2189 replies to this topic

[niner]

But hang on a minute. We don't know if "HTA" and "HTA98" are the same thing or not. Mackenzie has a COA on his site claiming that HTA98 is cyclo, but the paper never mentioned HTA98. They're only talking about something they call HTA, which was sourced from RevGenetics, and is said to be a multi-component astragalus extract. We need Anthony to weigh in and tell us what HTA is. I'm confident that TA65 is cyclo.

[GreenPower]

There're only so many substances which can differ between TA65 and HTA/HTA98 if they are extracted "only" from Astragalus Membranaceus.

But let's assume that HTA is HTA98 and that it consist of 98% Cycloastragenol (5mg or 10 mg) and then "random substances which we didn't manage to filter away". Then the poor results according to this report would indicate that Cycloastragenol would need some help of the other substances available in the plant in order to be more effective. This would also be in line with the mediocre "almost +/-0 results" I got when using Cycloastragenol, 5 mg for six months without anything else added than Chitosan, 1 mg. Which obviously did not boost the effect of the Cycloastragenol.

Let's then assume that TA65 is only 5% Cycloastragenol and then "ordinary Astragalus extract which we kept in order to have some other stuff in the pill". Then this report would indicate this to be a more effecient mix of ingridients.This is of course only speculation, the other 95% could be standardized on some specific subset of the plants other substances, but might in any case suggest you shouldn't use pure Cycloastragenol when it's not as effective. You might want to complement it with some other Astragalus extract of some kind.

For elevating telomerase activity in T-Cells, that is.

I wonder if someone else might have noticed that these reports from Effros, Blasco, and others only seem to investigate T-Cells. I don't say these cells aren't important, but there are other kinds of cells related to the immune system out there like B-Cells, NK-Cells, Granulocytes and Macrophages. After all the reports they have published the last five years or so it's getting kind of strange why the effect on these cell types aren't included. Or is it just me who have managed to miss these reports?

[Telo]

In the current study we have characterized the effects of two extracts of
Astragalus membranaceus,
TA-65 and HTA, for their ability to induce telomerase activity and cell proliferation on both CD4 and
CD8 T cells. We show that TA-65 increased CD4 and CD8 T cells telomerase activity by 1.3-3.3-fold
over the control treatment (
p < 0.05) in six out of six donor cultures, but HTA treatment caused mild
telomerase increases in only 2 of the 6 donor cultures. The TA-65 telomerase enhancement was in the
same range as that documented in our previous work with the TAT2 telomerase activator on CD8 T
cells from persons infected with HIV [13]

Am I reading this corrrectly:

In total they have tested 3 different astragalus extracts: TA65, HTA and TAT2.

(And TAT2 is Cycloastragenol, right?)

So, are they really saying that Cycloastragenol is not the same as TA-65 but it's fully comparable as a telomerase activator?

Or maybe it's exactly the same thing but they can't say it because of patent issues.

[niner]

There're only so many substances which can differ between TA65 and HTA/HTA98 if they are extracted "only" from Astragalus Membranaceus.

But let's assume that HTA is HTA98 and that it consist of 98% Cycloastragenol (5mg or 10 mg) and then "random substances which we didn't manage to filter away". Then the poor results according to this report would indicate that Cycloastragenol would need some help of the other substances available in the plant in order to be more effective. This would also be in line with the mediocre "almost +/-0 results" I got when using Cycloastragenol, 5 mg for six months without anything else added than Chitosan, 1 mg. Which obviously did not boost the effect of the Cycloastragenol.

Let's then assume that TA65 is only 5% Cycloastragenol and then "ordinary Astragalus extract which we kept in order to have some other stuff in the pill". Then this report would indicate this to be a more effecient mix of ingridients.This is of course only speculation, the other 95% could be standardized on some specific subset of the plants other substances, but might in any case suggest you shouldn't use pure Cycloastragenol when it's not as effective. You might want to complement it with some other Astragalus extract of some kind.

