and LEF. Yet, they advertise on their site: "We guarantee utmost effectiveness." Apparently, their 75 scientists have missed the latest research in the past 20 years showing that magnesium oxide, for example, is very poorly absorbed versus many of the other forms of magnesium (the oxide form is basically crushed rock). Many other minerals used are poor choices, and many of the other ingredients are included only a near meaningless token amounts.

It's no wonder that Shaklee is not a brand I've ever heard taken seriously in ANY of the health forums or discussions I've seen or taken part of.

Susan, you wrote: "There is so much "crap" on the market it makes me sick sometimes." The thing is, Shaklee appears to be no better than the "crap" you want to condemn. And their Vivix is super over-priced (no doubt due to Sinclair's involvement and royalty take), while not offering benefits that can't be had far more cheaply by buying these same ingredients separately.

#56 100YearsToGo

  • Guest
  • 204 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Netherlands Antilles

Posted 24 August 2008 - 06:32 PM

Looks like there is a new resveratrol product with Sinclair called Vivix. I believe this is this product is the first commerical suspension.


Looks like its some extract from the muscadine grape. That is the so called super grape with the extra chromozome.
I found two patents that aim to extract the goodies (resveratrol etc..) from these grapes.



http://appft1.uspto....er..."6,190,716"

http://patft.uspto.g...RS=PN/6,190,716

Years and years of research? No kidding! Should cost US $10.00.

Regards immortals.

Edited by 100YearsToGo, 24 August 2008 - 06:35 PM.


#57 Anthony_Loera

  • Life Member
  • 3,130 posts
  • 714
  • Location:Miami Florida

Posted 24 August 2008 - 07:01 PM

That is interesting...

although if you read the Viv*x ingredients the resveratrol comes from "Polygonum Cuspidatum" (root) which is actually Japanese knotweed, and not the so called "super grape". So it appears these patents are not being used at all, and as much as they want to say "super grape" in the marketing, the grape supplies no trans-resveratrol for this product, as it's not found in the ingredient list.

Does that mean the "extra chromosome" prevents the super grape from manufacturing trans-resveratrol in it's skin, and that the grape is in fact not a "super grape", but a "crippled grape" instead?

Anyone else know why they had to add "knotweed resveratrol" to their grape product instead of grape skin resveratrol?
(I know I am being a little cheeky here, but if the marketing is about a "super grape", I should ask the questions that come to mind when I see the ingredient list from this product.)

If I were a regular customer, and didn't know any better, I would wonder about this issue:

1- It would make no sense that when a super grape is what is being marketed, I would expect to see super resveratrol from the super grape... but in it's place is regular knotweed resveratrol (that is found in much cheaper products).

2- If I know that knotweed resveratrol is in this product... I need to understand why I paying the extra money. (What do the other ingredients bring to the table?)

3- If I bought this product thinking the resveratrol came from a super grape (and that this made it 10x better), and then find that it doesn't come from the grape at all ... would I be upset about the marketing that lead me to believe this? Would I have made a different choice if I knew the real story upfront?


I personally believe it's just interesting marketing at this point.
cheers
A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 24 August 2008 - 07:02 PM.


#58 krillin

  • Guest
  • 1,516 posts
  • 59
  • Location:USA

Posted 24 August 2008 - 10:50 PM

Anthony,

In the price watch thread you said you had some Viv*x. Is there any stuff that falls out of solution? If not, then either sorbitol is a great resveratrol solvent (I've already discovered that glycerol is a terrible solvent.) or this is a homeopathic product.

#59 DaffyDuck

  • Guest
  • 85 posts
  • 11

Posted 24 August 2008 - 11:13 PM

Anthony,

In the price watch thread you said you had some Viv*x. Is there any stuff that falls out of solution? If not, then either sorbitol is a great resveratrol solvent (I've already discovered that glycerol is a terrible solvent.) or this is a homeopathic product.


The instructions say to shake well so I would guess the resveratrol is not completely dissolved.

Look under directions tab here: http://www.shaklee.com/21000.html

Click HERE to rent this advertising spot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#60 100YearsToGo

  • Guest
  • 204 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Netherlands Antilles

Posted 25 August 2008 - 12:24 AM

That is interesting...


Anyone else know why they had to add "knotweed resveratrol" to their grape product instead of grape skin resveratrol?
(I know I am being a little cheeky here, but if the marketing is about a "super grape", I should ask the questions that come to mind when I see the ingredient list from this product.)


Muscadine is one of the grapes with the highest level of resv. It probably was not enough. So they added knotweed resv. I just find it hilarious that they say, they had a bunch of scientists working years and years on this. Billberry? c'mon.... $100 jeesh...




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users