602 replies to this topic

[Louis]

It's a fair question Anthony:
Peer review and journal publication is a key part of the scientific process.

This is the first question a professional scientist will ask.
I really strongly urge you to partake in the proper peer review system and submit the paper to a legitimate journal.
This is the only way the paper will really be taken seriously.

Self-publishing is the next best option if the paper gets rejected, but you still feel so strongly that the experimental techniques are sound and the results are legitimate. Often the feedback from the reviewers when a paper gets rejected is very useful in improving the experiments or the quality of the paper. Then a higher quality paper can be re-submitted at a later date.

Edited by Louis, 13 January 2012 - 08:45 PM.

[Louis]

It's a fair question Anthony:
Peer review and journal publication is a key part of the scientific process.

This is the first question a professional scientist will ask.
I really strongly urge you to partake in the proper peer review system and submit the paper to a legitimate journal.
This is the only way the paper will really be taken seriously.

Self-publishing is the next best option if the paper gets rejected, but you still feel so strongly that the experimental techniques are sound and the results are legitimate. Often the feedback from the reviewers when a paper gets rejected is very useful in improving the experiments or the quality of the paper. Then a higher quality paper can be re-submitted at a later date.

Anthony, you should also be aware that if you do choose to self publish this paper on your website, it's extremely unlikely that a journal will accept it for publication later.

Most journals have a rule that they will not accept a paper published elsewhere -- and this usually includes self publication on the web.

An unwillingness to at least try to submit your work for peer review to a legitimate journal first will inevitably be interpreted as a lack of confidence on your part in the correctness or quality of your work. If the work is truly correct and of high quality, then you should have nothing to hide from the journal peer reviewers.

I find it strange that you don't want to address this question of peer review and journal publication. It's a standard scientific question: Why don't you just answer it directly? Quite frankly, not directly addressing the question comes across as a lack of scientific confidence in the work.

If I did work that I was confident in and proud of, I'd have no problem telling people that I planned to submit it for journal publication. Are you not confident in either the correctness or quality of the work? Is that why you won't tell us if you're at least going to try to submit it for peer review and legitimate journal publication?

Edited by Louis, 15 January 2012 - 12:17 AM.

[hav]

Louis, you make it sound like Anthony is doing studies over which he has full control over reporting and submission. My understanding from his previous posts is that he does some limited in-house testing, has his own telomeres tested from time to time, but that the major portion of his involvement consists of supplying product to encourage study by independent organizations like universities and medical schools. I doubt peer review publishing houses would be interested anecdotal test reports. And I also doubt that any amount of cheer leading from the sidelines will speed up the reporting and publication process of independent organizations doing formal studies... although if you have some big grant money you might be able to get their attention.

On the other hand I have to question referring to any test to advocate for or advise against a product if you are unwilling to give any details of the test. Although I trust Anthony, it still seems unfair.

Howard

[Louis]

Hector Valenzuela has supposedly done the studies. He was a former Ph.D. student of Rita Effros at UCLA. He's published a very similar previous study on cycloastragenol. There's no reason why he couldn't publish the exact same style study on Product B in the exact same journal. This journal has accepted his work in the past, and would likely do so again with a repeat study on Product B.

I have concerns that Hector is unwilling to put his reputation on the line by publishing a study that he is not scientifically confident in. Publishing incorrect studies can seriously damage a scientist's career. If Hector truly believes these results are correct, then he should put his scientific repuation on the line and submit them for proper review by his scientific peers and legitimate journal publication. I fear that he is afraid to do that because he is not confident in the results.

I challenge Hector to put his scientific repuation on the line and pass legitimate peer review and journal publication with these results. My bet is that will never happen. This is why Anthony is avoiding the question.

Edited by Louis, 16 January 2012 - 01:39 AM.

[Louis]

A link to Hector Valenzueala's previouly published study on cycloastragenol in the Journal of Immunology:
http://www.jimmunol....Abstracts/90.30

[Anthony_Loera]

Louis,

I had a great weekend. I went to the gun show, spent time with friends, saw a few good movies. I didn't even think about the forum...

