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

Photo
- - - - -

Resveratrol and Fraud

new york times fraud science resveratrol fraud retracted study dipak das falsified data tyrosol

  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#31 YAGOOFT

  • Guest
  • 15 posts
  • 4
  • Location:NY

Posted 13 September 2012 - 11:50 AM

Interesting,

I hadn't heard much fanfare over last six months on TA-65, so with more doubt on product with this suit, makes you wonder. For a company to sue an individual, it has to hit their bottom line hard, One claim of cancer, true or not, heck most men have prostrate cancer, they just don't know it, so to mention he had cancer, and suspected it could have been caused by TA-65 is not something to sue about as I see it. Even more important is that if he had cancer at al, it would be just as damaging to learn that TA-65 has no effect on cancer, as in eliminate it. So many claims, sounded so promising, yet now, who really knows the truth.

Success to all,

#32 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 18,997 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 26 January 2013 - 11:06 AM

Dr. Das is fighting back, suing for his job back, suing for libel, claims he did not fabricate results. Strange that Uconn did not allow Das to answer the charges before going to the media and blowing the whole thing up. Did anyone here read the 60,000 page indictment? It sounds like they were thorough. It is hard to imagine Uconn would be as incompetent or malicious to file an erroneous/false report.

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

#33 anagram

  • Guest
  • 339 posts
  • -29
  • Location:Down to my shoulders in earth.. again!

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:46 AM

yah Resveratrol is great. no BS.

Edited by anagram, 27 January 2013 - 12:47 AM.

  • dislike x 3

#34 hav

  • Guest
  • 1,089 posts
  • 219
  • Location:Cape Cod, MA
  • NO

Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:57 PM

Dr. Das is fighting back, suing for his job back, suing for libel, claims he did not fabricate results. Strange that Uconn did not allow Das to answer the charges before going to the media and blowing the whole thing up. Did anyone here read the 60,000 page indictment? It sounds like they were thorough. It is hard to imagine Uconn would be as incompetent or malicious to file an erroneous/false report.


I read through most of it last year and posted my thoughts at the time here. Funny that you characterize it as an "indictment". I doubt it would survive even casual judicial scrutiny, I'm kind of surprised that scientific publications versed in peer reviewing research papers haven't commented the least bit critically on it .

Howard

#35 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,949 posts
  • 1,625
  • Location:New York

Posted 28 January 2013 - 01:50 PM

Some of DAS papers seemed designed to support a particular conclusion, not hard to do but given who was funding some of his work, not something the university wanted to be associated with....

Edited by maxwatt, 28 January 2013 - 06:11 PM.


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

#36 anagram

  • Guest
  • 339 posts
  • -29
  • Location:Down to my shoulders in earth.. again!

Posted 30 January 2013 - 08:14 PM

Isn't SODmn that Res massively up regulates, on its own known to be life extending?
  • dislike x 1





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: new york times, fraud science, resveratrol, fraud, retracted study, dipak das, falsified data, tyrosol

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users