2189 replies to this topic

[bsm]

Isn't telomerase's job to stop old cells from losing more telomeres?

My speculation is that perhaps telomerase only works on old cells. Which might not be a bad thing.

Are results from TA implying that the old cells died off or the old cells elongated above the threshold?

Yes, I posted the study proving telomerase only works on telomeres below a certain threshold.

Telomere feedback loop

Edited by bsm, 14 September 2010 - 09:18 PM.

[johnross47]

I made some remarks on Facebook on the Sierra Sciences link commenting on the high price for what is probably AIV.....they seem to have disconnected me from their Facebook feed in revenge. I was sent two angry emails from TA Life Sciences full of waffle about how expensive the process is and how many certificates they have etc, but at no point did they admit what it actually is they are selling. It walks like a scam and quacks like a scam.......

Interesting response from them. Still, I'm not sure I'd call this a scam. They've invested a lot of resources in their program, have done a huge amount of testing, and are publishing on it. And they are the ones who brought it to the public and essentially ran a clinical trial for us. At the same time, they managed to get their patients to foot the bill for this, and are ultimately interested in getting rich off of their work. It's not terrifically different than a biotech or pharma, not that we necessarily consider those to be paragons of moral virtue. This is what it looks like when you employ capitalism to fund biomedical R&D.

Sierra Sciences Have Successfully Lengthened Telomeres Which Could Be Used to Extend Human Lifespan
nextbigfuture.com This is a headline from the Facebook link.
it was headlines like this that made me ask how connected those apparently separate organisations are? As I recall the Patton Protocol originally promised people 8-9 years worth of telomere extension.....in slippery lawyer approved language of course and now they are trumpeting very limited results in a very limited set of cell types. This is presumably partly because they haven't looked at other cells.....or have they?

[Chopperboy]

when unusually high concentration of Telomerase is detected in bloodstream, our body thinking that "Ahh, cancer cells are running rampant somewhere." And when this happens, our body deploys whatever anti-cancer measures necessary.

Taking Cycloastraganol over a few months I noticed 3 moles/ warts get initially larger before dying back to much smaller than thay had been for years. Also it brought out freckles on my back which get no sun exposure. Also noticed a strong feeling of well being. Any ideas whats going on?

[niner]

Telomerase activation is a hallmark of cancer and there are some studies that suggest our body raises red-flag when unusually high concentration of Telomerase is detected in bloodstream, our body thinking that "Ahh, cancer cells are running rampant somewhere." And when this happens, our body deploys whatever anti-cancer measures necessary.

Telomerase is not a secreted protein, so even if there is upregulation of it in some cells, it isn't going to end up in plasma. In people with advanced cancer, you can find HTERT mRNA (not protein) in plasma. This is in cases where there are massive numbers of genetically unstable cells in which telomerase has been constitutively activated. I'd be pretty surprised if our body was detecting this mRNA and using it as a signal to do anything. Could you post an abstract or link to one of the papers that support this hypothesis?

[motorcitykid]

Very interesting article in today's sciencedaily linking the longevity molecule to lithocolic acid:

http://www.scienceda...00915100935.htm


Titorenko and colleagues screened more than 19,000 small molecules to test their ability to extend yeast-lifespan. Under both normal and stressed conditions, LCA had a major impact.

"Our findings imply that LCA extends longevity by targeting two different mechanisms," says first author Alexander Goldberg, a Concordia doctoral student. "The first takes place regardless of the number of calories and involves the day-to-day or housekeeping proteins. The second system occurs during calorie-restriction and involves stressor proteins."

"Regardless of their triggers both of these mechanisms work to suppress the pro-aging process," he continues.


Alternate studies indicate that lab animals live longer when fed a LOW PROTEIN DIET which INHIBITS LCA production:

http://grande.nal.us...s&therow=269644

Anyone wanna take a stab at interpretting this contradicting data?

[Chopperboy]

SAVE SIERRA SCIENCES

Anyone got 200K per month in their back pocket to help Sierra Sciences through financial difficulty?

http://www.my-wellne...ure-aging-.html

[kilgoretrout]

But I would not be surprised if fda was investigating revgenetics... their web site makes seemingly illegal medical claims of improvements of health and longevity, when in fact resveratrol has not been proven to do anything at all when taken by live real humans in terms of medical endpoints compared to placebo, nor that taking huge doses of resveratrol are not in fact dangerous, via promoting growth of cancers or immune cells that are supposed to die. Its also obvious that revgenetics owns and funds this site, witness the amount of spam constantly in our faces from them here. And the presence of their president in the resveratrol thread constantly making promotional claims about its magical powers. Now watch as I am bitchslapped for speaking heresy.

