37 replies to this topic

[Dorho]

I found a very provokative statement from the depths of the interwebs:

Due to processing, grape juice provides little resveratrol. Sun-dried raisins also contain no resveratrol due to oxidation by sun rays. The same is true for resveratrol pills which are widely marketed. Their resveratrol content, extracted from the Giant Knotweed plant (also called fo-ti in Asian cultures) for use in dietary supplements, is nil. Sinclair has tested a number of brands of resveratrol pills and their resveratrol content was zero. The resveratrol disappears soon after exposure to air during encapsulation. For now, red wine is the only reliable source of resveratrol.

http://www.lewrockwe...di/sardi25.html

This can't be true, or can it?

In case you're interested, I found the page as I was googling for the resveratrol content of raisins. There is contradictory information on that as well and I would really like to know the truth. Does anyone have access to this study?

[Anthony_Loera]

That article was from: September 18, 2003

A lot of new information has come about since then, and the article has been shown to be incorrect for this day and age.

1- Tran-resveratrol has been shown to be much better at handling ambient elements, however ultraviolet light still changes it from trans-resveratrol to cis-resveratrol.
2- Resveratrol supplements in 2003 where pretty horrible in quality, they aren't anymore.
3- Nitrogen Licaps with micronized trans-resveratrol are now used to market to folks who still worry about articles such as this one, as they take into account all the issues that this article pointed out in 2003.

So if you are still worried (which I believe you shouldn't be), you can always google micronized resveratrol in a licaps capsule and be at peace.

Cheers
A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 24 February 2010 - 05:07 PM.

[unglued]

Also, type "Sardi Consumer Labs" into the "Google Custom Search" box at the top left of this page to see more recent (late 2007) information on independent testing. Summary:

and most of this ~98%, was
trans-resveratrol, apparently

Well that puts the last nail in the coffin for Sardi's Resveratrol instability claims.

There had been a lot of discussion about that theory. Sardi's company's web site used to make that claim, but the word "oxygen" no longer appears anywhere on their site today. (I won't mention its name since Anthony didn't mention the name of his own company.)

[mikeinnaples]

And... on top of it all, judging by his emails to me in the past, Sardi is a complete and total douchebag.

[Dorho]

Ok, thanks for clearing things up. I'm currently using Country Life's Resveratrol Plus. I hope it beats raisins in its resveratrol/dollar ratio.

[Mind]

Sardi's company's web site used to make that claim, but the word "oxygen" no longer appears anywhere on their site today. (I won't mention its name since Anthony didn't mention the name of his own company.)

Hooray Unglued and Anthony! We have a policy here where we try to keep commercial presence, links, and viral marketing out of the "main" forums. If members would like to discuss a specific brand-name product or specific company, please use the Retailer/Product Discussion forum (however, this is still not a place for direct marketing, only discussion of issues wrt to brand names and companies). We would like to keep the main supplement and noos forums focused on the science of supplementation - as much as possible.

[Ringostarr]

Sardi's company's web site used to make that claim, but the word "oxygen" no longer appears anywhere on their site today. (I won't mention its name since Anthony didn't mention the name of his own company.)

Hooray Unglued and Anthony! We have a policy here where we try to keep commercial presence, links, and viral marketing out of the "main" forums. If members would like to discuss a specific brand-name product or specific company, please use the Retailer/Product Discussion forum (however, this is still not a place for direct marketing, only discussion of issues wrt to brand names and companies). We would like to keep the main supplement and noos forums focused on the science of supplementation - as much as possible.

I think Sardi is depressed because he is just starting to realize that selling resveratrol, a commodity, is all about access to marketing channels (which can be very expensive). Anyone can start a supplement company this day and age - competition is fierce. And the big boys haven't even entered the room - yet.

[cider]

I think Sardi is depressed because he is just starting to realize that selling resveratrol, a commodity, is all about access to marketing channels (which can be very expensive). Anyone can start a supplement company this day and age - competition is fierce. And the big boys haven't even entered the room - yet.

