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

Photo
- - - - -

FASEB this week: Findings from the University of Colorado Boulder Nicotinamide Riboside Human Clinical Trial

nicotinamide riboside

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
46 replies to this topic

#1 stefan_001

  • Guest
  • 1,070 posts
  • 222
  • Location:Munich

Posted 10 July 2017 - 11:18 AM


Interesting week;

 

https://finance.yaho...-103000064.html

 

http://faseb.org/src...e/NAD/home.aspx



#2 Oakman

  • Location:CO

Posted 10 July 2017 - 01:34 PM

Wow! That's one rich NR conference...  and what is an 'off site attendee'... the internet? Again wow and not in a good way.

 

Conference Location     Single       Double with Attendee   Double with Guest     Additional Guest*    Off-site Attendee
New Orleans, LA            $1,800.00  $1,445.00                        $2,460.00                    $1,015.00                  $1,095.00

 


Edited by Oakman, 10 July 2017 - 01:36 PM.


Click HERE to rent this ad spot for the NAD+ forum to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 bluemoon

  • Guest
  • 723 posts
  • 86
  • Location:south side
  • NO

Posted 10 July 2017 - 06:48 PM

 

Wow! That's one rich NR conference...  and what is an 'off site attendee'... the internet? Again wow and not in a good way.

 

Conference Location     Single       Double with Attendee   Double with Guest     Additional Guest*    Off-site Attendee
New Orleans, LA            $1,800.00  $1,445.00                        $2,460.00                    $1,015.00                  $1,095.00

 

 

That's a hell of a lot cheaper than a TED Talk! 

 

Something tells me that Leonard Guarente did not receive an invitation. Anyway, we will get the University of Colorado soon considering the U of Colorado results were given this morning according to the announcement. 


Edited by bluemoon, 10 July 2017 - 07:33 PM.


#4 Oakman

  • Location:CO

Posted 10 July 2017 - 08:45 PM

 

 

Wow! That's one rich NR conference...  and what is an 'off site attendee'... the internet? Again wow and not in a good way.

 

Conference Location     Single       Double with Attendee   Double with Guest     Additional Guest*    Off-site Attendee
New Orleans, LA            $1,800.00  $1,445.00                        $2,460.00                    $1,015.00                  $1,095.00

 

 

That's a hell of a lot cheaper than a TED Talk! 

 

Something tells me that Leonard Guarente did not receive an invitation. Anyway, we will get the University of Colorado soon considering the U of Colorado results were given this morning according to the announcement. 

 

 

"Dr. Christopher Martens of the Integrative Physiology of Aging Laboratory at the University of Colorado Boulder (CU Boulder), who will present findings from his recently completed clinical trial of chronic nicotinamide riboside supplementation in middle-aged and older adults."

 

Agree'd. And WOW!! This was the precursor to this announcement coming from 30-MAR-2017 > https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC5389020/

 

Truly - this announcement could be extra-ordinary ... or... a flop inducing failure for the NR taking population and Chromadex.

 

Christopher Martens, Phd  > http://spot.colorado.edu/~chma3573/

 

He's been doing these studies, so he should be able to tell us once and for all significant results about NR. Fingers crossed :)

 

  • UL1 TR001082 (P&F Grant)
  • Colorado Clinical & Translational Sciences Institute
  • "Nicotinamide Riboside Supplementation for Improving Physiological Function in Middle-Aged and Older Adults"
  • Period: 2015-2016
  • Role: PI
  • Direct Costs: $30,000
  • Industry Contract
  • ChromaDex Inc.
  • "NIAGEN Supplementation for Improving Physical and Metabolic Function in Midlife and Older Adult Humans"
  • Period: 2015-2016
  • Role: PI
  • Direct Costs: $65,000
  • Postdoctoral Fellowship
  • Glenn/AFAR Program for Translational Research on Aging
  • "Nicotinamide Riboside Supplementation for Improving Physiological Function in Older Adults"
  • Period: 2015-2016
  • Role: PI
  • Direct Costs: $49,980


#5 able

  • Guest
  • 722 posts
  • 325
  • Location:austin texas
  • NO

Posted 10 July 2017 - 09:43 PM

 

 

Wow! That's one rich NR conference...  and what is an 'off site attendee'... the internet? Again wow and not in a good way.

