I have used Verisol before and although I don't know about a decrease in wrinkles, I did notice my skin got very soft, but I was taking a few things at the time, however, including gelatine, neocell collagen, and dark chocolate. I feel like the latter actually contributed. I am going to try Verisol again.
So, Verisol is made by Gelita and claims to reduce wrinkles in studies.
Oral intake of specific bioactive collagen peptides reduces skin wrinkles and increases dermal matrix synthesis.
In conclusion, our findings demonstrate that the oral intake of specific bioactive collagen peptides (Verisol®) reduced skin wrinkles and had positive effects on dermal matrix synthesis.
source: http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/24401291
Here is a document talking about the different products and results. Go to page 32 for Verisol.
http://files7.webydo...64fe4ba4bfa.pdf
But here is a document from the european food safety authority mentioning that it may not do that, citing that the conditions tested were not measurable functions of the skin, and the test that did measure a function of the skin did not have any difference.
The Panel considers that a change in skin elasticity leading to an improvement in skin function is a beneficial physiological effect. The applicant presented two human studies, one animal study and one in vitro study as being pertinent to the health claim. No conclusions can be drawn from one of the two human studies as it did not assess a function of the skin. The second human study assessed a function, i.e. the water barrier function, of the skin, but did not show an effect on this function. In the absence of evidence for an effect on skin function in humans, the animal and in vitro studies cannot be used for the scientific substantiation of the claim. The Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of VeriSol®P and a change in skin elasticity leading to an improvement in skin function.
In a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 114 women received daily for eight weeks 2.5 g VeriSol®P or a placebo. The primary outcome of the study was the volume of eye wrinkles. Secondary outcomes were the contents of pro-collagen type I, elastin and fibrillin in suction blister biopsies. The Panel notes that this study did not assess a function of the skin, and considers that no conclusions can be drawn from this study for the scientific substantiation of the claim.
In another randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 69 women received daily for eight weeks 2.5 g VeriSol®P, 5 g VeriSol®P or a placebo. Primary outcomes of the study were skin elasticity and skin hydration. Secondary outcomes were transepidermal and transonychial water loss. In addition, skin roughness was assessed. The Panel considers that measures of transepidermal water loss can be used as scientific evidence for a function, i.e. the water barrier function, of the skin, and that measures of the water-holding capacity (hydration) of skin may be used as supportive evidence. There were no significant differences between the groups for transepidermal water loss or skin hydration at any time point. The Panel notes that this study did not show an effect on the water barrier function of the skin, and that no other function of the skin was measured.
This is odd because the guide posted above has the european food safety authority's logo on the pages.
Source: http://www.efsa.euro...ournal/pub/3257
I think that document is saying that it didn't have a measurable result. It didn't actually say that it made no change to wrinkles, but more like there was nothing measurable?
