2189 replies to this topic

[Robert89]

How often do you see a company discontinue a product that is selling?

Not often. But how often do you get one of the Nobel prize winners behind the telomere discovery come out and say that TA65/ cycloastrogenol is not of any significant use in Newsweek magazine because its not bio-available to any significant degree. That's what Revgenetics was selling !! (cyclo ...)

That's got to be a big reason to stop selling it right?

(But having said that, it doesn't make sense to start selling TA 65)

OK, I'm confused myself now.

If it did work, there would be amazing trial data in the last TA Sciences published paper ... there wasn't. If it didn't work, why would all those people keep taking it? Faith or the placebo effect?

Maybe what that nobel winner said in the newsweek article is right ... the stuff just doesn't get into the blood stream to any significant effect. In the test tube, its fine. But it just can't get past the gut. But then, why start selling the arch enemies stuff? I'm sure there's a perfectly reasonable explanation for this all.

Of all the players in the telomere field, the only one I really would trust is revgenetics and terraternal ... they sell quality products at reasonable prices, and are upfront with what's in the product and the quality levels. TA Sciences I think screwed up their golden opportunity and the newsweek article was the start of the end for them.

(I personally took astragaloside 4 for over a year with a 2 week on and 2 week off schedule. I felt it worked well, and saw skin quality improve, hair darken, and other improvements ... so I stand by the benefits of even limited telomerase activation ... I wonder what it'd be like having an even more bio available activator)

Edited by Robert89, 13 October 2011 - 03:25 PM.

[Anthony_Loera]

There is a perfect explanation for it:

1- Bio-availability...
in 4 days in vitro tests show significant changes... however we know that the stuff will not hang around anyone's body for that long without being metabolized, hence the 6 to 12 month regimen. Personally I would treat it like res, and up the dosage when it gets cheaper.

2- Cycloastragenol...
Yes we were to the first to sell it in 5mg capsules... and we may bring it back, however we want to make sure there isn't anything commercially better as it remains quite expensive. We now have plans to be Sierra Sciences competitor by testing materials, and bringing something comparable to cyclo to our customers. I think the main aim is to bring down costs to make it reachable to most people as well as provide a great product, don't you think?

3- Sell the arch enemies stuff...
TA Sciences is not our arch enemy, they try to provide information on their product's effectiveness. I believe this information is beneficial to most folks, heck the more information the better. Again just like 'Product B' is not our Arch enemy, as we will sell this product as well if our tests show it activates telomerase. Anyone else has products that we should test?

4- Terraternal...
I am not sure what to think about Terraternal. I do know they also appear to operate CrackAging (Same bottles, website is similar, and of course the screenshot attached shows Google cache showing terraternal text on the crackaging site makes it pretty obvious they are related). I also noticed crackaging has changed their servers from US based to Swiss based with a China business address, possibly to avoid legal fights with folks here in the USA if products don't show up or other types of legal issues, I am simply not sure. Regardless...in my personal opinion, this operation remains a bit sketchy, and need time to see if issues arise from these folks.

I hope these answers are good for you Robert98

Cheers
A

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 13 October 2011 - 04:16 PM.

[Robert89]

There is a perfect explanation for it:

1- Bio-availability...
in 4 days in vitro tests show significant changes... however we know that the stuff will not hang around anyone's body for that long without being metabolized, hence the 6 to 12 month regimen. Personally I would treat it like res, and up the dosage when it gets cheaper.

2- Cycloastragenol...
Yes we were to the first to sell it in 5mg capsules... and we may bring it back, however we want to make sure there isn't anything commercially better as it remains quite expensive. We now have plans to be Sierra Sciences competitor by testing materials, and bringing something comparable to cyclo to our customers. I think the main aim is to bring down costs to make it reachable to most people as well as provide a great product, don't you think?