Well, what I think was going on with you is that 5mg of cycloastragenol just wasn't enough. When you took a larger dose of a mixed astragalus extract, the cycloastragenol was synthesized (microbially in the gut of metabolically) from other astrogalosides (all that's needed is a simple enzymatic cleavage, so this is not unlikely) and you effectively got a larger dose of cycloastragenol.

I don't think we should assume that HTA is the same as HTA98, because in the paper they say that HTA is a mixed product, while Tony Mackenzie says that HTA98 is cycloastragenol. The "98" was probably tacked on to the name to distinguish it from an earlier HTA product. We really need Anthony to sort this out.

[Hebbeh]

In the current study we have characterized the effects of two extracts of
Astragalus membranaceus,
TA-65 and HTA, for their ability to induce telomerase activity and cell proliferation on both CD4 and
CD8 T cells. We show that TA-65 increased CD4 and CD8 T cells telomerase activity by 1.3-3.3-fold
over the control treatment (
p < 0.05) in six out of six donor cultures, but HTA treatment caused mild
telomerase increases in only 2 of the 6 donor cultures. The TA-65 telomerase enhancement was in the
same range as that documented in our previous work with the TAT2 telomerase activator on CD8 T
cells from persons infected with HIV [13]

Am I reading this corrrectly:

In total they have tested 3 different astragalus extracts: TA65, HTA and TAT2.

(And TAT2 is Cycloastragenol, right?)

So, are they really saying that Cycloastragenol is not the same as TA-65 but it's fully comparable as a telomerase activator?

Or maybe it's exactly the same thing but they can't say it because of patent issues.

Did you read Anthony's quotes in my post above? I believe Anthony answered those questions.

[GreenPower]

Well, what I think was going on with you is that 5mg of cycloastragenol just wasn't enough. When you took a larger dose of a mixed astragalus extract, the cycloastragenol was synthesized (microbially in the gut of metabolically) from other astrogalosides (all that's needed is a simple enzymatic cleavage, so this is not unlikely) and you effectively got a larger dose of cycloastragenol.

I don't think we should assume that HTA is the same as HTA98, because in the paper they say that HTA is a mixed product, while Tony Mackenzie says that HTA98 is cycloastragenol. The "98" was probably tacked on to the name to distinguish it from an earlier HTA product. We really need Anthony to sort this out.

And this is also speculation. I agree, we need Anthony to verify the HTA they supplied to the study and HTA98 is the same thing.

I also believe it's quite possible the reference "The TA-65 telomerase enhancement was in the same range as that documented in our previous work with the TAT2 telomerase activator on CD8 T cells from persons infected with HIV [13]" in the study might be a way to refer to the same product without breaking any NDA's. But then again, I seem to remember a discussion about possible changes in the formula of TA65, which means it might contain "product enhancements". In which case these enhancements didn't add any obvious additional value to the product (with regards to T-cells).

I've previously not seen the comment "We also found it that it behaves differently than plain old 99% pure cyclo. It actually behaves like when you micronize the astragalus powder. I suspect TA-65 has been processed in a way that is more absorbable than plain cyclo." from the other forum. It's quite interesting because it doesn't suggest it's the cycloastragenom that's been micronized. It suggest it's the astragalus powder.

[hav]

Hi, greenpower. I seem to recall that your independent anecdotal observation was that you got better in vivo telomere test results from a standardized astragalus extract than from either high purity cyclo or as4. That kind of did it for me. These latest test tube results are interesting but do not change much in my mind... except underlie a need for further in vivo clinical research, comparing not only cyclo formulations, but also as4 and broader spectrum astragalus extracts. Looking forward to your latest test results.

Can you refresh us on exactly what telomere tests you're having done and what;s involved?

Howard

Edited by hav, 24 January 2013 - 06:41 AM.

[stephen_b]

I'm taking the root extract at about 9g/day to help with an upper respiratory infection/sore throat. I haven't noticed an effect on energy so far.