But if what scientists commenting on In The Pipeline are correct, maybe GSK won't enter at all as so many are convinced that SRT1720, etc. are worthless. Yet I don't follow their logic. Unless the SRT 501 study on diabetics was flawed, we know SRT 501 at a high dose lowered glucose levels despite the Pfizer group not finding that it directly activated SIRT 1. Same with resveratrol.

I wonder what GSK would do if it turns out SRT 501 is effective against different diseases but the NCEs like SRT 2104 are not. Would they enter the resveratrol fray? From what I've read, SRT 501 is five times more potent than resveratrol. Would that be equivalent to taking 5 times as much resveratrol? My guess is no, so GSK could potentially create a higher end niche in the market soon if they wanted to. Unrealistic?

[niner]

I wonder what GSK would do if it turns out SRT 501 is effective against different diseases but the NCEs like SRT 2104 are not. Would they enter the resveratrol fray? From what I've read, SRT 501 is five times more potent than resveratrol. Would that be equivalent to taking 5 times as much resveratrol? My guess is no, so GSK could potentially create a higher end niche in the market soon if they wanted to. Unrealistic?

With drugs, it's all about the intellectual property position. They can't patent resveratrol as a chemical entity, so they will never have exclusivity with the compound. The best they could do would be a patented formulation, like 501, but Anthony has been selling something pretty close to that for a long time, and it is not priced anywhere near what GSK would want for a drug. That doesn't mean that they couldn't put 501 or an improved version of it on the market as a prescription drug, and if insurance companies would pay for it, then people would take it, even if they could get something like it for less from RG. This still seems like a longshot to me. If the NCEs were designed against the Sirtuin assay, and resveratrol doesn't work through surtuins, then why was there a paper from Auwerx's group that showed one of the NCEs working like resveratrol did in mice? Something doesn't add up.

[cider]

I wonder what GSK would do if it turns out SRT 501 is effective against different diseases but the NCEs like SRT 2104 are not. Would they enter the resveratrol fray? From what I've read, SRT 501 is five times more potent than resveratrol. Would that be equivalent to taking 5 times as much resveratrol? My guess is no, so GSK could potentially create a higher end niche in the market soon if they wanted to. Unrealistic?

With drugs, it's all about the intellectual property position. They can't patent resveratrol as a chemical entity, so they will never have exclusivity with the compound. The best they could do would be a patented formulation, like 501, but Anthony has been selling something pretty close to that for a long time, and it is not priced anywhere near what GSK would want for a drug.

Which of Anthony's products is 5 times as potent as resveratrol?? I thought he was selling 98% pure resveratrol like several others.

That doesn't mean that they couldn't put 501 or an improved version of it on the market as a prescription drug, and if insurance companies would pay for it, then people would take it, even if they could get something like it for less from RG. This still seems like a longshot to me. If the NCEs were designed against the Sirtuin assay, and resveratrol doesn't work through surtuins, then why was there a paper from Auwerx's group that showed one of the NCEs working like resveratrol did in mice? Something doesn't add up.

I guess that was part of my question, but isn't SRT 501 already an improvement, even if at a higher price? I wonder what customer would want 501 and what type would want something like RG. I'm going on assumption that if 501 were sold, it wouldnt be the same as just taking 5 times as mu 98% RG at 1/5 the price.

I agree that something isn't adding up with the studies. I also don't see why so many scientists posting comments over there are so sure GSK has junk considering resveartrol and 501 at least seem to be effective (especially 501 since a human trial) yet thet also didn't directly activate SIRT1. Isn't this like an old GRE test where the answer isn't "D
" (junk) but "E" insufficient information to conclude.

[niner]

I wonder what GSK would do if it turns out SRT 501 is effective against different diseases but the NCEs like SRT 2104 are not. Would they enter the resveratrol fray? From what I've read, SRT 501 is five times more potent than resveratrol. Would that be equivalent to taking 5 times as much resveratrol? My guess is no, so GSK could potentially create a higher end niche in the market soon if they wanted to. Unrealistic?