3- Sell the arch enemies stuff...
TA Sciences is not our arch enemy, they try to provide information on their product's effectiveness. I believe this information is beneficial to most folks, heck the more information the better. Again just like 'Product B' is not our Arch enemy, as we will sell this product as well if our tests show it activates telomerase. Anyone else has products that we should test?

4- Terraternal...
I am not sure what to think about Terraternal. I do know they also appear to operate CrackAging (Same bottles, website is similar, and of course the screenshot attached shows Google cache showing terraternal text on the crackaging site makes it pretty obvious they are related). I also noticed crackaging has changed their servers from US based to Swiss based with a China business address, possibly to avoid legal fights with folks here in the USA if products don't show up or other types of legal issues, I am simply not sure. Regardless...in my personal opinion, this operation remains a bit sketchy, and need time to see if issues arise from these folks.

I hope these answers are good for you Robert98

Cheers
A

Thanks Anthony for your answer.

In regards to Bioavailability, I quote from the newsweek article I mentioned:

"... Carol Greider, who, along with Elizabeth Blackburn and Jack Szostak, won the Nobel for the discovery of telomerase and how telomeres protect chromosomes ... [Carol] sent me a paper reporting that if taken in pill form, Geron’s drug-in-progress from the Chinese herb (TAT2) couldn’t even get to the body’s cells to make a difference. “This particular drug wouldn’t be one that you would give orally,” says Greider. “There would need to be some sort of chemical modification… for it to actually be useful.”

The point I was making, is yes, it works in the test tube. But it doesn't get into the blood stream. This is the Nobel prize winner talking, not me!

I took Astragaloside for a year, but I also took a raw root supplement, resveratrol, large doses of omega 3 oils, a multi-vitamin, etc so I can't tell if the positive effects I saw were due to one thing or another.

I had been seriously thinking of taking Cycloastragenol as well, since it was shown to be TA-65 in the report you posted (and also TAT2). But when I heard Carol Greider said it wasn't bio-available, she meant in vivo, not in the lab as you mention. The fact that smarter people than me have looked at the TA sciences 3 years of study with TA65 and not be convinced is a telling sign. The stuff probably doesn't work.


BTW, I also took a look at the "crack aging" website you said was terraternal, and all I can say is that there is no way terraternal would rip-off the content of their own website to make a fake one with a China address and phone number. That doesn't make any sense, whichever way you look at it. Those "crack aging" people are obviously Chinese copycats or someone trying to deliberately make terraternal look bad.

Edited by Robert89, 14 October 2011 - 04:31 PM.

[Anthony_Loera]

I don't think so, the bottles are the same (terraternal and the crackaging).

So taking the servers from US to Swiss, and having a china address makes me wonder what they are trying to avoid. Typically chinese companies don't start out with US servers hosting their website. So you got to wonder why all they cloak and dagger with the website unless it is to avoid some legal stuff here in the USA.

Did you look at the screenshot?

A

[Robert89]

Sure I took at look at the screen shot. However, it doesn't prove anything, as the terraternal website is online and active, which logically, they would have taken it down if there was a scam going on. Besides, the Chinese website has just taken the pictures of terraternal's products and spent 2 minutes in some image editing software to slap on a fake logo. If you were terraternal, why would you destroy your own brand?

Anyway, this is kinda getting away from the point of my post. Cycloastragenol seems to be past it's prime as a reliable way to increase telomerase activity in the body. That's where it counts. If you look back at the 50 or so pages of this thread, you'll see this issue has come up several times - it works in the test tube but cant get into the blood stream efficiently.

I wish you the best in getting a new formulation done - it would be nice to have a telomerase activator that actually worked (and was bio-available). I for one would buy it and use it.

Edited by Robert89, 15 October 2011 - 03:59 AM.

[Chopperboy]

I disagree about Cyclo not working - it may be hard to absorb but it certainly has a dramatic effect. We hear the same story for Chrysin, science says its useless because its hard to absorb, but at 5g per day it certainly does work. This absorbancy argument is a bit like cutting an asprin into 12 pieces and then saying "it didn't fix my headache". Also different people are more sensitive to drugs and supplements than others.