[niner]

Its also obvious that revgenetics owns and funds this site, witness the amount of spam constantly in our faces from them here.

RevGenetics most certainly does not "own this site". They sponsor the resveratrol forum, which means they pay ImmInst some money (which keeps the site going, helps fund research, and a lot of other stuff) and they get to run an ad in this forum. ImmInst is a non-profit organization. No one is getting rich here. It's an all-volunteer organization.

[mikeinnaples]

when in fact resveratrol has not been proven to do anything at all when taken by live real humans in terms of medical endpoints compared to placebo

This is not fact. You are also wrong.

[kilgoretrout]

when in fact resveratrol has not been proven to do anything at all when taken by live real humans in terms of medical endpoints compared to placebo

This is not fact. You are also wrong.

So where are these peer-reviewed placebo-controlled research publications showing resveratrol having beneficial impact on medical endpoints when used by live humans that you imply? It would be great to see them, please!

[smithx]

TA Sciences has just made TA-65, whatever it actually is, available for a lower cost. They are charging $1200 for 250 capsules, $2200 for 500 capsules, and $4000 for 1000 capsules. At the lowest price, that's $4 per capsule.

If each TA-65 capsule was equal to two RevGenetics capsules, which are $85 for 60 (given that 2 capsules of their new formula contains the same cycloastragenol as one capsule of the old formula), it would be $4 per capsule for TA, vs $2.83 per capsule for RevGenetics.

On the other hand, we have no proof that TA-65 is either cycloastragenol or astragaloside IV. Given that there's at least some research supporting TA's product, the extra 40% or so of cost seems reasonable.

Here's the press release:

September 20, 2010

T.A. Sciences announces new dose options that can drastically lower the cost of TA-65 to as low as $200 per month..

T.A. Sciences is pleased to announce that the world's only proven telomerase activator TA-65, is now being offered at new flexible dosing options which can drastically cut individual user costs.

The statistics showing TA-65's efficacy in the ground breaking scientific paper published Sept. 8, 2010 in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Rejuvenation Research allow us to now offer two new dosing options along with the original recommended full dose. The data in this ground-breaking scientific study shows that doses that are half or even a quarter of the current full dose can be effective and still offer significant health benefits. The two new lower doses of 500 units and 250 units are significantly less expensive than the full 1000 units dose.



This lower pricing greatly expands the market demographics; making TA-65 more affordable and attractive to a significantly larger number of people. TA-65 is now a viable and affordable option for almost anyone who is concerned about combating age related decline. Anyone desiring to learn how TA-65 and Telomerase Activation might help their unique situation should contact one of T.A. Sciences' licensed doctors trained in Telomere Biology. See www.tasciences.com to find a physician located near you.



Below is the guideline that our licensed doctors use to help choose the appropriate dosage and price for each patient's unique situation:

250 units (1 capsule daily) is efficacious for healthy adults in their 40's or 50's. Also 250 units can serve as a maintenance dose for older people who have been taking higher doses of TA-65 for several years and want to continue on a reduced cost program. Clients who took this dose were shown to have increased short telomere length and significantly improved immune system function. There are also anecdotal reports of increased endurance and other benefits.

Cost: US $1,200 for each 6 month segment. (Average monthly cost $200)

500 units (2 capsules daily) has been proven to lengthen short telomeres, restore the immune system, and improve other important bio markers. Anecdotal reports included increased energy, endurance, vision improvements, sexual enhancement, and more. This medium strength dose is recommended for people who are generally in good health and want to be proactive in longevity and healthy aging. Many people in their 50's or 60's fall into this category.

Cost: US $2,200 for each 6 month segment. (Average monthly cost $367)


1000 units (4 capsules daily) This is considered the FULL DOSE and is recommended for clients who are:

(a) Over 70 years of age, or

(b) Are of any age and have measured their telomeres and found them to be short, or
(b) Have reason to believe that strengthening their immune system would have particular benefit.

