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


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

Full David Sinclair Video


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic
⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#1 Crepulance

  • Guest
  • 269 posts
  • -2

Posted 27 August 2008 - 06:46 AM


Ground Breaking - Not sure if you're allowed to put up links in these, if not let me know and I'll put in the web address.


Crep

#2 inawe

  • Guest
  • 653 posts
  • 3

Posted 27 August 2008 - 04:32 PM

Ground Breaking - Not sure if you're allowed to put up links in these, if not let me know and I'll put in the web address.


Crep

More like BALL BREAKING.
Very dishonest talk given to the worst possible audience. Sinclair was studying yeast under calorie restriction when Howitz came to him and told him that RSV also increased the replication life of yeast cells (PMID: 18455976). So it's not that Sinclair looked at hundreds of molecules and settled on RSV.
It was reported that calorie restriction increased Sirtuin expression (at least SIRT1). Even that is now in doubt. RSV does not increase Sirtuin expression. It only lowers the Michaelis constant of the reactions. And even this in case the Sirtuin concentration is the limiting factor (it could be NAD+, instead).
And what's that talk 10X about?
I take a lot of RSV. I think it's a very good supplement to take. It was shown to act on several pathways. Probably the activity on Sirtuins is not the most relevant.

#3 JayMass

  • Guest
  • 17 posts
  • 1

Posted 27 August 2008 - 07:00 PM

Crep[/quote]

I take a lot of RSV. I think it's a very good supplement to take. It was shown to act on several pathways. Probably the activity on Sirtuins is not the most relevant.
[/quote]

Out of curiosity what is a lot of RSV?

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#4 inawe

  • Guest
  • 653 posts
  • 3

Posted 27 August 2008 - 09:16 PM

[/quote]

I take a lot of RSV. I think it's a very good supplement to take. It was shown to act on several pathways. Probably the activity on Sirtuins is not the most relevant.
[/quote]

Out of curiosity what is a lot of RSV?
[/quote][/quote]
1.5-2 gr/day. I consider that a lot

#5 malbecman

  • Guest
  • 732 posts
  • 154
  • Location:Sunny CA

Posted 28 August 2008 - 12:04 AM

What a sellout. As an academic, its hard to watch him up there, tossing out these one-liners and dramatic statements in order to draw applause. I'm still not sure why he went this route; perhaps the GSK buyout didnt make him rich enough???

#6 VP.

  • Member
  • 468 posts
  • 182

Posted 28 August 2008 - 04:59 AM

I guess he gave up hope for a Nobel Prize. He'll have to settle for Shaklee employee of the month.

#7 Crepulance

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 269 posts
  • -2

Posted 28 August 2008 - 07:52 AM

Gang, why are you ragging on him? The guy's allowed to make money, and a lot of it. And part of that is saying cheesey things and doing publicity, etc. To me people who say things like "selling out" are bitter and not wealthy. I'm sure he cares that someone on a thread thinks he's selling out as he rolls around in his money. He's making money man, you should applaud him unless he's hurting someone, and I don't believe that to be the case. Peace. By the wayl, "Ground Breaking" was what the link said, I didn't type that.

Crep

I guess he gave up hope for a Nobel Prize. He'll have to settle for Shaklee employee of the month.



#8 zoolander

  • Guest
  • 4,724 posts
  • 55
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 28 August 2008 - 09:04 AM

So how much are you get paid to say I take product "x" because it does "y" Crep?

#9 malbecman

  • Guest
  • 732 posts
  • 154
  • Location:Sunny CA

Posted 28 August 2008 - 04:06 PM

Sorry, Crep., but I'll have to disagree with you. I have no problems with someone making $$ in a capitalist society but as a Harvard professor, he (Sinclair) has to be held to higher standards. Starting your own small biotech company and going public or selling it are great ways for someone of his caliber to make their fortune. Writing a novel is also fine. Schlocking an imperfect product with dubious claims from a "shaky" company-No! That is not suitable for a Harvard professor. I can guarantee that many of his Harvard colleagues have lost a lot of respect for him. Personally, as another academic, I can no longer take his science as seriously anymore. I will no longer read one of his scientific papers with quite the same regard.