Anthony are some of these ingredients on your new list?
I notice Hawthorn is mentioned twice...

[maxwatt]

anthony, u should test resveratrol for telomerase activation at different concentrations.
There are conflicting studies, some say it blocks, others say it activates telomerase. It may be concentration dependant?

[Pantheon]

So far there is no any conclusion or independent research on whether cycloastragenol activates telomerase in vivo in human beings (source pubmed). Personally, due to the luck of scientific evidence, I’m more inclined to take into account users’ claims that are able to become guinea pigs and undergo independent lab tests. The forum user GreenPower has been into both astragalus extract (standardized for min 0.5% glycosides and 70% polysaccharides) and cycloastragenol for a couple of months. While independent lab results gave a low to none telomere increase for cycloastragenol, the use of Astragalus extract clearly demonstrated telomerase activation. However my only concern is that during the astragalus extract regime, he combined meditation which also proves to activate telomerase. (http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21035949) .

I suggest that instead of just concentrating on one substance for telomerase activation, that could also be done with astragalus extracts and probably with other adaptogens like Ginseng (ginsenosides?), Echinachea, Reishi, Ashwagandha. To complete my proposal the research can be organised through this forum, we can as users and members raise money for such purpose. Think that 10-12 members can easily volunteer for a larger scale research. The raised funds may be used for analysis purposes while users may only need to pay for the supplements under research.

Concerning the Price of Cycloastragenol: My Personal view is that raw cycloastragenol is not that expensive as is touted to be; the expectations are great and it simply allows for a bigger profit margin. Last year I bought in retail 1gr of 98% of cycloastragenol, directly from a reliable pharm company, accompanied with a certificate of analysis, for 140$ (101€) , which equals to 21$ (15€) for 5mg/30days. I’m sure the wholesale price for 1kgr and over is much cheaper. Take into account that many companies sell cycloastragenol of 80%, 60% or less concentration which allows much of adulteration to be done or may contain other undesired or harmful substances.

[Robert89]

I disagree about Cyclo not working - it may be hard to absorb but it certainly has a dramatic effect. We hear the same story for Chrysin, science says its useless because its hard to absorb, but at 5g per day it certainly does work. This absorbancy argument is a bit like cutting an asprin into 12 pieces and then saying "it didn't fix my headache". Also different people are more sensitive to drugs and supplements than others.

Fair point. I agree that 5g of cycloastragenol cut into 12 pieces wouldn't have much of an effect either. Thus increasing the dose might be a solution?

However would 5 or even 25g work any better? The 5g-25g a day study done by TA Sciences didn't show clear evidence of it working in it's age reversal role - the study didn't release all the data, and earlier in this thread, it was pointed out the study was vague. For a start, it seemed a lot of the people who started taking TA-65 stopped and didn't carry on for the full three years. If it worked, why would anyone stop?

Also, Carol Greider, who as you know, actually got the Nobel relating to telomeres/ telomerase, says "I haven't actually seen yet that they change telomere length, which is the clear real indicator". Either she's deliberately denying the usefulness of cycloastragenol, or she's got a valid reason for saying that.

Finally, Bill Andrews, the pioneer in the field of telomerase, has himself said recently that (1) he didn't test TA-65 (cycloastragenol) and then also said (2) that he did test it and it didn't have any significant action. This seems a bit evasive and disingenuous.

All that doesn't add up to a very convincing argument for cycloastragenol or TA-65.

What do TA Sciences day? The main results of all the published studies by TA Sciences for TA-65 or TAT-2 are all related to alleged improvements in immune system. However, in the very first pilot study, they stated NK cell population increased considerably over the control population using TA-65, and that this was a good thing. However in the paper published this year, they showed NK population went down with larger doses of TA-65, as much as 20%, and that this was good and indicated an "age reversal". I would say that these conclusions are at odds with each other.

