602 replies to this topic

[PhilZulli]

It is not accurate to say that you can reach those conclusions from reading a label, or that labels with identical ingredients give the same results. The sourcing of ingredients and especially the way they are processed can be a night and day difference in results. The other products that claim to activate telomerase, with few exceptions, do not produce that result in vitro in Dr. Andrews' lab. Product B™ does, and according to Dr. Andrews produces a much stronger effect than the others. Dr. Andrews is an ultramarathon runner and in the last two years his times have dropped and he is running more races, competing successfully with runners two age groups below his age of 60. He publicly gives all the credit to Isagenix and Product B™.

Also, we would not "have known a long time ago" whether ingredients have an effect on telomere length. The technology is new, developed by Dr. Bill Andrews. I'm not sure if you are reading my posts completely, or whether you have already reached a conclusion, Mind. If your mind is open, I do look forward to having you as a customer when the studies are published. But many people weigh the evidence for themselves and are using Product B™ now and seeing results that make them happy.

[Kevnzworld]

It is not accurate to say that you can reach those conclusions from reading a label, or that labels with identical ingredients give the same results. The sourcing of ingredients and especially the way they are processed can be a night and day difference in results. The other products that claim to activate telomerase, with few exceptions, do not produce that result in vitro in Dr. Andrews' lab. Product B™ does, and according to Dr. Andrews produces a much stronger effect than the others. Dr. Andrews is an ultramarathon runner and in the last two years his times have dropped and he is running more races, competing successfully with runners two age groups below his age of 60. He publicly gives all the credit to Isagenix and Product B™.

Also, we would not "have known a long time ago" whether ingredients have an effect on
telomere length. The technology is new, developed by Dr. Bill Andrews. I'm not sure if you are reading my posts completely, or whether you have already reached a conclusion, Mind. If your mind is open, I do look forward to having you as a customer when the studies are published. But many people weigh the evidence for themselves and are using Product B™ now and seeing results that make them happy.

I think most of us have open minds. Anecdotal evidence regarding Dr Andrews marathon times is nieither scientific or persuasive. We need to see real, peer reviewed , controlled studies done by an accredited academic institution.
Regarding the ingredients. I am not aware, or have not read that the company that sells " product B", actually extracts and standardizes their own raw ingredients ( silymarin etc ). So when you say night and day....what specifically makes their components special, new science etc? I agree that there are low cost Chinese made products out there that aren't standardized, but I think the longecity crowd knows that...
So that beng said, what differentiates the ingredients in product B ?

[PhilZulli]

I want to again be clear that I am not here to pitch Product B™ or sell product. I found this forum and saw lots of confusion about telomere activators and Product B™ and I wanted to offer my experiences and information.

Kevnsworld asked "what differentiates the ingredients in product B?". The only answer that we can talk about right now is results; the testing on human cells at Dr. Andrews lab, the results in the field, and independent testing that is not peer-reviewed or published.

Different people require different kinds of "proof". As a marketer and natural health advocate, I need to see a base of information that jives with my experience, plus significant noticeable results that are consistent among large groups of people. Results that some dismiss as "anecdotal" are life-changing and very real to others. For me personally, the benefit of peer-reviewed studies is simply legal validation that allow us to discuss results and benefits more openly and more completely.

Frankly, it's hard for me to understand why some people put all of their faith in peer-reviewed studies and ignore what seems to be common-sense to others. There are peer-reviewed studies that "prove" that cigarette smoking is not harmful and that fish oil is not beneficial for heart health, for example. That is good new for people who like to smoke and who think nutritional supplements are just snake-oil. That may make them feel good emotionally, but their bodies will pay a price. A top clinician once told me that at the highest levels clinicians are paid according to their ability to design a study that produces the desired result. That is consistent with my observations in many cases.

Isagenix is $300 million/yr. well-respected company. Dr. Andrews is recognized as one of the world experts in telomeres. Other top people in their fields are involved in the project. It is hard to understand why these people would risk their reputations on a false product. And, the two major studies that are underway are not cheap to finance. Why would anyone risk a million dollars to take a chance on the product being proved false?

We know what Product B™ does. It'll take another year before we can legally and openly talk about what it does. I have seen preliminary results and when we can talk about what is really happening with this product, it is my opinion that it will change the way people look at healthcare. Isagenix has beefed up infrastructure to support 2000% growth from where we are now (we're up 35% this year based on word-of-mouth results). We know what's coming, and for me it is something I've been working towards for almost 30 years; the validation of the superiority of high-quality nutritional supplements over pharmaceutical drugs in human health.