Gang, why are you ragging on him? The guy's allowed to make money, and a lot of it. And part of that is saying cheesey things and doing publicity, etc. To me people who say things like "selling out" are bitter and not wealthy. I'm sure he cares that someone on a thread thinks he's selling out as he rolls around in his money. He's making money man, you should applaud him unless he's hurting someone, and I don't believe that to be the case. Peace. By the wayl, "Ground Breaking" was what the link said, I didn't type that.

Crep

I guess he gave up hope for a Nobel Prize. He'll have to settle for Shaklee employee of the month.



⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#10 Crepulance

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 269 posts
  • -2

Posted 01 September 2008 - 09:55 AM

Malbec, with all due respect, I don't believe he cares, nor is it relevant wether or not you read his scientific papers anymore. Yes he can make money selling his biotech company and yes he can make it writing a book, and yes, he can also make it selling a product which you make assumptions to be "shaky". First, we have no science on it yet, so you're purely speculating, unless you have some newly found info. Another important note, though it seems you may doubt his philanthropic abilities, he truly may be doing this for the good of the people. As he's previously stated, it will take another 5-7 years before his GSK venture sees the market, so this is his intermediary to supplement his science to the people. I believe he has noble aspirations, and yes wants to make a lot of money in the meantime. Now, if something comes up dissproving the science of his new Shaklee venture, then of course my perception of this whole encounter will change, but until then, as I stated before, I will give him the benefit of the doubt, as he has thus far earned it.

Crep





Sorry, Crep., but I'll have to disagree with you. I have no problems with someone making $ in a capitalist society but as a Harvard professor, he (Sinclair) has to be held to higher standards. Starting your own small biotech company and going public or selling it are great ways for someone of his caliber to make their fortune. Writing a novel is also fine. Schlocking an imperfect product with dubious claims from a "shaky" company-No! That is not suitable for a Harvard professor. I can guarantee that many of his Harvard colleagues have lost a lot of respect for him. Personally, as another academic, I can no longer take his science as seriously anymore. I will no longer read one of his scientific papers with quite the same regard.



Gang, why are you ragging on him? The guy's allowed to make money, and a lot of it. And part of that is saying cheesey things and doing publicity, etc. To me people who say things like "selling out" are bitter and not wealthy. I'm sure he cares that someone on a thread thinks he's selling out as he rolls around in his money. He's making money man, you should applaud him unless he's hurting someone, and I don't believe that to be the case. Peace. By the wayl, "Ground Breaking" was what the link said, I didn't type that.

Crep

I guess he gave up hope for a Nobel Prize. He'll have to settle for Shaklee employee of the month.




#11 Anthony_Loera

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

Posted 01 September 2008 - 03:48 PM

Crep,

I have an issue with the fact that he states on camera, in front of millions that Barbara Walters needs to drink 1000 bottles of wine a day.

He then says Viv** is a great product. He can't say it's a great product because of resveratrol, the simple fact is that the product does not have 1000 bottles worth of res in one spoon full of the Viv**.

No, it has only about one gram in the full 30 day supply.

When people see Sinclair, they think Resveratrol and his research... not Advanced Glycation End products and the research which he was not involved with at all (please correct me if I am wrong).

I understand about making abusiness and money, but making such a statement to Barbara, and turning around to market a product that has no where near the amount of Res he told millions...

Well, I think that makes him seem untrustworthy.

A

#12 DukeNukem

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

Posted 01 September 2008 - 03:54 PM

I guess he gave up hope for a Nobel Prize. He'll have to settle for Shaklee employee of the month.


One of the best lines I've read on ImmInst. haha And I agree. He's settled for teaming up with a third-tier supplements company, making an over-priced resveratrol product. Anyone buying this is paying at least a 25% premium just for his involvement/royalty, and another 25% premium to cover this product's marketing/hype.

BTW, I have no problem with Sinclair turning his work into profits. But IMO he's taken the low road, rather than the high road.

Edited by DukeNukem, 01 September 2008 - 03:56 PM.