 

Conference Location     Single       Double with Attendee   Double with Guest     Additional Guest*    Off-site Attendee
New Orleans, LA            $1,800.00  $1,445.00                        $2,460.00                    $1,015.00                  $1,095.00

 

 

That's a hell of a lot cheaper than a TED Talk! 

 

Something tells me that Leonard Guarente did not receive an invitation. Anyway, we will get the University of Colorado soon considering the U of Colorado results were given this morning according to the announcement. 

 

 

 

Actually, Guarente is listed as an organizer...

 

Can't wait to hear some results.  

 

Anyone know if we'll see some scattered press release type stuff, or if presentations are posted online somewhere?

Attached Files


Edited by able, 10 July 2017 - 09:58 PM.


#6 bluemoon

  • Guest
  • 723 posts
  • 86
  • Location:south side
  • NO

Posted 11 July 2017 - 12:14 AM

 

 

 

Actually, Guarente is listed as an organizer...

 

Can't wait to hear some results.  

 

Anyone know if we'll see some scattered press release type stuff, or if presentations are posted online somewhere?

 

 

I'd expect to hear from Chromedex tomorrow or maybe as late as Friday if the results are favorable. I doubt NR will be shown to be a dud but maybe not a home run. For the past year, I've thought maybe Sinclair was correct in 2014 when he said you need at least 500 mg to  get  good results but many have reported 250 mg has been good for them. 

 

I think it is interesting that Chromadex stock got a boost from a very low $2.50 a share in winter to $3.50 but has stayed about there even in the couple of weeks leading up to this conference.  



#7 Oakman

  • Location:CO

Posted 11 July 2017 - 04:44 PM

Chromadex stock has been sliding downward since Monday. If there are any positive NR revelations at the conference, they've not encouraged investors up to this point.



#8 bluemoon

  • Guest
  • 723 posts
  • 86
  • Location:south side
  • NO

Posted 11 July 2017 - 08:36 PM

Chromadex stock has been sliding downward since Monday. If there are any positive NR revelations at the conference, they've not encouraged investors up to this point.

 

The stock price shot up from $2.50 to $3.50, or +40% the last week of April, and it has held there, $3.50 today as well. Maybe Elysium is bluffing, but it has assured customers that it will continue to sell NR, and that factors in to Chromadex's stock performance. 

 

Also, there is a good possibility that NR is helpful at 500 mg but not so much at 250 mg and if so, investors will naturally wonder if enough people will be convinced to pay $2.00 to $2.50 a day for NR when the effects are good but not great.   

 

I still doubt that Chromadex has a monopoly since Chinese companies can so easily undermine that but maybe I'm missing something.


  • Needs references x 1

#9 MightyMouse

  • Guest
  • 42 posts
  • 8
  • Location:Estonia
  • NO

Posted 16 July 2017 - 08:01 AM

So... The conference has ended apparently. Any news?



#10 stefan_001

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,070 posts
  • 222
  • Location:Munich

Posted 17 July 2017 - 11:18 AM

results submitted to famous journal and are under embargo till then.


  • Enjoying the show x 2
  • Informative x 1

#11 bluemoon

  • Guest
  • 723 posts
  • 86
  • Location:south side
  • NO

Posted 17 July 2017 - 11:25 PM

results submitted to famous journal and are under embargo till then.

 

I'm not sure what this means. ChromaDex said early in the year that it would release the "top line results" , whatever that means, of its 140 person trial in June or July. A few months later ChromaDex said that it would announce the results sometime in July, August or September. Is it now saying that its joint study with the U of Colorado won't be released until the study might be published? That would probably push that announcement into 2018 if they don't say anything earlier.  


  • Good Point x 1

#12 stefan_001

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,070 posts
  • 222
  • Location:Munich

Posted 18 July 2017 - 07:10 AM

 

results submitted to famous journal and are under embargo till then.