It is expected that this dose will give an increased benefit over the lower doses (although not a proportional benefit). Study subjects experienced lengthened telomeres, restoration of weak immune systems, bone density improvements and other important bio marker improvements which usually decline with age. Anecdotal reports include energy increase, endurance, cognitive improvements, improved vision, sexual enhancement, and an overall feeling of well being.



Cost: US $4,000 for each 6 month segment. (Average monthly cost $667)

Minimum order is one 6 month segment for each dose level. For shipments outside the USA, an international shipping and handling charge of US $150 is added.

Edited by smithx, 21 September 2010 - 12:32 AM.

[almonds]

TA Sciences has just made TA-65, whatever it actually is, available for a lower cost...

Thanks for sharing this!
Now I can spend money on a proven telomerase activator.

Edited by almonds, 21 September 2010 - 01:50 AM.
Trim excessive quote

[Anthony_Loera]

If TA65 is Astragaloside IV,
like many folks have considered since the latest document suggests that it is not in fact Cycloastragenol...Then it should simply be much cheaper. In fact, if we caused them to lower their prices, then much the better for everyone. That is the benefit of competition to the consumer, is it not?

Remember we were selling capsules of 100mg of astragaloside IV for... around $50. If the suggestion that TA65 is Astragaloside IV is correct, then the 25mg in each TA65 capsule would still be very expensive compared to our old 100mg capsules.

If someone here, takes TA65, I would ask you to send me a few capsules (I will reimburse you for them if you would like) so that we can send them off to a lab and test them. The fact that folks continue to try to compare and speculate, really should be put to rest. Many people are on the fence on telomerase activators, and our goal is to produce the best product that takes advantage of them, specifically for folks that want to try them.

Whether you like us or not, the fact is that our aim is to get a product out that folks want, while making a sensible profit to continue research in this area and grow the business. Yes, we are discovering new things about molecules (and other genes) that I have not mentioned that I feel would benefit many people in one way or another, however without the funds for research that we spend... we might as well be a one product shop, (like TA Sciences is).

Personally I am not going down that road, as multiple genes need to work together effectively for the good of the cells and ultimately the organism. So whether we succeed in our endeavors and find a perfect combination of molecules/supplements that may help some folks or...not.... The aim of is the same: The company is to spend time and effort in this area and provide longevity supporting products that have already appeared to make a difference to many people.

A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 21 September 2010 - 01:19 AM.

[smithx]

If someone here, takes TA65, I would ask you to send me a few capsules (I will reimburse you for them if you would like) so that we can send them off to a lab and test them.

Seems like you might want to spend the $1200 and see if you can find out what's in the TA-65. It may be neither cycloastragenol nor astragaloside IV, in which case you could be SOL if there's no existing spec data on whatever compound it is.

[Anthony_Loera]

That's funny... since UCLA tested Geron's most powerful telomerase activator called TAT2 (ie. Cycloastragenol).

The issue here is to prove to folks that they are receiving just what they think it is, and not paying too much for anything less (which apparently they are since the last document stated it was a molecule 'related' to TAT2). I believe I was the first to tell folks that the substance was likely Astragaloside IV, right after the dose change. If it is... the price is much more than your estimated 40% in profit.... much, much more. I find myself reeling thinking about when TA65 was only 5mg per capsule... and supposedly doing the same? Since your main issue is price smithx and it appears that TA65 is looking more likely than ever to be Astragaloside IV, then I am surprised you think this is a great deal.

Now someone here told me I should not feed the trolls, so I will limit my conversation with you mr. smithx.

Cheers

A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 21 September 2010 - 03:59 AM.

[almonds]

I don't follow what makes Smithx a troll.
He was simply pointing out that reverse engineering does not work in biochemistry i.e. what a lab test can do is to determine if a substance in question is or is not a certain pre-known substance, but what a lab test cannot do is to give us a out-of-scratch full constituent profile of a substance (and reconstitute the substance like Star Trek's food replicator does).

By the way who cares what TA-65 really is? I'm paying for what is proven to work and work safely. TA-65 satifies both but Astral Fruit doesn't.

[niner]

He was simply pointing out that reverse engineering does not work in biochemistry i.e. what a lab test can do is to determine if a substance in question is or is not a certain pre-known substance, but what a lab test cannot do is to give us a out-of-scratch full constituent profile of a substance (and reconstitute the substance like Star Trek's food replicator does).