My money (which is limited, therefore I need to be careful how I spend it :-) is on taking the astragalus root extract in its original refined state, without extracting any particular compound. Others (ex. GreenPower) on this forum have taken it in that state, and reported very good improvements.

Edited by Robert89, 17 October 2011 - 08:50 AM.

[niner]

Has anyone published anything on the pharmacokinetics of cycloastragenol? There's a lot out there on A4, but I don't see anything obvious on cycloastragenol. Here's an example on A4:

Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2007 Apr-Jun;32(2):75-9.
Pharmacokinetics of astragaloside iv in beagle dogs.

Zhang Q, Zhu LL, Chen GG, Du Y.

College of Life Science and Pharmacy, Nanjing University of Technology, Nanjing, People's Republic of China. zqapple@126.com

In this study, the pharmacokinetics of Astragaloside iv (AGS-IV) in Beagle dogs was studied by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (MS). The concentrations of the drugs in plasma were determined after i.v. administration of 0.5, 1, 2 mg.kg(-1) AGS-IV and p.o. administration of 10 mg.kg(-1) AGS-IV. The areas under concentration-time curve (AUC) were linearly correlated to the doses administrated. The absolute bioavailability of AGS-IV after p.o. administration was found to be 7.4%. The plasma protein binding rate of AGS-IV was about 90% within a concentration range of 250-1000 ng.ml(-1). There was no significant species difference regarding the pharmacokinetics of AGS-IV between the rat and the Beagle dog.
PMID: 17702194

The following study suggests ways to improve absorption:

Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2006 Jan-Mar;31(1):5-10.


Absorption enhancement study of astragaloside IV based on its transport mechanism in caco-2 cells.
Huang CR, Wang GJ, Wu XL, Li H, Xie HT, Lv H, Sun JG.

Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetic Research Center, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the transport characteristics and mechanisms for discovering the possible causes of the low bioavailability of astragaloside IV and to develop an absorption enhancement strategy. Caco-2 cells used as the in vitro model. Results showed a low permeability coefficient (3.7 x 10(-8)cm/s for transport from the AP to BL direction), which remained unchanged throughout the concentration range studied, indicating that the transport of astragaloside IV was predominantly via a passive route. The AP to BL transport of astragaloside IV was found to be highly sensitive to the extracellular Ca2+ concentration, which suggested that its transport may be via a paracellular route. Both chitosan and sodium deoxycholate can increase the permeation efficiency of astragaloside IV. This study indicated that astragaloside IV having a low fraction dose absorbed in humans mainly due to its poor intestinal permeability, high molecular weight, low lipophilicity as well as its paracelluar transport may directly result in the low permeability through its passive transport. Meanwhile, chitosan and sodium deoxycholate can be used as absorption enhancers based on its transport mechanism.

PMID: 16715776

So, if the bioavailability of oral A4 is 7.4% without any help, and cycloastragenol is more or less the A4 aglycone, how bad could it be? Greider may have gotten the Nobel for doing the grunt work in the search for telomerase, but that doesn't necessarily mean she's a pharmacokineticist. She seems to have an attitude regarding people taking telomerase activators; she seems to be opposed to it. From what I've read, she may not like that some people in the telomerase world are jumping on the financial bandwagon. I'd just take some of her statements with a grain of salt.

[Chopperboy]

I disagree about Cyclo not working - it may be hard to absorb but it certainly has a dramatic effect. We hear the same story for Chrysin, science says its useless because its hard to absorb, but at 5g per day it certainly does work. This absorbancy argument is a bit like cutting an asprin into 12 pieces and then saying "it didn't fix my headache". Also different people are more sensitive to drugs and supplements than others.

Fair point. I agree that 5g of cycloastragenol cut into 12 pieces wouldn't have much of an effect either. Thus increasing the dose might be a solution?