 

I'm not sure what this means. ChromaDex said early in the year that it would release the "top line results" , whatever that means, of its 140 person trial in June or July. A few months later ChromaDex said that it would announce the results sometime in July, August or September. Is it now saying that its joint study with the U of Colorado won't be released until the study might be published? That would probably push that announcement into 2018 if they don't say anything earlier.  

 

 

We will see what happens. But if they wanted to wipe the trial under the table because the results are not good then why include this quote in the PR:

 

"ChromaDex’s Founder and CEO, Frank Jaksch, stated, “As a company at the forefront of NR and NAD+ research, we continue to sponsor this meeting because we see collaboration as a catalyst of greater opportunity. We are thrilled that the results of the first chronic dose clinical trial of NIAGEN® will be shared amongst this elite community.  This is an exciting step forward in advancing the science supporting nicotinamide riboside and its role in human health.”
 


  • Good Point x 2
  • unsure x 1

#13 bluemoon

  • Guest
  • 723 posts
  • 86
  • Location:south side
  • NO

Posted 18 July 2017 - 02:53 PM

 

 

results submitted to famous journal and are under embargo till then.

 

I'm not sure what this means. ChromaDex said early in the year that it would release the "top line results" , whatever that means, of its 140 person trial in June or July. A few months later ChromaDex said that it would announce the results sometime in July, August or September. Is it now saying that its joint study with the U of Colorado won't be released until the study might be published? That would probably push that announcement into 2018 if they don't say anything earlier.  

 

 

We will see what happens. But if they wanted to wipe the trial under the table because the results are not good then why include this quote in the PR:

 

"ChromaDex’s Founder and CEO, Frank Jaksch, stated, “As a company at the forefront of NR and NAD+ research, we continue to sponsor this meeting because we see collaboration as a catalyst of greater opportunity. We are thrilled that the results of the first chronic dose clinical trial of NIAGEN® will be shared amongst this elite community.  This is an exciting step forward in advancing the science supporting nicotinamide riboside and its role in human health.”
 

 

 

I didn't say they want to bury the results, but it is clear they want to delay releasing information for some reason or two. I still think there will be positive results but maybe much more noticeable  at 1,000 mg that was tested rather than 300 mg or 100 mg and wonder who will pay $4.00 a day for that benefit. Elysium could also announce its results of 250 mg NR + 50 mg of pterostilbine and 500 mg of NR + 100 mg of pterostilbine but so far has waited almost 8 months and counting to put its results up on its website.

 

It seems something unusual is going on but that doesn't necessarily mean poor trial results. There may also be very good results at 250 mg/ 300 mg and still have strangeness at the business end.  We do know that Chromadex's stock rose sharply the last week of April to $3.50 a share and that has held up to today with no change before or after the conference, yet that few day increase was from a basement level of $2.50. If inflation is considered, that was at the level Chromadex was at in 2013 before they started to sell NR. 



#14 stefan_001

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,070 posts
  • 222
  • Location:Munich

Posted 18 July 2017 - 03:13 PM

 

 

 

results submitted to famous journal and are under embargo till then.

 

I'm not sure what this means. ChromaDex said early in the year that it would release the "top line results" , whatever that means, of its 140 person trial in June or July. A few months later ChromaDex said that it would announce the results sometime in July, August or September. Is it now saying that its joint study with the U of Colorado won't be released until the study might be published? That would probably push that announcement into 2018 if they don't say anything earlier.  

 

 

We will see what happens. But if they wanted to wipe the trial under the table because the results are not good then why include this quote in the PR:

 

"ChromaDex’s Founder and CEO, Frank Jaksch, stated, “As a company at the forefront of NR and NAD+ research, we continue to sponsor this meeting because we see collaboration as a catalyst of greater opportunity. We are thrilled that the results of the first chronic dose clinical trial of NIAGEN® will be shared amongst this elite community.  This is an exciting step forward in advancing the science supporting nicotinamide riboside and its role in human health.”
 