I come back today, and see you posting and making assumptions about the testing, where and when we will provide the info, talking about Dr. Valenzuela's reputation, and that he may be unwilling to put it on the line, etc, etc... Yes his reputation is impeccable, that is correct. But talking about it won't make the study get published any faster.

Look, some of us have a life, so don't get silly if I don't respond. When the results are ready, you will know. Be patient.

I do hope it's soon because when you see them, you will understand why I can't personally recommend Product B.

Cheers
A

[Louis]

Anthony, once again you intentionally avoided answering the important scientific question:

Will the results be published in a legitimate peer-reviewed journal (e.g. the Journal of Immunology)?

Simple question. All it requires is a simple YES or NO answer.

I find it extremely strange that you won't provide a simple direct answer to this simple question.

Edited by Louis, 16 January 2012 - 04:36 PM.

[Anthony_Loera]

Louis,

don't be obnoxious, I answered that back on November 16th 2011 (2 months ago!):
http://www.longecity...post__p__486144

I have decided to simply publish the 'Product B' results in a peer reviewed scientific journal.

Deciding to be forgetfull and try to make a big stink about it, only lowers your credibility in my personal opinion.

A

[Louis]

I have decided to simply publish the 'Product B' results in a peer reviewed scientific journal.

The emails, will remain available to folks coming to at our office as proof that they are genuine article from Bill Andrews.
If you are planning on a visit, let me know before hand, as we will likely turn you away without an appointment.

Cheers,
A

I quoted your old post above Anthony.

Based on this post, I am reading your answer as: YES you are planning to publish in a legitimate peer reviewed journal.

Please correct me if that's not what you're saying. Thank you for finally answering the question. I am happy to see that you are planning to do this the right way and pass the proper scientific peer review process before putting the results in print.

Edited by Louis, 16 January 2012 - 05:31 PM.

[Anthony_Loera]

I am happy to see that you are planning to do this the right way and pass the proper scientific peer review process before putting the results in print.

Heck, Bill Andrews didn't do it (and it's his baby!).

And the only reason we did it was to see if we could confirm the claims so that we could sell it. But, in my opinion it was worthless as a telomerase activator, and since we can't sell it as one... we aren't selling it at all.

I suppose we are actually doing something for people that not even Bill Andrews is managing to do (or doesn't really want to do?).

Cheers
A

P.S. That old post comes from a thread, that I specifically invited you to, Louis. You can't be that ignorant about it, because if you were... then why would people consider your words?

[Louis]

Two outside labs have now confirmed the telomerase activity of product B Anthony. On January 11, Isagenix held a conference call open to the public where they anounced that the results have been independently confirmed in 2 independent studies. Bill Andrews was on the call and did a lot of the speaking. You can find recordings on the web. Of course, this all remains completely unpublished to date, just like your study.

They also announced that they have now found natural compounds that test at 6% of HeLa and that these will be available in the 3rd generation of product B, which will be released in the future.

It doesn't surprise me that Sierra Sciences sought outside independent confirmation of the telomerase activity; they did that with their previous synthethic activators as well. That's their standard operating procedure.

This is why I've been asking you about your plans for peer review and publication.

[Anthony_Loera]

This all remains completely unpublished to date.

Does their standard operating procedure actually publish studies as well?... or is it that the Sierra Sciences standard procedure was NOT to publish the independent studies?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but It's my understanding that it is the latter. I don't think I see one Sierra Sciences (or independent study confirming a Sierra Science report) published studies in peer reviewed journals.

Can you post one? You have posted a link to Dr. Valenzuela's some posts above, so I figure you can post one from Sierra or Bill Andrews.

A

[Louis]

This all remains completely unpublished to date.

Does their standard operating procedure actually publish studies as well?... or is it that the Sierra Sciences standard procedure was NOT to publish the independent studies?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but It's my understanding that it is the latter. I don't think I see one Sierra Sciences (or independent study confirming a Sierra Science report) published studies in peer reviewed journals.