Also, Carol Greider, who as you know, actually got the Nobel relating to telomeres/ telomerase, says "I haven't actually seen yet that they change telomere length, which is the clear real indicator". Either she's deliberately denying the usefulness of cycloastragenol, or she's got a valid reason for saying that.

My guess is that cyclo activates telomerase in cells where it already has some level of activation. And doesn't activate it much in cells where its normally inactive. i.e. telomerase is boosted in immune/ hair folicle / eye cells etc.

[niner]

My guess is that cyclo activates telomerase in cells where it already has some level of activation. And doesn't activate it much in cells where its normally inactive. i.e. telomerase is boosted in immune/ hair folicle / eye cells etc.

It's been reported to decrease the fraction of cells with very short telomeres. Maybe those cells are in a state that makes them more susceptible to cyclo? It could be something like you speculate.

[Robert89]

Has anyone published anything on the pharmacokinetics of cycloastragenol? There's a lot out there on A4, but I don't see anything obvious on cycloastragenol. Here's an example on A4:

Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2007 Apr-Jun;32(2):75-9.
Pharmacokinetics of astragaloside iv in beagle dogs.

Zhang Q, Zhu LL, Chen GG, Du Y.

College of Life Science and Pharmacy, Nanjing University of Technology, Nanjing, People's Republic of China. zqapple@126.com

In this study, the pharmacokinetics of Astragaloside iv (AGS-IV) in Beagle dogs was studied by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (MS). The concentrations of the drugs in plasma were determined after i.v. administration of 0.5, 1, 2 mg.kg(-1) AGS-IV and p.o. administration of 10 mg.kg(-1) AGS-IV. The areas under concentration-time curve (AUC) were linearly correlated to the doses administrated. The absolute bioavailability of AGS-IV after p.o. administration was found to be 7.4%. The plasma protein binding rate of AGS-IV was about 90% within a concentration range of 250-1000 ng.ml(-1). There was no significant species difference regarding the pharmacokinetics of AGS-IV between the rat and the Beagle dog.
PMID: 17702194

So, if the bioavailability of oral A4 is 7.4% without any help, and cycloastragenol is more or less the A4 aglycone, how bad could it be? Greider may have gotten the Nobel for doing the grunt work in the search for telomerase, but that doesn't necessarily mean she's a pharmacokineticist. She seems to have an attitude regarding people taking telomerase activators; she seems to be opposed to it. From what I've read, she may not like that some people in the telomerase world are jumping on the financial bandwagon. I'd just take some of her statements with a grain of salt.

Good find. Thanks!

Based on what happened with the dogs - A4 delivers 7.4%, and you'd expect the figure to be higher with cyclo, as it was reported in this thread earlier that it's molecular size was smaller, thus more bioavailable. It could be as much as 10% or more on that basis?

Then it does seem Greider is being rather negative? and doesn't want joe public taking telomerase activators. She could be feeling a bit left out of the financial bandwagon and a bit resentful?

However, these findings do still seem at odds with the ultimate 'proof of the pudding' results - that is, if TA-65 had really been working, why did so many people drop out of the 'patton protocol' during the 3 years they were testing it on customers? If it worked on eyes, skin, hair, immune system, I certainly wouldn't stop taking it. I can't think of anyone who would say, "hey, I'll stop getting younger, one years good enough for me, bring those wrinkles back!". It'd be something you would want to do as long as possible. During those three years, the price was falling drastically as well, so it wasn't the price issue either.

[Anthony_Loera]

My guess is that cyclo activates telomerase in cells where it already has some level of activation. And doesn't activate it much in cells where its normally inactive. i.e. telomerase is boosted in immune/ hair folicle / eye cells etc.

From a recent patent it shows skin healing, so I am not sure your statement is correct:
http://appft1.uspto....enol AND harley

I believe it can work on cells with critically short telomeres, whether its in an HIV cells, or aged cells.