#13 Crepulance

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 269 posts
  • -2

Posted 03 September 2008 - 11:28 AM

Hi Anthony,
The Barabara Walters episode was already quite some time ago. (I believe I have my facts right) But there was a study recently that showed it takes far less Res (100mg) to be effective. This is new information that has come to light, so of course he will alter his view. Science isn't politics. It's not a bad thing to flip flop. I would hope that if Sinclair found that a lesser dose is effective that he wouldn't maintain his 1000 bottles view just for continuity's sake. And it is this information that he used in his vivi** product, I've read. So therefore his info is founded and legitimate and not taking the 'low road'. I promise I do not have an unfounded bias for Sinclair. If the science is proven wrong, I'll go right. To my knowledge, no one on this board has found something inept about his science (aside from monetary value). So if there's someone out there that has found something, let them speak.


Crep





Malbec, with all due respect, I don't believe he cares, nor is it relevant wether or not you read his scientific papers anymore. Yes he can make money selling his biotech company and yes he can make it writing a book, and yes, he can also make it selling a product which you make assumptions to be "shaky". First, we have no science on it yet, so you're purely speculating, unless you have some newly found info. Another important note, though it seems you may doubt his philanthropic abilities, he truly may be doing this for the good of the people. As he's previously stated, it will take another 5-7 years before his GSK venture sees the market, so this is his intermediary to supplement his science to the people. I believe he has noble aspirations, and yes wants to make a lot of money in the meantime. Now, if something comes up dissproving the science of his new Shaklee venture, then of course my perception of this whole encounter will change, but until then, as I stated before, I will give him the benefit of the doubt, as he has thus far earned it.

Crep





Sorry, Crep., but I'll have to disagree with you. I have no problems with someone making $ in a capitalist society but as a Harvard professor, he (Sinclair) has to be held to higher standards. Starting your own small biotech company and going public or selling it are great ways for someone of his caliber to make their fortune. Writing a novel is also fine. Schlocking an imperfect product with dubious claims from a "shaky" company-No! That is not suitable for a Harvard professor. I can guarantee that many of his Harvard colleagues have lost a lot of respect for him. Personally, as another academic, I can no longer take his science as seriously anymore. I will no longer read one of his scientific papers with quite the same regard.



Gang, why are you ragging on him? The guy's allowed to make money, and a lot of it. And part of that is saying cheesey things and doing publicity, etc. To me people who say things like "selling out" are bitter and not wealthy. I'm sure he cares that someone on a thread thinks he's selling out as he rolls around in his money. He's making money man, you should applaud him unless he's hurting someone, and I don't believe that to be the case. Peace. By the wayl, "Ground Breaking" was what the link said, I didn't type that.

Crep

I guess he gave up hope for a Nobel Prize. He'll have to settle for Shaklee employee of the month.




#14 Anthony_Loera

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

Posted 03 September 2008 - 01:09 PM

Crep,

First off, 33mg in Vivi* daily teaspoon is not equal to 100mg of regular resveratrol. Even if it was...

100mg for humans is incorrect regarding the most recent "low dose" study:
http://www.imminst.o...o...st&p=243430

EOD diet was necessary for increase of "lifespan" using resveratrol.
http://www.imminst.o...o...st&p=248969

What is EOD?
Well after talking to the LifeGen folks, the feedings of rats are done every other day because of cost/convenience. Basically resveratrol is mixed in with the food, and left in a cage with the rat to eat. They do not monitor if the rat eats it all at once, or nibbles on it throughout the 2 days...

What ws shown in rats according to Westphal?
"Frailty in humans is an important health concern," says Christoph Westphal, M.D., Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer, Sirtris, a GSK Company. "This study informs us how frailty in mice can be delayed, and this knowledge could help us translate preclinical benefits to humans. We are in clinical trials with SRT501, our proprietary formulation of resveratrol that has shown efficacy signs in humans in Phase 1b testing, and we are also testing a novel SIRT1 activator in a human clinical trial."