[hav]

Here's an interesting study that shows another gene, PinX1, if under expressed, leads to both telomerase activation and spontaneous tumor and cancer growth:

The telomerase inhibitor PinX1 is a major haploinsufficient tumor suppressor essential for chromosome stability in mice.

Telomerase is activated in most human cancers and is critical for cancer cell growth. However, little is known about the significance of telomerase activation in chromosome instability and cancer initiation. The gene encoding the potent endogenous telomerase inhibitor PinX1 (PIN2/TRF1-interacting, telomerase inhibitor 1) is located at human chromosome 8p23, a region frequently exhibiting heterozygosity in many common human cancers, but the function or functions of PinX1 in development and tumorigenesis are unknown. Here we have shown that PinX1 is a haploinsufficient tumor suppressor essential for chromosome stability in mice. We found that PinX1 expression was reduced in most human breast cancer tissues and cell lines. Furthermore, PinX1 heterozygosity and PinX1 knockdown in mouse embryonic fibroblasts activated telomerase and led to concomitant telomerase-dependent chromosomal instability. Moreover, while PinX1-null mice were embryonic lethal, most PinX1+/- mice spontaneously developed malignant tumors with evidence of chromosome instability. Notably, most PinX1 mutant tumors were carcinomas and shared tissues of origin with human cancer types linked to 8p23. PinX1 knockout also shifted the tumor spectrum of p53 mutant mice from lymphoma toward epithelial carcinomas. Thus, PinX1 is a major haploinsufficient tumor suppressor essential for maintaining telomerase activity and chromosome stability. These findings uncover what we believe to be a novel role for PinX1 and telomerase in chromosome instability and cancer initiation and suggest that telomerase inhibition may be potentially used to treat cancers that overexpress telomerase.

Howard

[hav]

thanks!

Check this out: http://www.asianjps.....asp?bsid=14493

sax

Beta-cyclodextrin is limited in the USA... we basically can't use it in supplements.

A

I was reading some studies on using Beta-cyclodextrin to enhance the bioavailability of silymarin and rsveratrol when I stumbled across the above cryptic mention in this thread.

Here's the graphic in the Beta-cyclodextrin/silymarin study that got me so interested:

Figure 7
Dissolution profiles of inclusion complexes of silymarin and β-cyclodextrin prepared using different methods. PM = Physical mixture, KN = kneading, CP = co-precipitation, SE = solvent evaporation

Simple physical mixture of silymarin and beta-cyclodextrin with a mortar and pestle increases water solubility from 20% to 100% and presumably dramatically increases bioavailability. Here's a similar article about using resveratrol and beta-cyclodextrin: Scientists consider cyclodextrins as resveratrol carriers. And a good toxicity study summary regarding use of beta-cyclodextrin as a food additive in the UK: Beta-Cyclodextrin (WHO Food Additives Series 32)... which seems to date back to 1994 but I'm not sure what happened in the UK approval process since then. As far as the US goes, I wasn't able to find any FDA approval but I did find this, where the FDA in 2005 seems to have made it a slight bit easier to get approval.

If anyone is interested in experimenting with this stuff, is seems to be available for research purposes on Amazon in pure and Hydroxypropyl forms.

Howard

Scientists consider cyclodextrins as resveratrol carriers

[Tom Andre F. (ex shinobi)]

There is interesting speculation on this thread. Actually, if some are right and that cycloastra are not as effective by 98% as less concentrate.. It could be the eact same with trans resveratrol 99% pure.

Do you now any brand that have tried to make a full spectrum astragal and just guarantee few % of cyclo and astragaloside IV ?

[riloal]

GreenPower do you have your last lab results? I,m waiting for your results.

[marcobjj]

There're only so many substances which can differ between TA65 and HTA/HTA98 if they are extracted "only" from Astragalus Membranaceus.