Cheers
A

[johnross47]

Much of that patent application passes over my head but I get the general message....it is very broad.....older British readers may be reminded of Lily the Pink and her Medicinal Compound........which was "most efficacious in every case"
How do those numbers translate into doses for of astragalus extract for example? I would guess there is just not quite enough information.....and the availability issue is unresolved.

[niner]

Based on what happened with the dogs - A4 delivers 7.4%, and you'd expect the figure to be higher with cyclo, as it was reported in this thread earlier that it's molecular size was smaller, thus more bioavailable. It could be as much as 10% or more on that basis?

Then it does seem Greider is being rather negative? and doesn't want joe public taking telomerase activators. She could be feeling a bit left out of the financial bandwagon and a bit resentful?

However, these findings do still seem at odds with the ultimate 'proof of the pudding' results - that is, if TA-65 had really been working, why did so many people drop out of the 'patton protocol' during the 3 years they were testing it on customers? If it worked on eyes, skin, hair, immune system, I certainly wouldn't stop taking it. I can't think of anyone who would say, "hey, I'll stop getting younger, one years good enough for me, bring those wrinkles back!". It'd be something you would want to do as long as possible. During those three years, the price was falling drastically as well, so it wasn't the price issue either.

I wouldn't be surprised to see 10% with cycloastragenol. It would be nice if someone measured it, which probably has happened somewhere, but I haven't seen it published. I do think Greider is being overly negative. The people who dropped out of the Patton Protocol might have had expectations that were too high. If wrinkles are mostly caused by glycation and photodamage, for example, or grey hair by oxidative destruction of melanocytes, then telomeres wouldn't help those problems. Even if the price was coming down, it was still pretty high, I suspect, if what they were hoping for was something that telomere elongation wouldn't help.

[Chopperboy]

My guess is that cyclo activates telomerase in cells where it already has some level of activation. And doesn't activate it much in cells where its normally inactive. i.e. telomerase is boosted in immune/ hair folicle / eye cells etc.

From a recent patent it shows skin healing, so I am not sure your statement is correct:
http://appft1.uspto....enol+AND+harley

I believe it can work on cells with critically short telomeres, whether its in an HIV cells, or aged cells.

Cheers
A

I agree that skin cells are likely one of the types where it shows activity.

According to Bill Andrews telomere length is notoriously hard to measure - a bit like throwing a thousand cigarettes on the floor and then trying to work out the average length by eye.

[GreenPower]

I wouldn't be surprised to see 10% with cycloastragenol. It would be nice if someone measured it, which probably has happened somewhere, but I haven't seen it published. I do think Greider is being overly negative. The people who dropped out of the Patton Protocol might have had expectations that were too high. If wrinkles are mostly caused by glycation and photodamage, for example, or grey hair by oxidative destruction of melanocytes, then telomeres wouldn't help those problems. Even if the price was coming down, it was still pretty high, I suspect, if what they were hoping for was something that telomere elongation wouldn't help.

They might not have had the financial muscles to do the Patton protocol for an extended time. But they might also have suffered from negative side effects which made them stop using it. It would be nice to see an explanation for the dropout rate.

Have anyone in this thread been taking larger doses of cycloastragenol (10-50mg/day) and what was your experience with regards to side effects?

[Methos000]

Have anyone in this thread been taking larger doses of cycloastragenol (10-50mg/day) and what was your experience with regards to side effects?

I've been taking 10-15 (currently 15) mg for the past 6 months. The only side effect I have to report is a tendency to awaken 30-90 minutes earlier than desired, and an inability to then return to sleep.

[boylan]

Have anyone in this thread been taking larger doses of cycloastragenol (10-50mg/day) and what was your experience with regards to side effects?

I've been taking 10-15 (currently 15) mg for the past 6 months. The only side effect I have to report is a tendency to awaken 30-90 minutes earlier than desired, and an inability to then return to sleep.