Total cholesterol was significantly reduced in 22-month-old non-obese mice after 10 months of resveratrol treatment, although triglyceride levels had only a slight, non-significant trend toward a decrease. Further, the aortas of 18-month-old obese and non-obese mice treated with resveratrol functioned significantly better than untreated mice. Resveratrol also moderated inflammation in the heart. In addition to cardiovascular function, the scientists found resveratrol to have a variety of positive effects on other age-related problems in mice:

* Treated mice tended to have better bone health, as measured by thickness, volume, mineral content and density, and bending stiffness compared to the non-treated control group.
* At 30 months of age, resveratrol-treated mice were found to have reduced cataract formation, a condition found to increase with age in control-group mice.
* Resveratrol enhanced balance and motor coordination in aged animals. Scientists found significant improvement in performance at 21 and 24 months versus 15 months in the resveratrol-treated mice but not in the untreated mice.
* Resveratrol partially mimicked the effects of dietary restriction on the gene expression profiles of liver, skeletal muscle and adipose (fatty) tissue in mice.

Along with determining the effect of resveratrol on the health of mice, scientists also studied the effect of resveratrol on longevity.

"We found that while quality of life improved with resveratrol, the compound did not significantly affect overall survival or maximum lifespan for mice on a standard diet, compared to mice on the same diet without resveratrol," said de Cabo.


Again, 33mg in the Vivi* tonic is extremely low for humans, specially when this 25mg study still is around that states the resveratrol is basically flushed out at 25mg:
http://dmd.aspetjour...ract/32/12/1377



A

#15 Phoebus

  • Guest
  • 666 posts
  • 144
  • Location:Upper Midwest, US

Posted 10 September 2008 - 01:41 AM

here are the ingredients of the vivix product.

------------

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

------------

does anyone have any idea if any of those ingredients enhance the effects of resveratrol? that assertion seems to be the crux of the claims surrounding this product.

#16 Anthony_Loera

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

Posted 10 September 2008 - 02:31 AM

I just copied most of this from our website:

=======================================================================
Dr. Sinclair promotes a new multi-level marketing supplement tonic, that is not based on resveratrol research:

The resveratrol in the multi-level marketing product that Dr. Sinclair has spoken about has about 33mg per serving plus other items. The main focus of this new product is not resveratrol but anti-oxident findings that are found in elderberry, carrots, and muscadine that work well with any resveratrol supplement to decrease the advanced glycosylation end products formation which are issues unrelated to the Dr. Sinclair's major resveratrol discoveries and benefits. A description of advanced glycosylation end products formation is found here:
http://en.wikipedia....tion_endproduct

Below are sources that you can add to your resveratrol regimen, <you can find these in google>:

* Muscadine (vitis rotundifolia): You can buy 120 capsules of Muscadine grape extract(500mg) for $14.99
* European black elderberry: You can buy 15 Lozenges containing Black Edlerberry for $1.43
* Carot Sativus, commonly known as the carrot can be bought at a variety of places: http://www.floridata...auc_car_sat.cfm


I believe you can buy the high quality and proven resveratrol from <your favorite place> at a great price, and then add the latest nutritional and dietary supplements to your daily regimen at much lower cost.

The advantage to this, is that if you are allergic to any of the additional 'supplements', you can simply stop taking it, while continuing to get the benefits from resveratrol and the rest of the supplements that you are not allergic too, or have issues with.
=======================================================================

Cheers
A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 10 September 2008 - 02:33 AM.


#17 Phoebus

  • Guest
  • 666 posts
  • 144
  • Location:Upper Midwest, US

Posted 10 September 2008 - 04:19 AM

thank you for that information. so, you are saying the extra ingredients are helpful for issues surrounding glycosylation, but the vivix people seem to be claiming that those ingredients directly increase the effectiveness of the RSV. (10 times more effective!!)

do you think those ingredients affect the action of RSV at all? i admit i know very little about this subject.

#18 s123

  • Director
  • 1,333 posts
  • 992
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 10 September 2008 - 11:33 AM

Personally, as another academic, I can no longer take his science as seriously anymore. I will no longer read one of his scientific papers with quite the same regard.