With drugs, it's all about the intellectual property position. They can't patent resveratrol as a chemical entity, so they will never have exclusivity with the compound. The best they could do would be a patented formulation, like 501, but Anthony has been selling something pretty close to that for a long time, and it is not priced anywhere near what GSK would want for a drug.

Which of Anthony's products is 5 times as potent as resveratrol?? I thought he was selling 98% pure resveratrol like several others.

Nitro 250. It's micronized resveratrol in tween. Similar, though not the same as 501.

That doesn't mean that they couldn't put 501 or an improved version of it on the market as a prescription drug, and if insurance companies would pay for it, then people would take it, even if they could get something like it for less from RG. This still seems like a longshot to me. If the NCEs were designed against the Sirtuin assay, and resveratrol doesn't work through surtuins, then why was there a paper from Auwerx's group that showed one of the NCEs working like resveratrol did in mice? Something doesn't add up.

I guess that was part of my question, but isn't SRT 501 already an improvement, even if at a higher price? I wonder what customer would want 501 and what type would want something like RG. I'm going on assumption that if 501 were sold, it wouldnt be the same as just taking 5 times as mu 98% RG at 1/5 the price.

I agree that something isn't adding up with the studies. I also don't see why so many scientists posting comments over there are so sure GSK has junk considering resveartrol and 501 at least seem to be effective (especially 501 since a human trial) yet thet also didn't directly activate SIRT1. Isn't this like an old GRE test where the answer isn't "D
" (junk) but "E" insufficient information to conclude.

The customer that would want 501 at 5 times the price would be one who has insurance and has a doctor that prescribes only drugs that come from drug companies that are big enough to get something FDA approved, which means that human trials have been done and purity is assured. Essentially, this describes just about all doctors... It would be kind of funny if GSK actually marketed resveratrol. I still don't think it would happen, but it would be interesting.

[Ringostarr]

I wonder what GSK would do if it turns out SRT 501 is effective against different diseases but the NCEs like SRT 2104 are not. Would they enter the resveratrol fray? From what I've read, SRT 501 is five times more potent than resveratrol. Would that be equivalent to taking 5 times as much resveratrol? My guess is no, so GSK could potentially create a higher end niche in the market soon if they wanted to. Unrealistic?

With drugs, it's all about the intellectual property position. They can't patent resveratrol as a chemical entity, so they will never have exclusivity with the compound. The best they could do would be a patented formulation, like 501, but Anthony has been selling something pretty close to that for a long time, and it is not priced anywhere near what GSK would want for a drug.

Which of Anthony's products is 5 times as potent as resveratrol?? I thought he was selling 98% pure resveratrol like several others.

Nitro 250. It's micronized resveratrol in tween. Similar, though not the same as 501.

That doesn't mean that they couldn't put 501 or an improved version of it on the market as a prescription drug, and if insurance companies would pay for it, then people would take it, even if they could get something like it for less from RG. This still seems like a longshot to me. If the NCEs were designed against the Sirtuin assay, and resveratrol doesn't work through surtuins, then why was there a paper from Auwerx's group that showed one of the NCEs working like resveratrol did in mice? Something doesn't add up.

I guess that was part of my question, but isn't SRT 501 already an improvement, even if at a higher price? I wonder what customer would want 501 and what type would want something like RG. I'm going on assumption that if 501 were sold, it wouldnt be the same as just taking 5 times as mu 98% RG at 1/5 the price.

I agree that something isn't adding up with the studies. I also don't see why so many scientists posting comments over there are so sure GSK has junk considering resveartrol and 501 at least seem to be effective (especially 501 since a human trial) yet thet also didn't directly activate SIRT1. Isn't this like an old GRE test where the answer isn't "D
" (junk) but "E" insufficient information to conclude.

The customer that would want 501 at 5 times the price would be one who has insurance and has a doctor that prescribes only drugs that come from drug companies that are big enough to get something FDA approved, which means that human trials have been done and purity is assured. Essentially, this describes just about all doctors... It would be kind of funny if GSK actually marketed resveratrol. I still don't think it would happen, but it would be interesting.