[Andey]

Phil, as you remember I am on your side )
But on this forum common sense for majority of people is to trust only numbers, not words )
There are a lot of good reasons why when we talk about drug efficiency we talk about study results not about anecdotal reports and common sense.
In human history there are a lot of examples when for several generations common sense lead to terrible mistakes -good example is blood bleeding procedure in medieval, that was prescribed for common sense even when patient already in anemia state or even when he loose already a lot of blood caused be direct wound. It could not be happen if medieval medics use peer reviewed studies ))

Here in this forum the main problem with Product B is lack of real objective information ) I am glad to hear that there are some studies ongoing and so far their results are somehow positive, and this is the main message that you give here. Its pitty that you cannon share intermediate results with us but we all understand your point.

[Kevnzworld]

That's all good Phil. There are " secret " tests that prove its efficacy. I take most of the product B's ingredients already so I hope the science validates the claims. I just question , why put the product out first, and withhold the studies? Shouldn't the science come first? Before the hype?
I repeat my first and most important question since you brought the subject up in a previous post. Does Isagenix produce, standardize or extract it's own proprietary ingredients for product B, or just combine them. ( yes or no )

[Telo]

Phil
Always good to have an "insider" on the forum:)
So, when will the results be official, late 2013 or early 2013?
I would love to try it but it's not available in my country (Sweden).
When do you think it will be available for purchase in more countries?
What exactly is stopping them from making it available worldwide?
Customs /import regulations? Different classifications of some of the ingredients (supplement / drug)?

[Robert89]

I want to again be clear that I am not here to pitch Product B™ or sell product. I found this forum and saw lots of confusion about telomere activators and Product B™ and I wanted to offer my experiences and information.

Different people require different kinds of "proof". As a marketer and natural health advocate, I need to see a base of information that jives with my experience, plus significant noticeable results that are consistent among large groups of people. Results that some dismiss as "anecdotal" are life-changing and very real to others. For me personally, the benefit of peer-reviewed studies is simply legal validation that allow us to discuss results and benefits more openly and more completely.

Frankly, it's hard for me to understand why some people put all of their faith in peer-reviewed studies and ignore what seems to be common-sense to others. There are peer-reviewed studies that "prove" that cigarette smoking is not harmful and that fish oil is not beneficial for heart health, for example.

Really? You sound like you are looking for new customers. You have no data nor facts. Just marketing hype.
Lets face it. You are are looking for new customers, but have no data to support your claims.


Also, There are NO studies that prove cigarette is not harmful etc.

[Kevnzworld]

Ok, Who is Isagenix? Those who have been reading forums like this are well acquainted with marketers offering up amazing claims, proprietary formulations and breakthrough science... The problem is the lack of scientific backup from impartial parties. ( not the marketer ).
Isagenix is just another MLM...we get alot of them on Longecity.
I repeat ( again ) my question to anybody from Isagenix, or product B. Do you isolate and standardize your own extracts of the polyphenols in the product? Or do you buy them and then combine them? Why do you market and sell Product B first, and offer the promise of " studies " later ?
Who is Isagwnix anyway?
http://www.isagenix....pportunity.html

[hav]

...

Here is the current list of ingredients. As I mentioned, it is being updated batch to batch as new, better "hits' are discovered. Isagenix doesn't mind spending money to continually improve their products. But this is where it is right now.

Here's a fuller view of the ingredients list from the Isagenix site that indicates a serving size of 2 capsules recommended to be taken twice a day. I don't believe the rest of the ingredient list has changed, other than perhaps the omission of the 2x a day recommendation since I first posted it in August of 2011 earlier this thread.

But I do have a question. Apparently Silymarin is considered by Isagenix to be the breakthrough telomere lengthening ingredient and most published research on Silymarin bio-availability considers proprietary form of it, Siliphos, to have about 10x higher bio-availability than ordinary Silymarin extracts. My question is, does Product B use the Siliphos form? The ingredient label doesn't mention it. Or does Isagenix claim to have developed a Silymarin type with greater bio-availability than Siliphos?

Howard

[Turnbuckle]

...

Here is the current list of ingredients. As I mentioned, it is being updated batch to batch as new, better "hits' are discovered. Isagenix doesn't mind spending money to continually improve their products. But this is where it is right now.