But let's assume that HTA is HTA98 and that it consist of 98% Cycloastragenol (5mg or 10 mg) and then "random substances which we didn't manage to filter away". Then the poor results according to this report would indicate that Cycloastragenol would need some help of the other substances available in the plant in order to be more effective. This would also be in line with the mediocre "almost +/-0 results" I got when using Cycloastragenol, 5 mg for six months without anything else added than Chitosan, 1 mg. Which obviously did not boost the effect of the Cycloastragenol.

Let's then assume that TA65 is only 5% Cycloastragenol and then "ordinary Astragalus extract which we kept in order to have some other stuff in the pill". Then this report would indicate this to be a more effecient mix of ingridients.This is of course only speculation, the other 95% could be standardized on some specific subset of the plants other substances, but might in any case suggest you shouldn't use pure Cycloastragenol when it's not as effective. You might want to complement it with some other Astragalus extract of some kind.

Well, what I think was going on with you is that 5mg of cycloastragenol just wasn't enough. When you took a larger dose of a mixed astragalus extract, the cycloastragenol was synthesized (microbially in the gut of metabolically) from other astrogalosides (all that's needed is a simple enzymatic cleavage, so this is not unlikely) and you effectively got a larger dose of cycloastragenol.

I don't think we should assume that HTA is the same as HTA98, because in the paper they say that HTA is a mixed product, while Tony Mackenzie says that HTA98 is cycloastragenol. The "98" was probably tacked on to the name to distinguish it from an earlier HTA product. We really need Anthony to sort this out.

It is also very possible that Cycloastragenol did work for you, by decreasing the number of critically short telomeres. The number of critically short telomeres is thought to be more important data then mean telomere length.

- when Bill Andrews tested TA65 with 12 subjects over the course of a year, he found that mean telomere length did still decrease, however the number of critically short telomeres also decreased. (source: )

-Dr Ed Park measured his telomeres regularly and found that both his mean telomere length and critically short telomeres decreased in the first 6 months. After that his critically short telomeres continued to decrease, but his mean telomere length went up. After years of taking TA65 his mean telomere length is that of an 18 year old according to tests. (source: http://www.rechargeb...ark.php?page=41)

[marcobjj]

I'm also getting the feeling that there's a disinfo campaign going on with regards to Cyclo vs TA65, the fact that they're the same is being swept under the rug.

[Tom Andre F. (ex shinobi)]

is it possible to know exactly the composition (and concentration) of TA65 ? what do you think about an HPLC-LCMS-NMR ? It can take times, but I can maybe do something. We will not have Anthony's help as he is just here to make money, and it's not in his interest

Also, if they did clinical trials, they MUST have give their exact composition.. If you have referance of the study, I can have a look.

Edited by Shinobi, 23 April 2013 - 08:17 AM.

[Tsaun]

is it possible to know exactly the composition (and concentration) of TA65 ? what do you think about an HPLC-LCMS-NMR ? It can take times, but I can maybe do something. We will not have Anthony's help as he is just here to make money, and it's not in his interest

Also, if they did clinical trials, they MUST have give their exact composition.. If you have referance of the study, I can have a look.

I believe Anthony said each TA-65 tablet contained 5mg of cyclo and a little bit of astragaloside. It's in this thread somewhere, I know the post is after page 37 but I can't tell you much more.

[Tom Andre F. (ex shinobi)]

yes I get this:

"TA-65 according to the COA is:

Astragaloside IV - .27mg / serving

Cycloastragenol

• Astragenol - .01mg / serving
• Cycloastraganol - 5.44mg / serving"

but it's not enough. The C of A is not available anymore. We have also to know the concentration.

[niner]

but it's not enough. The C of A is not available anymore. We have also to know the concentration.

Why do you need the concentration? The only thing that matters is the concentration in the blood, which (assuming it all gets into the blood and none goes anywhere else) is 5.44mg/blood volume.

[Tom Andre F. (ex shinobi)]

because of synergie. What about the astragalus ? is this raw or 50/1 extract or just trace from the cyclo extract ?

It could also have a difference between each fraction of the extract in therms of solubility ?

Also, does anyone know what is the mesh size ?