With sufficient analytical hardware, you can usually figure out the exact structure of a compound. The problem is that instead of a relatively inexpensive HPLC, you might need a Mass Spec added on to the end of your chromatograph. It can get expensive.

We don't have a machine that can synthesize virtually anything from scratch, but then that's not really needed.

[almonds]

Oh disagreed. Current tech is no way near to come up with a full constituent profile of an unknown substance. No machine in the world can give us a full, air-tight out-of-scratch analysis, rather, we need to feed the machine with O/X questions. "Mirror, mirror on the wall, is it likely Cycloastragenol or Astragaloside IV ?" Only then the machine can answer, "Cycloastragenol positive, Astragaloside IV negative." but still then, this does not necessarily mean TA-65 is Cycloastragenol, since the lab machine alone cannot let us know what other molecules may possibly constitute TA-65 in addition to Cycloastragenol, unless we feed it with further appropriate O/X questions, which in mathmatical probabilty, will take a million years.

And if I might add, the fact that TA Sciences is having TA-65 available to the mass public pretty much precludes the possibility that TA-65 would be either one of the two, Cycloastragenol or Astragaloside IV. TA-65 is most likely a novel molecule.

Edited by almonds, 21 September 2010 - 06:09 AM.

[smithx]

Now someone here told me I should not feed the trolls, so I will limit my conversation with you mr. smithx.

I don't know why you decided take this negative attitude. I had no ill feelings toward you or your company. I simply wanted to find out the quantity of cycloastragenol in your product. Suddenly, I became a "troll" for making you state what was in the product. This sort of attack is really counter productive in my view.

As for this latest discussion, you apparently are not familiar with how unknown compound analysis works. You should be, since analysis is part of your business, but allow me to explain.

Typical analysis is done by GC/MS or GC/NMR, HPLC is used sometimes, but it requires a standard for comparison on each run.

Let's start with HPLC. What you do is take a known pure substance and run it through your test setup. Then you take your unknown and run it through. If you get the same peak time curve, you are somewhat likely to have the same compound. Purity is determined by the area under the curve.

GC/MS is much more accurate. In this test, the GC is used to purify the unknown sample, which is then sent through mass spec. If you get the same curve and the same molecular weights as your suspected known compound, you're again fairly certain that it's what you were looking for. You can be more certain if you use more advanced types of ms, which break the molecules up into pieces. Again if you have the spectrum of your suspected known compound, and the pieces all match, you're much more certain that's what you've got.

The problem comes when you have an unknown that isn't a match for something you already have a spectrum for. Then you have a lot of work in front of you. Basically, at that point you have to somehow obtain pure samples of each of the compounds you think may be your unknown, run ms on each one, and then compare that to your unknown sample. This is very expensive and not guaranteed to work, if you don't predict what substance it is likely to be and aren't able to obtain a pure sample of that to compare your unknown to.

That's what I meant when I said "It may be neither cycloastragenol nor astragaloside IV, in which case you could be SOL if there's no existing spec data on whatever compound it is."

The point is that if you buy the TA-65 and do an analysis, and it doesn't match any known compound in your analytical lab's database, you will not easily find out what that compound is.

If I were you, I'd take the risk and buy the TA-65 in case you can unequivocally state that it is cycloastragenol or astragaloside IV. But I just wanted you to know that you might be wasting your money if it turns out to be neither of those, because analysis of a truly unknown compound would be likely to cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Edited by smithx, 21 September 2010 - 10:34 AM.

[maxwatt]

...
By the way who cares what TA-65 really is? I'm paying for what is proven to work and work safely. TA-65 satifies both but Astral Fruit doesn't.

Astral Fruit may or may not contain whatever is in TA-65. The hope these substances lengthen some of one's Telomeres is based on less than iron-clad evidence.* I've yet to see even anecdotal reports of health benefits from putative telomere lengtheners, unlike reports concerning other nostrums. Spindler's as-yet-unpublished NIA studies did not find TA-65 to extend the lifespan of heterogenous mice, though Spinder mentioned promising results for other things.

Personally I would not pay for either of them, but don't let me stop you if you think they may do you some good.