My opinion: Resveratrol sales are about to explode.

[Ringostarr]

I should expound. I am convinced that resveratrol works - in animals and in people. It is not patentable - prices for pure resveratrol will hopefully stay low (assuming supply can keep up with demand). People will buy resveratrol at the grocery store (in supplements, multivitamins, foods and juices etc), on the internet, in health food stores etc. etc. Think about it - if you stop somebody on the street today, do you think they will know what resveratrol is? Maybe 2 out of 100 will? (maybe?). Now take vitamin C. Maybe 99%. The pent up demand is like the Hoover dam about to burst.

Big players not involved: multivitamin companies, food/drink companies, Big Pharma

[cider]

Think about it - if you stop somebody on the street today, do you think they will know what resveratrol is? Maybe 2 out of 100 will? (maybe?). Now take vitamin C. Maybe 99%. The pent up demand is like the Hoover dam about to burst.

Big players not involved: multivitamin companies, food/drink companies, Big Pharma

I've thought this since 2008, but it never seemed to happen. Bill Sardi said that sales of his product were pretty flat until Nov 2006 when the mouse study was published, then something like ten times more sales. But you'd think in the internet age, and with Sinclair out there saying he takes it, that sales would be higher. I don't think it is as low as 2 out of 100 anymore, -- 10%?-- but I have been surprised at the extreme conservative attitude I sometimes run into despite resveratrol being natural.

Overall, I think you are right, maybe depending on what the NIH says or doesn't. But more studies are coming, so I'd bet a big increase by summer.

[cider]

Nitro 250. It's micronized resveratrol in tween. Similar, though not the same as 501.

How similar is "pretty close"? Anothony has also said that Nitro 250 is the closest to what Sirtis has, but other products weren't compared. Anthony once posted a letter Bill Sardi wrote to ImmInst a while back (through Crepulance) saying that Sinclair's SRT 501 was "esssentially a ripoff o Longevine*" as was the other brand Sinclair helped forumlate, Vivi*."

When I read that, I thought there might be some truth to it since Sinclair was behind both of these products, but I think "essentially a ripoff" is likely too strong. I think Sinclair did something new with SRT 501. I don't know. But with respect to Nitro 250's similarity to SRT 501, is it five times as potent as standard 98% resveratrol? Two times as potent? 50% higher potency?

The next question would be , "Does it matter?" I don't think this is clear yet. I also don't think we've heard that last of Sirtris, but maybe those will be a bust. Sinclair wrote in an essay for Seed Magazine in April 2009 that "It is premature to call these drugs a sure thing, but we already have come much further than I expected to witness in my lifetime. Each morning, I awaken excited to see what new discovery the day may bring, for soon we’ll know whether ours will be the last generation in human history to merely dream of a healthy, vibrant life beyond 90 — or become the very first generation to experience it."

Edited by cider, 25 February 2010 - 05:49 AM.

[maxwatt]

Nitro 250. It's micronized resveratrol in tween. Similar, though not the same as 501.

How similar is "pretty close"? Anothony has also said that Nitro 250 is the closest to what Sirtis has, but other products weren't compared. Anthony once posted a letter Bill Sardi wrote to ImmInst a while back (through Crepulance) saying that Sinclair's SRT 501 was "esssentially a ripoff o Longevine*" as was the other brand Sinclair helped forumlate, Vivi*."

When I read that, I thought there might be some truth to it since Sinclair was behind both of these products, but I think "essentially a ripoff" is likely too strong. I think Sinclair did something new with SRT 501. I don't know. But with respect to Nitro 250's similarity to SRT 501, is it five times as potent as standard 98% resveratrol? Two times as potent? 50% higher potency?