Maybe I could replicate a supplement like that for 1/10 price..

Edited by Shinobi, 23 April 2013 - 12:44 PM.

[zorba990]

Yes the early threads were telling http://www.longecity...-now-available/

[Tom Andre F. (ex shinobi)]

do you think peoples here could be interested if I offer for less than 120$, a 2 months supply (60 capsues) of exactly this composition ? with an independant C of A to certify about purity ? If so, i will try to do my best.

[marcobjj]

for reference, Terraetneral is selling 60x10mg cyclo caps for around $140.

[Tom Andre F. (ex shinobi)]

yes but purity is only 67%

[marcobjj]

purity 50% but they come in 20mg pills (according to Terraeternal), so totalizing 10mg of Cyclo per pill.

[Tom Andre F. (ex shinobi)]

yes but we need a specific concentration to mimic the TA65. We also need 0,01mg of astragenol and 0.27mg of astra IV in the same capsule. Usually, when we speak about a 90% pure for cyclo, that's mean 90 of cyclo and 10 of dextrine.

I dont understand why peoples say TA65 also have some raw astragalus in there ? Are you sure, or is it just supposition ?

Whatever, what do you think if we can get the exact same product for 1/4 prices (and maybe even less, i'm a customer before a producer so dont want to really make money on this, but rather diminishes the cost if we are enough interested in.

[AdamI]

U do know Revgenetics have tested regular cyclo and TA-65. Among others.... I Think there result was that TA-65 was stronger than anything they had seen. And test show it's particle very similiar as Cyclo but something is changed... But it's your Money just do a Telomere test Before and after and see if it infact do any change. From a site I found "Besides TA-65 available from TA sciences, based on the information in the Geron patent other companies have started to market both astragaloside IV and cycloastragenol as telomerase activator supplements(ref)(rev). These supplements are being sold considerably cheaper than TA-65 with cost of a 30-day supply typically running up to $80. One such company, Revgenetics, decided to discontinue its cycloastragenol product line when the Geron patent was finally issued and sell of its existing stock at discount, charging $25 for a bottle which contains 30 5mg pills. " http://www.anti-agin...they-really-do/

[Tom Andre F. (ex shinobi)]

thanks Adaml.

What do you exactly mean by " And test show it's particle very similiar as Cyclo but something is changed" ?

Your link also reveals that: "It is interesting that when it was originally marketed the daily dosage of TA-65 was 5 mg and the daily dosage has been increased now to 100mg, by a factor of 20". Do someone have more info on this ? The C of A of Anthony is before or after this change ?

[marcobjj]

- Actually, the tests showed that TA65 is Cycloastragenol, there's no mention that something is changed.

- Revgenetics didn't test "regular cyclo", but rather a product called HTA which no one knows for sure what it is.

[marcobjj]

The maximum daily dosage of TA65 according to TASciences is 20mg ("1000 units" on their own scale).

Shinobi, TA65 comes in 8mg capsules of which 5mg are cycloastragenol. does that help? Perhaps you should explain on laymen terms what exactly you mean by concentration.

[Tom Andre F. (ex shinobi)]

marcobjj,

anthony says on his own page that he tested telomerase activity on many supplement. He notes that only TA 65 finally really works. Are we sure he never tested pure cylco and rather hide the test ?

thanks marcobjj, yes it does help a lot. But I dont understand: 20mg daily of cyclo you mean (no TA65 as you said the capsule is 8mg size content), so 4 capsules, right ?

about concentration I mean that:

I can sell you an extract which is 5mg of cyclo from a 100mg astragalus (astragalus with 5% of cyclo). Whch is not the same as a 5mg of cyclo from 6mg of astragalus. Whch is not the same as a 60% cyclo which can be: for 100mg of powder: 60mg of cyclo and 40mg of dextrin.

I never worked on this extract, but If I could have enough found, I would experiment some extraction with specific solvant to maybe even surpass this TA 65

Edited by Shinobi, 24 April 2013 - 09:10 PM.