A company (like Shaklee) has asked me to become one of their salespeople. I refused because I didn't want to be associated with dubious companies. They were willing to pay me thousands for dollars each month for selling their product after I came home from university. This would look irresistible for a student but I refused. So, if even a student like myself wouldn't do this then why would a researcher like dr. Sinclair do this??? I also have lost my respect for him.

#19 Anthony_Loera

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

Posted 10 September 2008 - 02:18 PM

No it's just marketing...
Even in the Shackleee video on vi*x, the have "advanced glycosylation end products" in tiny print on the screen, when they mention 10x more effective.

Which means that it is only regarding "advanced glycosylation end products".

When people (MLM sales people) state 10x better about effectiveness without mentioning "advanced glycosylation end products" is like stating, the US Government is now 10x more effective, simply because we have created a new weapon that helps the army destroy many more enemies. Well the government is composed of many branches, state, health and a myriad of helpful services, not just the Army... so only the Army maybe more effective, but not the other aspects of government.

hmm... I think that example is a bit of a stretch, but I hope the meaning came through.

A


thank you for that information. so, you are saying the extra ingredients are helpful for issues surrounding glycosylation, but the vivix people seem to be claiming that those ingredients directly increase the effectiveness of the RSV. (10 times more effective!!)

do you think those ingredients affect the action of RSV at all? i admit i know very little about this subject.


Edited by Anthony_Loera, 10 September 2008 - 02:19 PM.


#20 Phoebus

  • Guest
  • 666 posts
  • 144
  • Location:Upper Midwest, US

Posted 10 September 2008 - 02:35 PM

No it's just marketing...
Even in the Shackleee video on vi*x, the have "advanced glycosylation end products" in tiny print on the screen, when they mention 10x more effective.


good grief! i didn't even notice those tiny words. ok, thanks for explaining that.

#21 billypc99

  • Guest
  • 16 posts
  • 0

Posted 12 September 2008 - 01:00 PM

I just looked at some of the promotional materials and was surprised to learn that each serving contains 100mg of resveratrol. It comes in a 30-day supply ans supplies 3,000mg of resveratrol over that timeframe. Now I understand where they get the 3,000 glasses of wine equivalent, i.e. they use 1mg per glass as a conversion factor, which seems fair.

#22 Anthony_Loera

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

Posted 12 September 2008 - 03:11 PM

I just looked at some of the promotional materials and was surprised to learn that each serving contains 100mg of resveratrol. It comes in a 30-day supply ans supplies 3,000mg of resveratrol over that timeframe. Now I understand where they get the 3,000 glasses of wine equivalent, i.e. they use 1mg per glass as a conversion factor, which seems fair.



Billy, I believe it's a maximum of 33mg a serving from estimates of how much is in the average bottle of wine, and not 100mg.
Nothing I have read states 100mg.

Cheers
A

⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#23 100YearsToGo

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

Posted 14 September 2008 - 04:45 PM

No it's just marketing...
Even in the Shackleee video on vi*x, the have "advanced glycosylation end products" in tiny print on the screen, when they mention 10x more effective.

Which means that it is only regarding "advanced glycosylation end products".

When people (MLM sales people) state 10x better about effectiveness without mentioning "advanced glycosylation end products" is like stating, the US Government is now 10x more effective, simply because we have created a new weapon that helps the army destroy many more enemies. Well the government is composed of many branches, state, health and a myriad of helpful services, not just the Army... so only the Army maybe more effective, but not the other aspects of government.

hmm... I think that example is a bit of a stretch, but I hope the meaning came through.

A


thank you for that information. so, you are saying the extra ingredients are helpful for issues surrounding glycosylation, but the vivix people seem to be claiming that those ingredients directly increase the effectiveness of the RSV. (10 times more effective!!)

do you think those ingredients affect the action of RSV at all? i admit i know very little about this subject.


It seems that anthocyanin, a purple igment, (which can be found in elderberry ) is usefull for combating diabetes cataracts etc...These inventors http://www.freepaten...07/0060533.html hold that it is partly because of the antiglycation properties of anthocyanin. Purple carrot is also full of anthocyanin. Muscadine exhibits glycation preventive action http://iospress.meta...13n15322815222/ Given the background of sinclair with diabetes drug development as a precursor to an age defying drug, I'm paying attention. There is certainly something going on here eventhough the synergy if any with RESV. is not clear. I think the suggestion of Anthony to buy these ingredients separately is a good one. Time to check where to buy.