Here's a fuller view of the ingredients list from the Isagenix site that indicates a serving size of 2 capsules recommended to be taken twice a day. I don't believe the rest of the ingredient list has changed, other than perhaps the omission of the 2x a day recommendation since I first posted it in August of 2011 earlier this thread.

But I do have a question. Apparently Silymarin is considered by Isagenix to be the breakthrough telomere lengthening ingredient and most published research on Silymarin bio-availability considers proprietary form of it, Siliphos, to have about 10x higher bio-availability than ordinary Silymarin extracts. My question is, does Product B use the Siliphos form? The ingredient label doesn't mention it. Or does Isagenix claim to have developed a Silymarin type with greater bio-availability than Siliphos?

Howard

Whenever a product has this many ingredients to achieve one end, it's usually because the packager doesn't know what he's doing, or else he's trying to hide the one ingredient that actually does the job. If it's the second case, customers could just save their money and buy the active ingredient--silymarin.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 23 October 2012 - 11:59 AM.

[Andey]

...Apparently Silymarin is considered by Isagenix to be the breakthrough telomere lengthening ingredient...

Interesting ) Why do you think so ?

[Turnbuckle]

Isagenix is $300 million/yr. well-respected company...Isagenix has beefed up infrastructure to support 2000% growth from where we are now...

So you expect to reach $6 billion/year?

[hav]

...Apparently Silymarin is considered by Isagenix to be the breakthrough telomere lengthening ingredient...

Interesting ) Why do you think so ?

Because of the way the patent application for Product B reads which was posted by Louis earlier in this thread...

Howard

Edited by hav, 23 October 2012 - 07:00 PM.

[Turnbuckle]

...Apparently Silymarin is considered by Isagenix to be the breakthrough telomere lengthening ingredient...

Interesting ) Why do you think so ?

Because of the way the patent application for Product B reads which was posted by Louis earlier in this thread...

Howard

Rather unimpressive. The patent gives data on only one human subject who took something like the "B" formulation for 4 months, where his telomeres went from 8.3 kp to 8.44 kp. No mention of error range, no control, no indication of cell type, and no useful statistics whatsoever.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 23 October 2012 - 08:41 PM.

[RJ100]

Good lord, what a cluster f of ingredients.

If you took all of those separately you could at least subtract sups individually or raise/lower dosages as needed.

[Turnbuckle]

1. A method of increasing telomere length in humans comprising administering an effective amount of milk thistle extract in a pharmaceutically effective carrier.

2. A composition for inducing increase in telomere length in humans comprising about 50% by weight milk thistle seed extract, about 25% in a combination of horny goat weed extract, grape seed extract, turmeric root extract, ashwagandha root extract, bacopa leaf extract, N-acetyl-L-cysteine, pomegranate fruit extract, DL-alpha lipoic acid, and Asian ginseng root extract, and 25% in a combination of berberine rhizome extract, bilberry fruit extract, blueberry fruit extract, red raspberry fruit extract, green tea leaf extract, white tea leaf extract, black tea leaf extract, acacia bark extract, plantain leaf extract, L-glutathione, velvet bean extract, hawthorn root extract, quercetin, boswellia fruit extract, maca root extract, hawthorn fruit extract, resveratrol, harada fruit extract, shillajit extract, and chia seed extract.

3. A method of increasing telomere length in humans comprising administering an effective amount of a composition comprising about 50% by weight milk thistle seed extract, about 25% in a combination of horny goat weed extract, grape seed extract, turmeric root extract, ashwagandha root extract, bacopa leaf extract, N-acetyl-L-cysteine, pomegranate fruit extract, DL-alpha lipoic acid, and Asian ginseng root extract, and 25% in a combination of berberine rhizome extract, bilberry fruit extract, blueberry fruit extract, red raspberry fruit extract, green tea leaf extract, white tea leaf extract, black tea leaf extract, acacia bark extract, plantain leaf extract, L-glutathione, velvet bean extract, hawthorn root extract, quercetin, boswellia fruit extract, maca root extract, hawthorn fruit extract, resveratrol, harada fruit extract, shillajit extract, and chia seed extract.

These are the claims, and the first one is the important one. It reveals that milk thistle extract is the really important ingredient, and the other claims are fall back. They won't get the first claim, and even if they did, anyone can still sell it for other purposes thus it won't be worth much. Claims 2&3 are so specific as to be worthless. Still, this will allow them to claim patent pending on the bottle.

[Andey]

Because of the way the patent application for Product B reads which was posted by Louis earlier in this thread...