Can you post one? You have posted a link to Dr. Valenzuela's some posts above, so I figure you can post one from Sierra or Bill Andrews.

A

As far as I can tell, you're correct on those points. I don't disagree.

[debism63]

Hi Everyone Again,


I still have questions I hope someone that knows will answer.

I follow 'The Immortality Edge' book telomeres vitamins, supplements and antioxidants regimen they recommend, and this is where I first heard about the telomeres activator TA-65.

After researching on the internet about telomeres activators I also came across Dr Dave's Best telomeres activators AM PM formulas, he also has TA-65 on his website.

I am still a little bit confused or I could say like I haven't come across with information, and or the people I have contacted haven't quite thought about questions I have to come up with good answers.


-If I start taking one of the telomeres activators either TA-65 or Product B, should I STOP taking the vitamins and supplements I take that target the telomeres shortening?

-If I start taking Product B, should I REDUCE the dosage I take of those vitamins and supplements and or ELIMINATE any of them, if so, which to eliminate and or what vitamin or supplement should I reduce dosage on?

I think I saw something on the label of Product B that has a blend of 950 mgs or something like that which has some of the supplements I currently take but doesn't quite tell you of each how much, is just a blend and the total.

I hope I explained well what I am tring to get answer for, I sure hope someone has the answer for me or perhaps know who might be able to help me.

Thanks..

[Anthony_Loera]

Hi Debis,
why are you considering Product B over TA-65 or Cyclo?

I believe TA-65 & Cyclo has many studies to back it up, while Product B does not. See these Below:

For Cycloastragenol:
UCLA Study: http://www.jimmunol....0/7400.abstract
Our CSO at RevGenetics did this one: http://www.jimmunol....Abstracts/90.30

For TA-65:
Blasco Study: http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21426483
Blasco Study: http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/20822369
Actually the Blasco study is important because it tests to see if TA-65 will increase the cancer incidence in an animal... and it does not. Other telomerase activators like nicotine actually can metobilze into aminoketone, which is a precursor to NNK carcinogen. That is why no one promotes say... a nicotine patch to increase telomeres. The Blasco study is important because of the safety test in the animal.

For Product B:
No Published Studies

Now about your vitamin question...
Do not stop taking your vitamins. For women this article explains why regular vitamins will help keep your telomeres younger:
http://www.sciencene...ing_chromosomes

So what did the women take in the study?

Among recruits taking vitamins, these supplements served as a major source of their total vitamin and mineral intakes. For instance, they tended to provide more than half of a woman’s intake of vitamins C and E — the primary antioxidant vitamins, vitamin D, vitamin B-6 and -12, folate, iron and zinc. And they provided a third to half of a woman’s intake of vitamins A, calcium, and beta-carotene.

Again, I see vitamains C, E and B12 in Product B (none of the others in the study are in the product) ... so forget the silly arguments found on this forum and consider the studies, to make a better decision.

I seriously don't think anyone will consider Product B as an expensive multi-vitamin, and they shouldn't as many better ones like Vimmortal and Ortho-Core are available.

I hope this helps
A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 17 January 2012 - 02:54 PM.

[debism63]

Hi Anthony,

The only reason I am still debating and not quite convinced about eliminating quite yet the possibility of taking Product B is Dr Andrews switching from TA-65 to it.

I might like to see some tests results before I take Product B off my list of possibilities completely, but I'd like to start soon on the best tested up to date telomeres activator.
I truly appreciate your dedication and responses.


P.D. By the way, I live about 20 to 25 min from your office I could drop by sometime when and if invited .....

[Anthony_Loera]

Interesting new thread. I've been trying to catch up on Product B and here's my take on it. Please feel three to correct me where I've got things wrong.
1. Sierra Sciences have ran low on money and therefore partnered with Isagenix in order to be able to continue to screen for better telomerase activators.
2. Bill Andrews then gave away all the results they had until now and the product developer at Isagenix then gave Bill some other drugs to test.
3. Isagenix then took most or all of the drugs which activated telomeres and mixed them with some other drugs which might (or might not) have some other beneficial effects.
4. This product in now called Product B.