The next question would be , "Does it matter?" I don't think this is clear yet. I also don't think we've heard that last of Sirtris, but maybe those will be a bust. Sinclair wrote in an essay for Seed Magazine in April 2009 that "It is premature to call these drugs a sure thing, but we already have come much further than I expected to witness in my lifetime. Each morning, I awaken excited to see what new discovery the day may bring, for soon we’ll know whether ours will be the last generation in human history to merely dream of a healthy, vibrant life beyond 90 — or become the very first generation to experience it."

If you look at this patent application Application number: 11/440,584 Publication number: US 2006/0292099 A1 by Christoph Westphal of Sirtris you will find out that Tween 80 was as effective a dispersant as HPMC/DOSS (which was used in published SRT501 formulations in human studies.) There are several graphs in the patent's figures showing several fold increase in plasma levels from these formulations. While patent applications are not the most reliable of sources, given the credentials of the applicants in this case one can confidently infer that the data represent actual study results. I believe the Nitro 250 formulation is the most efficient, if not necessarily the most cost effective, method of achieving a high blood serum level of resveratrol. I don't think there's another pill available that comes close.

Sardi's comments are essentially marketing; I think you're right not to give them much weight.

You are not the only one expecting resveratrol sales to explode. A new factory is opening in Hunan, with a production capacity of 1000 kg a month. Europe seems to be discovering it, too.

[cider]

If you look at this patent application Application number: 11/440,584 Publication number: US 2006/0292099 A1 by Christoph Westphal of Sirtris you will find out that Tween 80 was as effective a dispersant as HPMC/DOSS (which was used in published SRT501 formulations in human studies.) There are several graphs in the patent's figures showing several fold increase in plasma levels from these formulations. While patent applications are not the most reliable of sources, given the credentials of the applicants in this case one can confidently infer that the data represent actual study results. I believe the Nitro 250 formulation is the most efficient, if not necessarily the most cost effective, method of achieving a high blood serum level of resveratrol. I don't think there's another pill available that comes close.

But this isn't science.

If so, how much more potent is Nitro 250 than 98% resveratrol?

No studies, and no numbers, right? It is just as much marketing as claiming SRT 501 is "essentially a rip off of Longevinex."

[niner]

If you look at this patent application Application number: 11/440,584 Publication number: US 2006/0292099 A1 by Christoph Westphal of Sirtris you will find out that Tween 80 was as effective a dispersant as HPMC/DOSS (which was used in published SRT501 formulations in human studies.) There are several graphs in the patent's figures showing several fold increase in plasma levels from these formulations. While patent applications are not the most reliable of sources, given the credentials of the applicants in this case one can confidently infer that the data represent actual study results. I believe the Nitro 250 formulation is the most efficient, if not necessarily the most cost effective, method of achieving a high blood serum level of resveratrol. I don't think there's another pill available that comes close.

But this isn't science.

If so, how much more potent is Nitro 250 than 98% resveratrol?

No studies, and no numbers, right? It is just as much marketing as claiming SRT 501 is "essentially a rip off of Longevinex."

No, the correct description for the phrase "essentially a rip off of L*ngevinex" is not marketing, it is LIE. It has NO basis in fact. It's not even close. On the other hand, Nitro 250 is micronized resveratrol in tween. That is a formula that Sirtris studied, and showed enhanced absorption from. It is in fact similar to 501, though as I said before, not the same. Nitro 250 has not to my knowledge undergone a pharmacokinetic study in humans, which is what you are looking for, so you're right; no studies, no numbers. All we can go by is the ingredients and the way they have been shown to work in humans by other labs. That is something of real substance. It's more than just marketing, but not as much as I would like to see. However, it is light-years away from a complete falsehood.

[cider]

No, the correct description for the phrase "essentially a rip off of L*ngevinex" is not marketing, it is LIE. It has NO basis in fact. It's not even close. On the other hand, Nitro 250 is micronized resveratrol in tween. That is a formula that Sirtris studied, and showed enhanced absorption from. It is in fact similar to 501, though as I said before, not the same. Nitro 250 has not to my knowledge undergone a pharmacokinetic study in humans, which is what you are looking for, so you're right; no studies, no numbers. All we can go by is the ingredients and the way they have been shown to work in humans by other labs. That is something of real substance. It's more than just marketing, but not as much as I would like to see. However, it is light-years away from a complete falsehood.