*see Elus' earlier post here

Edited by maxwatt, 21 September 2010 - 11:35 AM.
footnote

[Anthony_Loera]

smithx,

I personally don't care what TA65 anymore since it was stated that it was not cycloastragenol. We have cycloastragenol from a natural source, simply Geron's best tested while they try to modify the molecule to make a drug. The fact is that if TA65 is 'astragalus extract' and not the single molecule they were touting, the tests would simply bear that out. It is not on me anymore to try to figure it out, the knowledge is really for the benefit of the folks who keep thinking TA65 should be expensive because... of ignorance.

Remember Noel's company does not research new compounds like Sierra Sciences, or Geron. The notion that his company found out a 'new' and more powerful than what Geron has achieved... is in my opinion, a complete stretch smithx.

Almonds,
It is not about reverse engineering. It's about saving you guys money by making you aware of what is behind the curtain (for those that care about telomerase activators).


Maxwatt,
Thanks for the post.
From the last round of informative posts (which started here) it does seem like TA65 is very limited, and the charts do remind me of those found in gerons patents. It is possible they were repeating some of the same tests, for marketing purposes (similar to Sardi testing for things in his product that were already found before in a university study on plain resveratrol). Since telomeres shrink at different rates (Per Elizabeth Blackburn), it is likely that an oral dose may be limited, possibly to the immune system and not to the whole organism.

Also, please remember these two milestones, as they often get confused when posting:
1- Geron's TAT2 that UCLA studied was determined to be Cycloastragenol.
2- That TA65 has been confirmed not to be Cycloastragenol. It is likely a Astragaloside IV or a less powerful activator listed at the beginning of this thread.


Cheers
A

[smithx]

Remember Noel's company does not research new compounds like Sierra Sciences, or Geron. The notion that his company found out a 'new' and more powerful than what Geron has achieved... is in my opinion, a complete stretch smithx.

Where did I say that there's some new compound? I said that if you do an analysis, and if it's not one of the compounds you think it's likely to be, it would be difficult to figure out what it is. I'm just trying to be helpful here. Anthony's desire to be combative is really bizarre and I'm sure is not endearing him to people on this forum.

He now no longer cares what TA-65 is because you think cycloastragenol is superior? This seems odd. The only study on Medline which came up on a search for cycloastragenol with regard to telomerase was this one:

J Immunol. 2008 Nov 15;181(10):7400-6.
Telomerase-based pharmacologic enhancement of antiviral function of human CD8+ T lymphocytes.

Fauce SR, Jamieson BD, Chin AC, Mitsuyasu RT, Parish ST, Ng HL, Kitchen CM, Yang OO, Harley CB, Effros RB.

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Abstract

Telomerase reverse transcribes telomere DNA onto the ends of linear chromosomes and retards cellular aging. In contrast to most normal somatic cells, which show little or no telomerase activity, immune cells up-regulate telomerase in concert with activation. Nevertheless, during aging and chronic HIV-1 infection, there are high proportions of dysfunctional CD8(+) CTL with short telomeres, suggesting that telomerase is limiting. The present study shows that exposure of CD8(+) T lymphocytes from HIV-infected human donors to a small molecule telomerase activator (TAT2) modestly retards telomere shortening, increases proliferative potential, and, importantly, enhances cytokine/chemokine production and antiviral activity. The enhanced antiviral effects were abrogated in the presence of a potent and specific telomerase inhibitor, suggesting that TAT2 acts primarily through telomerase activation. Our study is the first to use a pharmacological telomerase-based approach to enhance immune function, thus directly addressing the telomere loss immunopathologic facet of chronic viral infection.

This is an in vitro study of one type of cells from HIV infected people, and it showed only that the compound "modestly retards telomere shortening". Generalizing from this to saying that the compound works via an oral route in live humans and does something useful is a very big stretch.

TA-65, on the other hand, does have at least some research data for activity by the oral route in live humans. If there is no other data showing that cycloastragenol does something useful in live humans, it seems clear that TA-65 is much better supported by evidence at this time.

By the way, this is not Anthony's thread about his products. This is a thread about astragalus extracts of various kinds and their potential usefulness. Every post on here is not either defending or attacking him and his company. The goal is to share information, not to either make him rich or deprive him of income.

Edited by smithx, 21 September 2010 - 12:59 PM.