I understand that Product B is not created by Sierra Sciences, but by Isagenix - using information provided by Sierra Sciences on individual drugs. But just because several of the ingredients are likely to be telomerase activators, there's no telling how your body will react on them when they are all mixed together.

Even though most of the videos hints at Product B extending your telomeres, they never actually say so. In fact, their website specifically states that that the resellers of Product B cannot:
- Claim it lengthens telomere
- Claim it induces telomerase (enzyme that can reverse telomeres shortening)
This is quite interesting, because if it doesn't claim to induce the production of telomerase, then how is is it supposed to work?

Another member provided a good summary above regarding the product.

A few Bill (Dr. Andrews) facts:
1- Bill Andrews still takes TA-65. Which is odd if he believes Product B is a good product for telomerase activation.
2- Bill Andrews takes 6 capsules a day (He mentioned it in one of the Isagenix videos), thats 180 capsules a month, however one bottle of Product B only holds 120 capsules. How much extra money is that a month to take the same dose as Bill?

I guess you have to consider all the items.

Cheers

A

[Louis]

Bill Andrews now takes 10 caps per day of Product B, in addition to the 4 caps/day of TA-65 he has been taking for several years. He has increased his dose.

He mentions his product B dose increase in the same public January 11 conference call I referred to earlier. This is the same call where they disclosed their discovery of natural compounds at roughly 6% of HeLa -- to be included in product B release #3.

They'll also be using the new release #3 in the Maria Blasco clinical trial which is about to start (as opposed to release #2 currently on the market).

Edited by Louis, 17 January 2012 - 10:09 PM.

[niner]

The only reason I am still debating and not quite convinced about eliminating quite yet the possibility of taking Product B is Dr Andrews switching from TA-65 to it.

As mentioned above, he didn't stop taking TA-65, but more importantly, you should be aware that Dr. Andrews has a financial conflict of interest concerning Product B.

If version 3 of Product B is going to be used in the trial, I would wait for the early trial results and then decide whether or not to use Product B. For the time being, I'd take cycloastragenol/TA-65.

[Louis]

And to be completely fair, Anthony Loera should disclose his financial conflict of interest as well:

He sells TA-65.

Edited by Louis, 17 January 2012 - 10:53 PM.

[niner]

And to be completely fair, Anthony Loera should disclose his financial conflict of interest as well:

He sells TA-65.

Yes, that's a good point. I don't sell it though, or have any conflict of interest, and I would still go with cycloastragenol at least until some data appeared on product B. At this point, it's data-free, and cycloastragenol (aka TA65) is not.

[McQueen]

Anthony, I was gonna ask if your proclamations about Product B were long term or just until you start selling it. But, I guess their marketing approach won't allow that. I really don't want to get into a pissin war with you because you have enough of those going on in these forums already. Your motives are laughingly transparent. Yes, yes, I know, you really just want to sell "the best gosh darn product on the planet".

Edited by McQueen, 18 January 2012 - 03:17 AM.

[Product-B-User]

Two outside labs have now confirmed the telomerase activity of product B Anthony. On January 11, Isagenix held a conference call open to the public where they anounced that the results have been independently confirmed in 2 independent studies. Bill Andrews was on the call and did a lot of the speaking. You can find recordings on the web. Of course, this all remains completely unpublished to date, just like your study.

They also announced that they have now found natural compounds that test at 6% of HeLa and that these will be available in the 3rd generation of product B, which will be released in the future.

It doesn't surprise me that Sierra Sciences sought outside independent confirmation of the telomerase activity; they did that with their previous synthethic activators as well. That's their standard operating procedure.

This is why I've been asking you about your plans for peer review and publication.

Louis, this is great news! I haven't even heard of this call on the 11th, but I've sort of been out of the loops since Christmas. I'll look for the call.....please let me know if you come across a recording will you?