Again, there is no science in the above. You just wrote Nitro 250 is "pretty close" to SRT 501, which is a very strong claim considering there are no numbers to back this.

U of Wisconsin resveratrol researcher Richard Weindruch says that combination of IP6 and quercetin along with resveratrol in longevinex seems to have a synergistic effect. So at least he is explaining the reasoning why this may be so. But we don't know how close either are to SRT 501 or ovreall effectiveness.

[Anthony_Loera]

Hmm... is it me, or am I seeing a pattern emerging in these lasts posts?

hopefully it's just me...

A

[maxwatt]

No, the correct description for the phrase "essentially a rip off of L*ngevinex" is not marketing, it is LIE. It has NO basis in fact. It's not even close. On the other hand, Nitro 250 is micronized resveratrol in tween. That is a formula that Sirtris studied, and showed enhanced absorption from. It is in fact similar to 501, though as I said before, not the same. Nitro 250 has not to my knowledge undergone a pharmacokinetic study in humans, which is what you are looking for, so you're right; no studies, no numbers. All we can go by is the ingredients and the way they have been shown to work in humans by other labs. That is something of real substance. It's more than just marketing, but not as much as I would like to see. However, it is light-years away from a complete falsehood.

Again, there is no science in the above. You just wrote Nitro 250 is "pretty close" to SRT 501, which is a very strong claim considering there are no numbers to back this.

U of Wisconsin resveratrol researcher Richard Weindruch says that combination of IP6 and quercetin along with resveratrol in longevinex seems to have a synergistic effect. So at least he is explaining the reasoning why this may be so. But we don't know how close either are to SRT 501 or ovreall effectiveness.

Try reading the patent applicationI cited in the post (#16) above. There material is based on studies Westphal sponsored. The numbers are given n the chart. You have to read the material, not just gloss over as you can do with PR handouts. Basically, Tween 80 is at least as effective as PMC/DOSS (one formulation for SRT501) at improving serum levels of resveratrol.

[cider]

Hmm... is it me, or am I seeing a pattern emerging in these lasts posts?

hopefully it's just me...

A

Oh, I was going to add that it doesn't make sense that Nitro 250 can be made to be "pretty close" to SRT 501 yet greatly undercut GSK's speculated price for it. Wouldn't they at least be able to go up against Nitro 250? That isn't pantentable, right? So are other makers going to be offering something like Nitro 250? And the numbers thing... I wouldn't be surprised if Nitro 250 is somewhat more potent than standard 99% resv, but 1) how much so (I highly doubt 5 times that is claimed for SRT 501...) and 2) does it even matter?
All speculation at this point.

[maxwatt]

Hmm... is it me, or am I seeing a pattern emerging in these lasts posts?

hopefully it's just me...

A

Oh, I was going to add that it doesn't make sense that Nitro 250 can be made to be "pretty close" to SRT 501 yet greatly undercut GSK's speculated price for it. Wouldn't they at least be able to go up against Nitro 250? That isn't pantentable, right? So are other makers going to be offering something like Nitro 250? And the numbers thing... I wouldn't be surprised if Nitro 250 is somewhat more potent than standard 99% resv, but 1) how much so (I highly doubt 5 times that is claimed for SRT 501...) and 2) does it even matter?
All speculation at this point.

Our posts crossed. Westphals patent app compares Tween 80 and HPMC/DOSS (srt501) to plain micronized resveratrol, and shows exactly that.

[cider]

Our posts crossed. Westphals patent app compares Tween 80 and HPMC/DOSS (srt501) to plain micronized resveratrol, and shows exactly that.

Shows that SRT501 is 5 times as potent? You are willing to say Nitro 250 is 5 times as potent as plain 98% resv? It might be, but I'd like to see where the numbers are derived.

[maxwatt]

Our posts crossed. Westphals patent app compares Tween 80 and HPMC/DOSS (srt501) to plain micronized resveratrol, and shows exactly that.