Edited by 100YearsToGo, 14 September 2008 - 05:03 PM.


#24 billypc99

  • Guest
  • 16 posts
  • 0

Posted 15 September 2008 - 04:08 PM

I just looked at some of the promotional materials and was surprised to learn that each serving contains 100mg of resveratrol. It comes in a 30-day supply ans supplies 3,000mg of resveratrol over that timeframe. Now I understand where they get the 3,000 glasses of wine equivalent, i.e. they use 1mg per glass as a conversion factor, which seems fair.



Billy, I believe it's a maximum of 33mg a serving from estimates of how much is in the average bottle of wine, and not 100mg.
Nothing I have read states 100mg.

Cheers
A


I just read the label and FAQ online and it is 100mg per serving. The serving size is 1 teaspoon and each box has thirty servings.

http://64.233.169.10...m...;cd=1&gl=us

#25 Anthony_Loera

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

Posted 15 September 2008 - 05:20 PM

Hey Billypc99

I stand corrected, although the label doesn't state it.
Thanks for the FAQ link.

A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 15 September 2008 - 05:26 PM.


#26 Anthony_Loera

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

Posted 15 September 2008 - 05:34 PM

ok, I corrected the Resveratrol Price Watch...

the product stands at $33 per resveratrol gram instead of $99 per resveratrol gram...
Still quite high compared to most products on the list...

A

#27 100YearsToGo

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

Posted 15 September 2008 - 06:52 PM

ok, I corrected the Resveratrol Price Watch...

the product stands at $33 per resveratrol gram instead of $99 per resveratrol gram...
Still quite high compared to most products on the list...

A


You are not fair. It contains a specialized patented blend of the superfruit. Whereas resv is a commodity. ;)
also don't forget the elderberry and purple carrots.

#28 Anthony_Loera

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

Posted 15 September 2008 - 07:23 PM

You are funny!

Here is your superfruit:

* Muscadine (vitis rotundifolia):
You can buy 120 capsules of Muscadine grape extract(500mg) for $14.99

* European black elderberry:
You can buy 15 Lozenges containing Black Edlerberry for $1.43 ($2.86 for 30 should be enough...)

* Daucus Carota Sativus, commonly known as the carrot can be bought at a variety of places (hmm... how much are carrots now-a-days?) accroding to this... these guys are pretty normal carrots:
http://www.floridata...auc_car_sat.cfm


Sounds to me like folks can save a bundle if they buy resveratrol, and the super fruit separately...

A

#29 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,945 posts
  • 1,618
  • Location:New York

Posted 15 September 2008 - 08:31 PM

You are funny!

Here is your superfruit:

* Muscadine (vitis rotundifolia):
You can buy 120 capsules of Muscadine grape extract(500mg) for $14.99

* European black elderberry:
You can buy 15 Lozenges containing Black Edlerberry for $1.43 ($2.86 for 30 should be enough...)

* Daucus Carota Sativus, commonly known as the carrot can be bought at a variety of places (hmm... how much are carrots now-a-days?) accroding to this... these guys are pretty normal carrots:
http://www.floridata...auc_car_sat.cfm


Sounds to me like folks can save a bundle if they buy resveratrol, and the super fruit separately...

A


I don't know about that.... Elderberry wine was the poison in Arsenic and Old Lace. Be careful.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#30 zawy

  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 19 September 2008 - 02:03 PM

Speaking of the David Sinclair self-promotion, i had noticed there was a lot of very suspicious heavy promotion of David Sinclair in the early wiki article on resveratrol. Somebody was using every excuse possible in the introductory paragraphh and two other sections in the article.

But if he's really 69, he looks amazing in the barbara walters interview. He could pass for 50 easy. I wasn't able to verify his age, and couldn't find a publication before 2002. But according to wiki, he received his PhD in 1998 ish at the age of 60 ?????




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users