Howard

Thanks, it looks right )

[hav]

Because of the way the patent application for Product B reads which was posted by Louis earlier in this thread...

Howard

Rather unimpressive. The patent gives data on only one human subject who took something like the "B" formulation for 4 months, where his telomeres went from 8.3 kp to 8.44 kp. No mention of error range, no control, no indication of cell type, and no useful statistics whatsoever.

I also have questions about the use of the C0057684 screening results being featured as proof of telomerase activation. I couldn't find one peer reviewed study on Pubmed confirming that as a valid telomere screen test. I did find this about it on the the Sierra site. I went looking for some hard numbers to use to compare TA65 and Silymarin but I came up empty. ,But I do seem to recall hearing something, perhaps in one of those audio conferences, that Silymarin scored much higher than TA65 in the screening tests. Closest I came was this interesting presentation by a Dr. Laura Brigg of Sierra with comparative telomerase messaging indicators for TA65, DMSO, and C0057684 in various cell types:

http://5election.com...-life-to-years/


... the most interesting thing I thought was that DMSO scored quite close to TA65 on 2 out of 3 of the non-cancer cells. Which casts further doubt on the patent "evidence" which also employed DMSO. But more fundamentally, previous Pubmed studies on Silymarin telomere effects were conflicting, one reporting telomerase activation and another the opposite. In any event, I have my doubts that the amount used in Product B is likely to do anything unless you take enough of it in a form that is actually bio-available.

Howard

[PhilZulli]

Andey, thanks for the good words. And you touched upon a great point. Some of the responses I see are wrapped up in ideas about "drug efficacy". Product B™ is not a drug and is not limited to the "active ingredient" limitation. In Nature, complex combinations exist that are beyond mankind's capabilities to duplication or synthesize.

Kevnsworld, "secret" studies? Nothing secret about them; they involve known leading scientists in the telomere field. Isagenix is just being responsible in not publishing any results until they are peer-reviewed. You can choose to look carefully at what I've offered here, or not.
To answer your question; YES. please refer back to my post #496, 4th paragraph. Isagenix co-founder John Anderson is one of the leading nutritional product formulators in the world. He knows ingredient sourcing in a way that few can compare to. And his knowledge of processing and preparing ingredients is unrivaled, in my opinion.

Telo, the studies complete by next summer and publication dates will depend on length of the peer-review period. Regarding availability, each country has it's own regulations. Many companies today claim to operate in every country around the world simply because they have a website. Isagenix operates only in countries where we have brick-and-mortar facilities, offices, and warehousing. Currently we are in USA and Puerto Rico, Canada, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.

Robert89, what is your definition of data? I have offered much info here, you may chose to see what you like.

Hav, Howard, once again the ingredients list is just one part of the story. The formulation of those ingredients is proprietary and neither John or Isagenix is likely to reveal the details in order to protect our distinct advantage in the marketplace. Several other companies are trying to get on the bandwagon with identical ingredients, but when tested by Dr. Andrews fail to product even a weak "hit".

Turnbuckle, that's an interesting conclusion you have reached about silymarin. Good luck with it. Regarding the size of our market over the long term, if you had all of the info that Isagenix has, you would also gear up your operations in a big way.

RJ100, what you call a cluster F is going to change a lot of beliefs next year.

Generally speaking, folks, has it occurred to some of you that there may be actually be people somewhere who have more experience and more information than you do? It is very difficult to expand your knowledge of a subject while spending so much energy on cherry-picking some statements and ignoring other statements in order to defend your own beliefs. You could get old that way.

[PhilZulli]

I just saw your last post, Howard. I am impressed with your work.

[Turnbuckle]

Turnbuckle, that's an interesting conclusion you have reached about silymarin. Good luck with it. Regarding the size of our market over the long term, if you had all of the info that Isagenix has, you would also gear up your operations in a big way.

Based on those patent claims and the general quality of the application, I'd say there isn't much chance of grabbing 1/4 of the supplement market with this.

[PhilZulli]

Turnbuckle, thank you for making me proof-read my posts. The 2000% figure I posted was an error. We'll do $350 million this year and Isagenix has infrastructure in place to handle $2 billion and is ready to scale up as needed. 600% was the number I meant to post. I did check the rest of my posts to be sure I didn't make other errors. I like accuracy.

There are good reasons for preparing for that kind of growth. The implications of what we're seeing with Product B™ has the potential to expand the market for supplements. And Isagenix is much more than Product B™. We've just completed a weight-loss study at the University of Illinois, led by Dr. Krista Varady, comparing our program with the #1 doctor-recommended heart-healthy diet. The results were strong. That study is in peer-review right now and we're expecting publication in three medical journals.