[Anthony_Loera]

Smithx,

The telomerase activators from astragalus already appear to be rated at the beginning of this thread. again... Remember Noel's company does not research new compounds like Sierra Sciences, or Geron. The notion that his company found out a 'new' and more powerful than what Geron has achieved... is in my opinion, a complete stretch smithx. The price of ingredients plays a huge role in this, that is why I can understand that TA65 could really be Astragaloside IV (or a mix and not really a pure compound), even though Cycloastragenol is more soluble, you would likely need less and considered better because of it's solubility.

Personally Astragaloside IV did not do much for me and in my eyes it was not determined to work like I wanted it to, and I took it for a bit. My tests came back, and the difference was within the error rate between blood draws of the test from repeat diagnostics.

The skin cream patent (which got rejected by the patent office) has quite a bit of info regarding the compounds, including charts on telomerase activity. Calvin Harley who put forward the information for it, is considered one of the best and I would not take his work lightly regarding that public information. Most of this information regarding patents and the different activators found in Astragalus has been posted on this thread in the past.

A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 21 September 2010 - 01:54 PM.

[GreenPower]

SAVE SIERRA SCIENCES

Anyone got 200K per month in their back pocket to help Sierra Sciences through financial difficulty?

http://www.my-wellne...ure-aging-.html

> To this end, we have formed an alliance with a well-known and very successful manufacturer and retailer of natural products. They will be marketing our discoveries as anti-aging nutraceuticals.
> This alliance is expected to bring us enough revenue to support further nutraceutical research by mid-2011, and to support pharmaceutical research by mid-2012.

This might mean that Sierra Sciences plan to collaborate with TA Sciences to start selling the results of their research as anti-aging nutraceuticals. I make this guess because both of these companies were mentioned in the Author Disclosure Statement of the report "A Natural Product Telomerase Activator As Part of a Health Maintenance Program" which Saxiephon attached in a recent post in this thread. Both companies have also been referencing each other frequently on their respective web sites in the past.

But if Sierra Science's discoveries where proven to work better than TA65, TA Sciences ought to have been able to pay these 200K per month for the stated time period of 6-12 months and/or buy out one of the two major shareholders which has withdrawn their support. Because they are not doing this, I draw the conclusion that Sierra Sciences has no hard numbers backing up the efficacy or the safeness of their discoveries. Or that TA Sciences are not making that much money by selling TA65, although their margins must have been quite high for TA65 in the past (regardless of whether TA65 is AIV, Cycloastragenol or any other substance which Geron's subsidiary TA Therapeutics found to activate telomerase).

But if Sierra Sciences manages the next half year or so, TA Sciences might actually get to have more than one product in their sales portfolio.

[GreenPower]

Smithx,

The telomerase activators from astragalus already appear to be rated at the beginning of this thread. again... Remember Noel's company does not research new compounds like Sierra Sciences, or Geron. The notion that his company found out a 'new' and more powerful than what Geron has achieved... is in my opinion, a complete stretch smithx. The price of ingredients plays a huge role in this, that is why I can understand that TA65 could really be Astragaloside IV (or a mix and not really a pure compound), even though Cycloastragenol is more soluble, you would likely need less and considered better because of it's solubility.

Personally Astragaloside IV did not do much for me and in my eyes it was not determined to work like I wanted it to, and I took it for a bit. My tests came back, and the difference was within the error rate between blood draws of the test from repeat diagnostics.

The skin cream patent (which got rejected by the patent office) has quite a bit of info regarding the compounds, including charts on telomerase activity. Calvin Harley who put forward the information for it, is considered one of the best and I would not take his work lightly regarding that public information. Most of this information regarding patents and the different activators found in Astragalus has been posted on this thread in the past.

A

Anthony, did you publish the test results from when you were using Cycloastragenol? I searched through the thread but couldn't find it.

Edited by GreenPower, 21 September 2010 - 04:23 PM.

[niner]

Oh disagreed. Current tech is no way near to come up with a full constituent profile of an unknown substance. No machine in the world can give us a full, air-tight out-of-scratch analysis, rather, we need to feed the machine with O/X questions. "Mirror, mirror on the wall, is it likely Cycloastragenol or Astragaloside IV ?" Only then the machine can answer, "Cycloastragenol positive, Astragaloside IV negative." [...]