 

 

I didn't say they want to bury the results, but it is clear they want to delay releasing information for some reason or two. I still think there will be positive results but maybe much more noticeable  at 1,000 mg that was tested rather than 300 mg or 100 mg and wonder who will pay $4.00 a day for that benefit. Elysium could also announce its results of 250 mg NR + 50 mg of pterostilbine and 500 mg of NR + 100 mg of pterostilbine but so far has waited almost 8 months and counting to put its results up on its website.

 

It seems something unusual is going on but that doesn't necessarily mean poor trial results. There may also be very good results at 250 mg/ 300 mg and still have strangeness at the business end.  We do know that Chromadex's stock rose sharply the last week of April to $3.50 a share and that has held up to today with no change before or after the conference, yet that few day increase was from a basement level of $2.50. If inflation is considered, that was at the level Chromadex was at in 2013 before they started to sell NR. 

 

 

Well its still an experimental area and therefore it would not surprise me that the dose indications are higher. Personally I think there is no optimal dose that fits all. Neither will the effects be the same. Best results for people with illness or poor health at higher dose. From own experience 500mg seems to to be a good dose. But who knows perhaps the best way is 1000mg for a month then back to 250mg and repeat again. I am not too worried about any of it. Btw the product cost is far lower than the retail price.

 



#15 bluemoon

  • Guest
  • 723 posts
  • 86
  • Location:south side
  • NO

Posted 18 July 2017 - 03:51 PM

 

 

Well its still an experimental area and therefore it would not surprise me that the dose indications are higher. Personally I think there is no optimal dose that fits all. Neither will the effects be the same. Best results for people with illness or poor health at higher dose. From own experience 500mg seems to to be a good dose. But who knows perhaps the best way is 1000mg for a month then back to 250mg and repeat again. I am not too worried about any of it. Btw the product cost is far lower than the retail price.

 

 

 

Yes, but ChromaDex has to estimate/guess what people are willing to pay if 300 mg shows only very modest effects while 1,000 mg may show much more pronounced effects. Last December, Charles Brenner said that he thought over time it will be shown that those who are the further away from good health will get the most benefit and the U of Colorado study may have shown that.

 

In the June radio interview, Guarente was asked about taking different doses at different weights:

 

Q. Is it based on body weight?

 

A. No. The site will list the dose and it's two pills a day, taken in the morning.

 

But I don't think that is correct, nor do I think that is correct for pterostilbine. We have never been given a reason by Brenner who says he takes 250 mg a day or by Elysium why they think that is the correct dose. The 250 mg recommendation is almost surely a combination of their benefit estimate along with price they think people are willing to pay. 



#16 stefan_001

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,070 posts
  • 222
  • Location:Munich

Posted 18 July 2017 - 04:28 PM

 

 

 

Well its still an experimental area and therefore it would not surprise me that the dose indications are higher. Personally I think there is no optimal dose that fits all. Neither will the effects be the same. Best results for people with illness or poor health at higher dose. From own experience 500mg seems to to be a good dose. But who knows perhaps the best way is 1000mg for a month then back to 250mg and repeat again. I am not too worried about any of it. Btw the product cost is far lower than the retail price.

 

 

 

Yes, but ChromaDex has to estimate/guess what people are willing to pay if 300 mg shows only very modest effects while 1,000 mg may show much more pronounced effects. Last December, Charles Brenner said that he thought over time it will be shown that those who are the further away from good health will get the most benefit and the U of Colorado study may have shown that.

 

In the June radio interview, Guarente was asked about taking different doses at different weights:

 

Q. Is it based on body weight?

 

A. No. The site will list the dose and it's two pills a day, taken in the morning.

 

But I don't think that is correct, nor do I think that is correct for pterostilbine. We have never been given a reason by Brenner who says he takes 250 mg a day or by Elysium why they think that is the correct dose. The 250 mg recommendation is almost surely a combination of their benefit estimate along with price they think people are willing to pay. 

 

 

I am more thinking like in this article that the 250mg dosing is choosen based on the safety profile (and from personal experience I also had a benefit from that dose):

http://www.timelessl...side-published/

 

I think they can sell NR at much lower price and still make a profit, especially if they cut out the middleman. From the data released in the dispute with Elysium Health we know that the channel markup is about a factor 4. I would expect that Chromadex has more than 50% GM on that supply price. Meaning that the NR cost in a bottle of NR is probably around 10% of the sales price. Also I would suspect that the manufacturing get cheaper with increasing volumes.