Shows that SRT501 is 5 times as potent? You are willing to say Nitro 250 is 5 times as potent as plain 98% resv? It might be, but I'd like to see where the numbers are derived.

Look at the charts in the figures in the patent. Of course I'm assuming the studies the figures are based on are legitimate, but given the credentials of the authors, Westphal et al, I trust the numbers: blood serum levels were even higher with Tween 80 than with HPMC/DOSS, about 5 times greater than micronized resveratrol. Whether this translates to "5 times as potent" is an open question, but I think it's the most potent resveratrol pill you can get without enrolling in a study.

FWIW, the patent cites good results with captisol (cyclodextrin) too, but the FDA apparently limits its use in a supplement.

I've also seen a patent using gelatin to make a water soluble resveratrol solution, but no figures for serum levels were given, and the source I consider less reliable than Westphal. Still, I may try some kitchen experiments with gelatin and powdered reseratrol.

[cider]

Our posts crossed. Westphals patent app compares Tween 80 and HPMC/DOSS (srt501) to plain micronized resveratrol, and shows exactly that.

Shows that SRT501 is 5 times as potent? You are willing to say Nitro 250 is 5 times as potent as plain 98% resv? It might be, but I'd like to see where the numbers are derived.

Look at the charts in the figures in the patent. Of course I'm assuming the studies the figures are based on are legitimate, but given the credentials of the authors, Westphal et al, I trust the numbers: blood serum levels were even higher with Tween 80 than with HPMC/DOSS, about 5 times greater than micronized resveratrol. Whether this translates to "5 times as potent" is an open question, but I think it's the most potent resveratrol pill you can get without enrolling in a study.

FWIW, the patent cites good results with captisol (cyclodextrin) too, but the FDA apparently limits its use in a supplement.

I've also seen a patent using gelatin to make a water soluble resveratrol solution, but no figures for serum levels were given, and the source I consider less reliable than Westphal. Still, I may try some kitchen experiments with gelatin and powdered reseratrol.

I did look at the graph, but too much isn't answered. First, it isn't crystal clear what those numbers mean either in absolute or relative terms. But I see the point about the sRT 501 comparison. Second, if comparing brands, we don't know how that compares to Longev* supposed synergistic effects as speculated by U of Wisconsin Richard Weindruch, an expert in the field. Finally, it isn't clear that Nitro 250 is worth the extra cost over 98% resv, and the same can be said for the seemingly synergistic effects of Longev* that is pricier than most 98% resv sold.

So, no speculation on how much more potent Nitro 250 is over 98% resv?

[niner]

Hmm... is it me, or am I seeing a pattern emerging in these lasts posts?

hopefully it's just me...

Not just you, Anthony...

[N.T.M.]

I found a very provokative statement from the depths of the interwebs:

Due to processing, grape juice provides little resveratrol. Sun-dried raisins also contain no resveratrol due to oxidation by sun rays. The same is true for resveratrol pills which are widely marketed. Their resveratrol content, extracted from the Giant Knotweed plant (also called fo-ti in Asian cultures) for use in dietary supplements, is nil. Sinclair has tested a number of brands of resveratrol pills and their resveratrol content was zero. The resveratrol disappears soon after exposure to air during encapsulation. For now, red wine is the only reliable source of resveratrol.

http://www.lewrockwe...di/sardi25.html

This can't be true, or can it?

In case you're interested, I found the page as I was googling for the resveratrol content of raisins. There is contradictory information on that as well and I would really like to know the truth. Does anyone have access to this study?

It's true! I actually just finished working for a company called Univera that boasted that their resveratrol was the only one that is stabilized and actually contains resveratrol indefinitely. Google search it.

Each serving is equivalent to about 100 bottles of wine and was stabilized with vitamin E, EPA and DHA (I believe, unless there was more). Also, it was 3rd party validated. It's the only true resveratrol supplement that I'm aware of.