And if I might add, the fact that TA Sciences is having TA-65 available to the mass public pretty much precludes the possibility that TA-65 would be either one of the two, Cycloastragenol or Astragaloside IV. TA-65 is most likely a novel molecule.

I didn't imply "full, air-tight out-of-scratch analysis". I said "usually". I also said "with sufficient analytical hardware", which goes beyond chromatography and MS. Also, the structure may not simply pop out of the machine, although in some cases it can (database of known compounds); it may take some thought on the part of the analytical chemist as well. Some compounds or questions like absolute configuration are tough, thus the use of the word "usually".

Why does having TA-65 available to the public preclude it being a natural product? What it does preclude is it being a novel molecule (New Chemical Entity), because then it would be considered a drug in the eyes of the FDA, and would have to go through approval. Perhaps you meant novel natural product, but I don't understand your logic even if that's the case.

[niner]

> To this end, we have formed an alliance with a well-known and very successful manufacturer and retailer of natural products. They will be marketing our discoveries as anti-aging nutraceuticals.
> This alliance is expected to bring us enough revenue to support further nutraceutical research by mid-2011, and to support pharmaceutical research by mid-2012.

This might mean that Sierra Sciences plan to collaborate with TA Sciences to start selling the results of their research as anti-aging nutraceuticals. I make this guess because both of these companies were mentioned in the Author Disclosure Statement of the report "A Natural Product Telomerase Activator As Part of a Health Maintenance Program" which Saxiephon attached in a recent post in this thread. Both companies have also been referencing each other frequently on their respective web sites in the past.

But if Sierra Science's discoveries where proven to work better than TA65, TA Sciences ought to have been able to pay these 200K per month for the stated time period of 6-12 months and/or buy out one of the two major shareholders which has withdrawn their support. Because they are not doing this, I draw the conclusion that Sierra Sciences has no hard numbers backing up the efficacy or the safeness of their discoveries. Or that TA Sciences are not making that much money by selling TA65, although their margins must have been quite high for TA65 in the past (regardless of whether TA65 is AIV, Cycloastragenol or any other substance which Geron's subsidiary TA Therapeutics found to activate telomerase).

But if Sierra Sciences manages the next half year or so, TA Sciences might actually get to have more than one product in their sales portfolio.

TA Sciences isn't a "well-known and very successful manufacturer and retailer of natural products". That would suggest someone like Jarrow, or one of the others you might find at iherb.com. TA Sciences is also unlikely to have a cash position that would permit them to fund Sierra. I don't think any conclusions can be drawn from TA not funding Sierra.

[GreenPower]

when unusually high concentration of Telomerase is detected in bloodstream, our body thinking that "Ahh, cancer cells are running rampant somewhere." And when this happens, our body deploys whatever anti-cancer measures necessary.

Taking Cycloastraganol over a few months I noticed 3 moles/ warts get initially larger before dying back to much smaller than thay had been for years. Also it brought out freckles on my back which get no sun exposure. Also noticed a strong feeling of well being. Any ideas whats going on?

Did you measure them before and after? How large is the difference? Do you have other moles whose size hasn't changed?

How large and frequent doses do you take and for how long? Are you taking any other substances at the same time?

Have you noticed any other effects?

[GreenPower]

TA Sciences isn't a "well-known and very successful manufacturer and retailer of natural products". That would suggest someone like Jarrow, or one of the others you might find at iherb.com. TA Sciences is also unlikely to have a cash position that would permit them to fund Sierra. I don't think any conclusions can be drawn from TA not funding Sierra.

I actually agree with you, but if you were hoping to reach an agreement with someone who might save your company from financial ruin, you will probably not call your only probable source of a future cash flow for "unknown" or "unsuccessful", however true the latter may be :-)

Edited by GreenPower, 21 September 2010 - 05:03 PM.

[almonds]

Feeding A Fruitless quibble is known to shorten telomere length 10% at a time.
I called TA Sciences yesterday for TA-65 aka Patton Protocol version 1. I'm waiting for a call from a doctor today, he's gonna determine the right dose for me.

I'll report further as time permits.

Here is a TA-65 study published 10 days ago. Efficacy and safety pretty much confirmed.
http://www.lieberton...9/rej.2010.1085

Edited by almonds, 22 September 2010 - 11:33 AM.