 

But again we are close to seeing the trial data, a bit more patience and then we are there.

 

 


Edited by stefan_001, 18 July 2017 - 04:31 PM.


#17 floweryriddle

  • Guest
  • 130 posts
  • 15
  • Location:Tokyo
  • NO

Posted 20 July 2017 - 09:05 AM

Even if the results say that a lot higher dose of NR is needed, it would still be huge because it means we have more evidence that it’s actually doing what we take it for.

In such case I’m also convinced that ChromaDex would lower the price to accommodate these results, especially with NMN potentially becoming more available in the near future.

#18 Bryan_S

  • Guest
  • 1,202 posts
  • 400
  • Location:Orlando

Posted 23 July 2017 - 02:13 PM

Yes, but ChromaDex has to estimate/guess what people are willing to pay if 300 mg shows only very modest effects while 1,000 mg may show much more pronounced effects. Last December, Charles Brenner said that he thought over time it will be shown that those who are the further away from good health will get the most benefit and the U of Colorado study may have shown that.

 

In the June radio interview, Guarente was asked about taking different doses at different weights:

 

Q. Is it based on body weight?

 

A. No. The site will list the dose and it's two pills a day, taken in the morning.

 

But I don't think that is correct, nor do I think that is correct for pterostilbine. We have never been given a reason by Brenner who says he takes 250 mg a day or by Elysium why they think that is the correct dose. The 250 mg recommendation is almost surely a combination of their benefit estimate along with price they think people are willing to pay. 

 

 

The FASEB does have their own Journal and they published 2 recent articles on NR "prior" to the conference.

http://www.fasebj.or...ent/458.5.short

&

http://www.fasebj.or...pplement/602.15

 

We can see thru the FASEB Journal that the NR study for childhood heart disease Friedrich’s Ataxia (FRDA) didn't pan out as hoped. To be fair they tested this on a mouse model of FXN KO hearts. We can debate if this is or was the correct model. Here is another FRDA study http://journals.plos...al.pone.0178354 There is also other clinical results yet to be published https://clinicaltria...how/NCT01589809 I would expect more news will be forthcoming but I have not seen a Human Clinical trial emerge from these mouse findings.

 

It's interesting to speculate about dosage, clinical results are tied to getting this right. From a pure per unit cost I believe ChromaDex wants to keep the pricing higher and at 1000 mg per day that dosage would be unaffordable for many and slow market growth at current pricing. I'm at that dosage level it presents a significant drain on my resources.

 

We will see what else the FASEB releases.

 

 

 

I think they can sell NR at much lower price and still make a profit, especially if they cut out the middleman. From the data released in the dispute with Elysium Health we know that the channel markup is about a factor 4. I would expect that Chromadex has more than 50% GM on that supply price. Meaning that the NR cost in a bottle of NR is probably around 10% of the sales price. Also I would suspect that the manufacturing get cheaper with increasing volumes.

 

But again we are close to seeing the trial data, a bit more patience and then we are there.

 

 

 

I think so also but key to this is volume and this relates to market size. Right now, I don't think that market is growing as fast as hoped. Then there is the question of emerging competition.

 

Elysium Health:

I don't believe pterostilbene weighs into the situation much if any but I do believe Elysium Health wants to produce NR themselves and cut ChromaDex out of the picture. It must have been interesting to see how Charles Brenner and Leonard P. Guarente got along at the conference following the filed patent challenge. We can see Elysium Health is testing the patent waters and they would only do so if they wanted to manufacture NR themselves. If they are successful I can see many other hopefuls follow suit and would imagine a free for all to follow if the patent is knocked down.

 

On Elysium Health's dosages from their study I would have expanded this passed the 250, 500 and also run the 1000 mg per day. I believe they felt the pterostilbene would help them top Brenner's findings at a lower dosage and prove pterostilbene's worth. We can see they believe in NR enough to continue fighting to control their share of the market.

 

I searched to find any media following the conference and what you see above came mostly from that search.