*edit again* Meh, somebody could just contact the head scientist, Stephen Cherniske. I just can't seem to find any good links.

Edited by N.T.M., 26 February 2010 - 05:10 AM.

[niner]

Our posts crossed. Westphals patent app compares Tween 80 and HPMC/DOSS (srt501) to plain micronized resveratrol, and shows exactly that.

Shows that SRT501 is 5 times as potent? You are willing to say Nitro 250 is 5 times as potent as plain 98% resv? It might be, but I'd like to see where the numbers are derived.

Look at the charts in the figures in the patent. Of course I'm assuming the studies the figures are based on are legitimate, but given the credentials of the authors, Westphal et al, I trust the numbers: blood serum levels were even higher with Tween 80 than with HPMC/DOSS, about 5 times greater than micronized resveratrol. Whether this translates to "5 times as potent" is an open question, but I think it's the most potent resveratrol pill you can get without enrolling in a study.

FWIW, the patent cites good results with captisol (cyclodextrin) too, but the FDA apparently limits its use in a supplement.

I've also seen a patent using gelatin to make a water soluble resveratrol solution, but no figures for serum levels were given, and the source I consider less reliable than Westphal. Still, I may try some kitchen experiments with gelatin and powdered reseratrol.

I did look at the graph, but too much isn't answered. First, it isn't crystal clear what those numbers mean either in absolute or relative terms. But I see the point about the sRT 501 comparison. Second, if comparing brands, we don't know how that compares to Longev* supposed synergistic effects as speculated by U of Wisconsin Richard Weindruch, an expert in the field. Finally, it isn't clear that Nitro 250 is worth the extra cost over 98% resv, and the same can be said for the seemingly synergistic effects of Longev* that is pricier than most 98% resv sold.

So, no speculation on how much more potent Nitro 250 is over 98% resv?

In the case of the Nitro 250 formulation, human tests were done on what appears to be nominally the same formulation, by Sirtris. In the case of the Longev* formulation, I'm not aware of any tests being done on any species of animal, anywhere in the universe, at any time since the big bang. In my view, this represents a difference of some consequence. You want speculation? Sure, I can speculate with the best of them. My speculation is that it will work like it worked when Sirtris tried the same thing. But why do you want speculation now, when a few posts back you kept complaining that we weren't providing any hard numbers?

[niner]

I found a very provokative statement from the depths of the interwebs:

Due to processing, grape juice provides little resveratrol. Sun-dried raisins also contain no resveratrol due to oxidation by sun rays. The same is true for resveratrol pills which are widely marketed. Their resveratrol content, extracted from the Giant Knotweed plant (also called fo-ti in Asian cultures) for use in dietary supplements, is nil. Sinclair has tested a number of brands of resveratrol pills and their resveratrol content was zero. The resveratrol disappears soon after exposure to air during encapsulation. For now, red wine is the only reliable source of resveratrol.

http://www.lewrockwe...di/sardi25.html

This can't be true, or can it?

In case you're interested, I found the page as I was googling for the resveratrol content of raisins. There is contradictory information on that as well and I would really like to know the truth. Does anyone have access to this study?

It's true! I actually just finished working for a company called Univera that boasted that their resveratrol was the only one that is stabilized and actually contains resveratrol indefinitely. Google search it.

Each serving is equivalent to about 100 bottles of wine and was stabilized with vitamin E, EPA and DHA (I believe, unless there was more). Also, it was 3rd party validated. It's the only true resveratrol supplement that I'm aware of.

*edit* I just found this: http://1familyman.wo...l-and-diabetes/

*edit again* Here's this too:

http://dawinedog.blo...01_archive.html

*edit again* Meh, somebody could just contact the head scientist, Stephen Cherniske. I just can't seem to find any good links.

Oh please, Stop it! Univera is a bullshit MLM outfit. You've given us a link to a religious site that has an Intelligent Design video; the guy is one of countless Univera sellers. Univera doesn't have anything worth a damn. Resveratrol doesn't need to be "stabilized". The science has been done on this; you were misled by your employer.