Methos,

Any postives?

[mikeinnaples]

Have anyone in this thread been taking larger doses of cycloastragenol (10-50mg/day) and what was your experience with regards to side effects?

I was taking 10mg a day before it become cost prohibitive during my 'on cycle'. I didnt notice any side effect to speak of.

[Methos000]

Have anyone in this thread been taking larger doses of cycloastragenol (10-50mg/day) and what was your experience with regards to side effects?

I've been taking 10-15 (currently 15) mg for the past 6 months. The only side effect I have to report is a tendency to awaken 30-90 minutes earlier than desired, and an inability to then return to sleep.

Methos,

Any postives?

Apart from celebrating my 158th birthday recently along with Aubrey de Grey?

Well, my weight is trending downwards, and I haven't been sick a day since I've been taking the CycloA.
I generally have more youthful mental and physical resilience. It may be pure luck, but I was pain-free after being rear-ended by another driver 2 weeks ago. My wife is complaining of quite a bit of back pain, but I'm not experiencing any issues (I was driving; she was in the passenger seat).

Unfortunately, I didn't have the 'before' blood work done. I plan to have my biomarkers measured soon to compare with later phases of the cycloastragenol protocol.

I'm on a 2 weeks on, 1 week off schedule. I go crazy with the supposed telomerase inhibitors on the off weeks, and restrict them otherwise.

[Pantheon]

They might not have had the financial muscles to do the Patton protocol for an extended time. But they might also have suffered from negative side effects which made them stop using it. It would be nice to see an explanation for the dropout rate.

Have anyone in this thread been taking larger doses of cycloastragenol (10-50mg/day) and what was your experience with regards to side effects?

I been on cyclo for nearly a year: 5mg Astral and then moved to 10-15mg 98% raw cyclo and even tried 20mg, but can't say I noticed any positive or negative side effects, but again I've taken it at night before bed.

GreenPower I think in a past post you've mentioned brain fog with a 10mg dose of cyclo, me too 've experienced brain fog and nausea with other supplements (including pure 500mg trans-resv) and nootropics as well, Think that many side effects are part of body's warning mechanism as a result of large doses that may interfere with normal body function; just wonder if supplementation with choline helps alleviate brain fog issues.

[Chopperboy]

Have anyone in this thread been taking larger doses of cycloastragenol (10-50mg/day) and what was your experience with regards to side effects?

I've been taking 10-15 (currently 15) mg for the past 6 months. The only side effect I have to report is a tendency to awaken 30-90 minutes earlier than desired, and an inability to then return to sleep.

My experiences:

Benefits:
1) Strong feeling of well being, feeling youthful and optimistic
2) More active/ energy, enjoy exercising
3) More driven to get projects completed
4) Better eyesight (colour, contrast and sharpness)
5) Increased libido
6) Reduction in wart sizes (warts that were perhaps 8 or less years old shrunk dramatically)
7) Appreciate music more - can now hear conversations in noisy environments easily
8) Stronger hair growth
9) Bitter foods seem to taste more bitter

Side effects:
1) Temporarily can causes a loss of short recall memory - goes away a few days after stopping.
2) Occasional indigestion
3) Increased energy and brain function can cause "early awakening" making it difficult to go back to sleep.
4) Strange skin wart or spot flares up then disappears

[thelongevityrevolution.tv]

Anyone have any experience with the "McKenzie Protocol"?
TA-65 is way too pricey!

Mackenzie Protocol is called HTA98 and is 98% cycloastragenol

[niner]

Anyone have any experience with the "McKenzie Protocol"?
TA-65 is way too pricey!

Mackenzie Protocol is called HTA98 and is 98% cycloastragenol

Mackenzie will sell you cycloastragenol, as long as you promise not to use it as a "consumer". He reports that Codex Alimentarius forces this. He's offering 98% cycloastragenol for .39 to .67 GBP/milligram, depending on quantity. Probably less if you really buy a lot.