  • Good Point x 2

#19 bluemoon

  • Guest
  • 723 posts
  • 86
  • Location:south side
  • NO

Posted 23 July 2017 - 06:30 PM

 

 

I think so also but key to this is volume and this relates to market size. Right now, I don't think that market is growing as fast as hoped. Then there is the question of emerging competition.

 

Elysium Health:

I don't believe pterostilbene weighs into the situation much if any but I do believe Elysium Health wants to produce NR themselves and cut ChromaDex out of the picture. It must have been interesting to see how Charles Brenner and Leonard P. Guarente got along at the conference following the filed patent challenge. We can see Elysium Health is testing the patent waters and they would only do so if they wanted to manufacture NR themselves. If they are successful I can see many other hopefuls follow suit and would imagine a free for all to follow if the patent is knocked down.

 

On Elysium Health's dosages from their study I would have expanded this passed the 250, 500 and also run the 1000 mg per day. I believe they felt the pterostilbene would help them top Brenner's findings at a lower dosage and prove pterostilbene's worth. We can see they believe in NR enough to continue fighting to control their share of the market.

 

 

I found Guarente's statement that there was no evidence for weight loss when taking Basis, curious. My friend, who is now 48 and in very good shape, started taking Basis two years ago and reported to me several months later that her weight had dropped from 120 lbs to 110 lbs, which she tried to do years ago. Back then, she said she felt starved after meeting her goal so went back to 120 lbs. But with Basis, she said she felt great and wasn't even trying to lose the weight.

 

I had a similar experience with 500 mg of resveratrol (longevinex)  in 2007 as I saw my very steady weight also drop about 8% within two to three weeks without feeling hungry (after no change for the first week), back to where I was when I gradated from college. $5 a day was too expensive for me to continue so dropped to an average of 250 mg a day and my weight returned to its previous level within a couple of weeks.

 

My guess was that pterotsibine was what made my friend easily lose weight, not NR, but I wasn't sure. Two years later, she has said that half of her weight returned so now at a stable 115.

 

Brenner said in December that resveratrol "does't work" which simply isn't true, based several human trials. Toward the end he also said "I doubt anything will come of pterostilbine, but we'll see."

 

I think Elysium decided not to test 1000 mg of NR along with 200 mg of pterostilbine is that they knew even if that was clearly the most effecitve dose of Basis not nearly enough people would by that for a current $200 a month.   



#20 Bryan_S

  • Guest
  • 1,202 posts
  • 400
  • Location:Orlando

Posted 23 July 2017 - 11:46 PM

 

I think Elysium decided not to test 1000 mg of NR along with 200 mg of pterostilbine is that they knew even if that was clearly the most effecitve dose of Basis not nearly enough people would by that for a current $200 a month.   

 

 

I think it is as well but once that number becomes what's perceived to be effective their will be talk of price gouging. Still no word on the study findings. https://clinicaltria...how/NCT02921659


  • Informative x 1

#21 Nate-2004

  • Guest
  • 2,276 posts
  • 311
  • Location:Philadelphia
  • NO

Posted 25 July 2017 - 03:51 AM

Still no results published? Hrm. I would think if they were positive they'd be antsy about publicizing the results as soon as possible.



#22 HappyPaul

  • Guest
  • 22 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Boston

Posted 25 July 2017 - 04:01 AM

Still no results published? Hrm. I would think if they were positive they'd be antsy about publicizing the results as soon as possible.

 

The really odd thing was that Chromadex made a press release about it that very morning.  "This morning’s session will include a talk by Dr. Christopher Martens of the Integrative Physiology of Aging Laboratory at the University of Colorado Boulder (CU Boulder), who will present findings from his recently completed clinical trial of chronic nicotinamide riboside supplementation in middle-aged and older adults."  

 

I expect positive results when they come out but the press release was a bit of a chain yank.  If they are not positive I will be disappointed.  



#23 Oakman

  • Location:CO

Posted 25 July 2017 - 01:20 PM

One has to wonder if anybody actually showed up at the conference. If there was something notable to be heard, one would imagine someone attending would say something, somewhere. In this world of leaks and dark knowledge, I've found the stock market typically knows all. In some perverse way, money finds a way to know all. But the stock seems to care less since the conference. Humm...