[niner]

Two outside labs have now confirmed the telomerase activity of product B Anthony. On January 11, Isagenix held a conference call open to the public where they anounced that the results have been independently confirmed in 2 independent studies. Bill Andrews was on the call and did a lot of the speaking. You can find recordings on the web. Of course, this all remains completely unpublished to date, just like your study.

They also announced that they have now found natural compounds that test at 6% of HeLa and that these will be available in the 3rd generation of product B, which will be released in the future.

Louis, did they say which groups have confirmed the activity? Was it in a cell-based in vitro assay? Do you have any links to anything written about it?

[Anthony_Loera]

And to be completely fair, Anthony Loera should disclose his financial conflict of interest as well:

He sells TA-65.

Louis,

I believe I have done this previously, but here it is again...

0- We produced a product called Astral Fruit in 2008, with Astragaloside IV for telomerase activation, yes we sold it.
1- We tested Cycloatragenol, sold it under the Astra Fruit-C name and do not sell it anymore.
3- We produced a product called Astral Fruit-NF with lots of nifty things in it, including Cycloastragenol for telomerase activation, yes we sold it.
4- We tested TA-65 and it was found to do extremely well, afterwords we approached TA Sciences because we thought it was the one for our customers, and now we sell it.
5- We tested Product B, thinking we could have a yang to TA-65's ying and sell it, but the batch we tested didn't stand up to our standards... and we simply don't sell it... Cycloastragenol did much better if you want me to compare them. But hey, I am a business man as well, so If things (or batches) change and Dr. Valenzuela gives me the thumbs up... we will sell it. I am not married to one product.

I simply answer to our customers.

Trust me, I have absolutely no problem with adding Product B, Product C, etc if it works well.
This would only benefit our RevGenetics customers.

I know folks that have been reading this thread already know this, but apparently I need to repeat it every once in a while because Louis is a bit forgetful.

Anthony, I was gonna ask if your proclamations about Product B were long term or just until you start selling it. But, I guess their marketing approach won't allow that. I really don't want to get into a pissin war with you because you have enough of those going on in these forums already. Your motives are laughingly transparent. Yes, yes, I know, you really just want to sell "the best gosh darn product on the planet".

Yes McQueen my motives are transparent!

I am trying to sell the best products to my customers while makeing a profit so that we can continue to grow the company and research materials... for the benefit of our customers, and myself. You are talking to a person that wants to live much longer than my 110 year old great uncle (yes he is still alive), while making sure my own folks remain healthy, happy and active for the longest time that is possible. With Dr. Valenzuela's help, I have already figured out that I can do it while helping folks do the same.

It's really a simple win win for everyone.

Now, who doesn't want this? It's in our declaration of independence...you know, those unalienable rights..."Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Why not take the first unalienable right seriously? I am surprised more immortalists and longevity advocates don't point to those unalienable rights, and use them to help push forward the movement.

Cheers
A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 18 January 2012 - 04:31 AM.

[maxwatt]

But is there really any evidence that artificially lengthening telomeres will increase an organism's life span? As far as I know, no.

Just because longer telomeres correlate with longer life span, does not mean it is causative, or that lengthening an organism's telomeres will increase its life span.

[Anthony_Loera]

But is there really any evidence that artificially lengthening telomeres will increase an organism's life span? As far as I know, no.

Just because longer telomeres correlate with longer life span, does not mean it is causative, or that lengthening an organism's telomeres will increase its life span.

hmmm... well, that is why I have t-curcumin around here (and other things)... that may help.

Telomerase activation is not the only thing on the radar.



A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 18 January 2012 - 05:01 AM.

[AdamI]

Anthony,
Will your company test Epitalon for Telomerase activation?
If no is it because of cost, or just simple not enought documentation/facts on it?

[Anthony_Loera]

Anthony,
Will your company test Epitalon for Telomerase activation?
If no is it because of cost, or just simple not enought documentation/facts on it?

Yes we will.

A

[debism63]

Anthony or anyone,

Do you know anything about Telomere Biosciences Product and Stem Cell 100?