[unglued]

... Cancer? No I dont think so:
I already mentioned cancer and transient telomerase before. It is not an issue, otherwise a cold would likely give you cancer. ...

By that logic, we know that telomerase activation doesn't slow or reverse aging, since getting a cold doesn't slow or reverse aging.

[hamishm00]

how do you know?

[Getm]

I can't quickly post on Product B thread so maybe I post it here because it's interesting.

There's a movie here, Bill says Product B induces telomerase and is superior to TA-65:

[Anthony_Loera]

You cant post to the Product B thread, but you somehow did spend time logging in?

Okay...

There's a movie here, Bill says Product B induces telomerase and is superior to TA-65

Getm, your stated the quote above. Now Is it all correct?


Here is the transcript:

******************************************************************************
In Minute 2:32 Bill Andrews states:
"Product B is a lot lot cheaper than TA-65, it doesn't require a doctor's prescription and Product B comes with a whole bunch of other things, a whole package. It's not just telomerase induction, it's also protecting telomeres in every other way. So in those ways Product B is Superior than TA-65."

Also, on Minute 4:11 he states:
"I take 3 capsules every morning and 3 capsules every evening."
******************************************************************************


Lets take the claims one by one:

******************************************************************************
Claim 1: "Product B is a lot lot cheaper than TA-65"
So now let's do the price calculation for Product B:
$99 for 120 Capsules. If you take 6 capsules a day like Bill Andrews, a months worth about $148.50.

Is this claim correct?
Maybe, we confirm that it is cheaper than TA-65... but really, by how much? Let's say you want to keep up with Bill Andrews regimen of 180 capsules a month. Well Product B doesn't come in 180 capsule bottles. It comes in only 120 capsule bottles. That means you need to purchase 2 bottles every month, and juggle pills every 2nd or 3rd month. How much is 2 bottles a month? Well it is $198 + $8.95 for shipping. Total of $206.95. That kind of pricing is looking more and more like TA-65 pricing, doesn't it? Heck for $12.05 more you can afford to get TA-65, and not juggle pills every 2 to 3 months. So is it a lot lot cheaper? No, but the price is a bit cheaper.
******************************************************************************

******************************************************************************
Claim 2: "it doesn't require a doctor's prescription"
Product B is sold on a website for $99 for less than a month's worth of product, and does not require a doctor's prescription.

Is this claim correct?
Yes, however TA-65 does not require a doctor's prescription either. It's available online in the RevGenetics website as proof that it can be ordered by anyone without a doctor.
******************************************************************************

******************************************************************************
Claim 3: "Product B comes with a whole bunch of other things, a whole package."
Product B is a formulation with a whole bunch of ingredients that make up the formulation. However many of the ingredients are telomerase inhibitors.

Is this claim correct?
Yes, the formulation has lots of ingredients, however many are telomerase inhibitors.
******************************************************************************

******************************************************************************
Claim 4: "It's not just telomerase induction."
Product B formulation, with all of the ingredients has never been tested. We at RevGenetics so far have inconclusive evidence on any telomerase activation. We continue to gather data to see if there is any evidence of telomerase that is statistically conclusive.

Is this claim correct?
No, the claim has not been proven correct.
******************************************************************************

******************************************************************************
Claim 5: "So in those ways Product B is Superior than TA-65."
The most important claim is claim 4, regarding telomerase activation. Since that one has yet to be proven, even by third parties like RevGenetics, this claim is not correct... (it's possible when all the data is gathered that this claim could be accurate, but it is not at this time.)

Is this claim correct?
No, the claim has not been proven correct.
******************************************************************************

I am sure this can be moved to the Product B thread if you really want it there, and just didn't have the time to post it correctly.

Cheers

A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 06 November 2011 - 07:43 PM.