#24 bluemoon

  • Guest
  • 723 posts
  • 86
  • Location:south side
  • NO

Posted 25 July 2017 - 06:16 PM

One has to wonder if anybody actually showed up at the conference. If there was something notable to be heard, one would imagine someone attending would say something, somewhere. In this world of leaks and dark knowledge, I've found the stock market typically knows all. In some perverse way, money finds a way to know all. But the stock seems to care less since the conference. Humm...

 

A biochemist friend who only publishes in top journals stopped by yesterday and before he left I had to ask about NR, ChromaDex, Elysium and the conference. I rhetorically asked what Oakman wrote above: "Do you think anyone showed up to the conference? How could there be no leaks at all?" He agreed that that was strange. 

 

As for the stock market, there was a big percentage increase at the end of April but that was from a basement price of the last two years.

 

The U of Colorado trial was divided into those taking 1000 mg of NR for six weeks and a placebo group, and you'd think that if something positive showed up that it would at the 1,000 mg level. My friend said it wasn't his area and that he hasn't been following it closely but thought the silence means NR is a bust. I gave reasons why I thought it wasn't and we left it at "We'll see." 

 

Oh, when I said that ChromaDex received a $25 million investment and Elysium got $20 million, he replied as I have thought: "That is a small amount of money for something big."  I countered, "Maybe not."


Edited by bluemoon, 25 July 2017 - 06:18 PM.


#25 Nate-2004

  • Guest
  • 2,276 posts
  • 311
  • Location:Philadelphia
  • NO

Posted 26 July 2017 - 02:37 PM

Maybe they didn't reveal anything at the conference? This is just weird. The stock is the same as it has been since I last checked, 3.5. I have 850 shares that I bought a while back when it was $2.70 or so.

 

Also my latest batch of 180 caps from HPN I noticed the color is darker than it was. It used to be an off white now it's approaching tan. Did they change the filler or something else?


Edited by Nate-2004, 26 July 2017 - 02:39 PM.


#26 Harkijn

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 177
  • Location:Amsterdam
  • NO

Posted 31 July 2017 - 02:05 PM

 

 

 Still no word on the study findings. https://clinicaltria...how/NCT02921659

 

Bryan,  you interviewed  dr. Brenner and mailed questions to him sometime ago. What about mailing him asking him for some preliminary info on the trial?



#27 bluemoon

  • Guest
  • 723 posts
  • 86
  • Location:south side
  • NO

Posted 01 August 2017 - 06:02 PM

It looks like there is news about ChromaDex since the stock price just dropped 9% in the last few hours. Looks like the quarterly earnings report was a downer. ChromaDex said in the last shareholders meeting that revenue would likely be down as they shifted to retail but maybe 1) lower than expected and/or 2) a lack of confidence the retail route is the way to go.


Edited by bluemoon, 01 August 2017 - 06:13 PM.


#28 Nate-2004

  • Guest
  • 2,276 posts
  • 311
  • Location:Philadelphia
  • NO

Posted 02 August 2017 - 11:20 PM

An interesting answer to the question. What's an exemption?

 

https://www.quora.co...ts-not-reported


  • Informative x 2

#29 bluemoon

  • Guest
  • 723 posts
  • 86
  • Location:south side
  • NO

Posted 04 August 2017 - 05:09 PM

ChromaDex posted on its homepage that the next meeting where quarterly financial results will be reported is on August 10th at 1:30 Pacific Time. This should be  an interesting meeting... 



Click HERE to rent this ad spot for the NAD+ forum to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#30 floweryriddle

  • Guest
  • 130 posts
  • 15
  • Location:Tokyo
  • NO

Posted 14 August 2017 - 01:34 AM

ChromaDex posted on its homepage that the next meeting where quarterly financial results will be reported is on August 10th at 1:30 Pacific Time. This should be  an interesting meeting... 

 

With this date passed, were there any interesting news related to this? 







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: nicotinamide riboside

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users