There are many reasons why people are aligning with us and plugging into our profit stream now, but many will wait until next year and beyond before they participate. That's what entrepreneurship is all about, recognizing opportunity. Anyone who can reach people in health/wellness related fields has a very large potential opportunity right now.

[Kevnzworld]

You have to love MLM's. ( Multi level marketers ). Amway was the first, then Herbalife, Nuskin, and now a hundred more. Most are now either based out of, or targeting China.. We get at least one new promotion a month now on longecity. They share ne thing in common, alot of nutrients,polyphenols combined, and all marketed to be a new miracle anti aging supplement. Oh by the way...sign up now, get in on the ground floor, and invest in this new fabulous opportunity ...!

[PhilZulli]

I do love what MLM'ers have done for moving nutritional health forward over the last 30 years.

When I started in the nutritional industry, doctors referred to nutritional supplements as 'snake oil" and ridiculed patients who brought good supplements in for their doctor's approval. The media fully supported that view of nutritional supplements. When we introduced fish oil in the mid-80's, CNN did a story with a scientist speaking for the medical establishment, smearing a fish oil capsule onto a piece of paper and stating how ridiculous it was that this fish oil could affect cardio-vascular health. Today, most doctors I know take fish oil every day. Especially cardiologists.

We couldn't fight the media with facts because regulators and others narrowly defined what "facts" are, and limited "facts" to peer-reviewed medical studies. Hundreds of thousands of people getting results is not fact enough when big pharmaceutical money is being threatened. So, as MLM'ers, we mobilized those people and taught them to stand up in their communities and tell people the results they were getting. The training was simple and duplicatable; "I used this product and this is what has happened for me. If you try this product, it may happen for you too. If it doesn't you can get your money back. Try it".

That strategy worked incredibly well and people discovered for themselves the benefits of high-quality supplements. And the sheer numbers of people sharing their results with their family, neighbors, and doctors, along with the huge growth of the nutrition industry, caused the medical establishment to rethink their position. They hate to see other interests get "their" money.

So, we started to hear about Complimentary and Alternative Medicine (CAM). The media started to cover the story with features on Health and Nutrition, and new magazines hit the newsstands with titles like Prevention and Women's Health and articles on nutritional supplements and the latest ingredients. Over the last 15 years I've trained many doctors on how to incorporate nutritionals into their practice. Pharmaceutical companies bought up all the vitamin manufacturers. And today we have aisles of nutritional supplements in every supermarket and department store.

I was at the 1985 Senate Sub-Committee Hearing on Herbalife. In 1993-1994, I helped build awareness for the DHEA Act which passed unanimously after consumers responded with the biggest letter writing campaign since the Vietnam War. I've been in the middle of this thing for 30 years. And I paid attention to what was happening and why it was happening.

I can tell you I firmly believe that none of it would have happened without MLM'ers standing up, talking about results, teaching people about natural health. If we had not been successful, supplements would still be just ridiculed snake oil, and untold numbers of people would have suffered needlessly. I'm proud to be an MLM'er. Today we are known as nutritional network marketers.

[Kevnzworld]

I don't think that multi level marketing pyramid companies like Amway are responsible for the increased awareness and popularity of natural, preventative health interventions. They are a consequence of, not a reason for this metamorphosis.
I think a non profit like Life Extension Foundation, or ACAM, even Andrew Lessman on HSN has been very influential in this regard over of the last 30 years.
It's not that I think that MLM products are all bad. Some are probably good! There is just far too much hype, exaggerated claims, and slimy marketing associated with these companies. They don't originate the science, or research. They are marketing opportunists capitalizing on whatever the latest health fad or headline is.
The latest? Kangen water....Is alkaline water good? Probably. But spending $2700 on a machine that produces it? The claims the reps make about the health effects are outlandish.
I'll stick to Fiji water.

Edited by Kevnzworld, 27 October 2012 - 02:27 AM.

[Andey]

It looks completely counterproductive to discuss MLM marketing here.
Anyway, regardless what company do researches sooner or later they all be in public and this could move our train forward )

For now its a new direction, and more flexible small and MLM companies are trying to move it for their good. Later big pharma companies will join it and I dont think that there would be any difference for average person )

P.S. I am really impressed with intelligence and self awareness level of community here. Not exactly the dream customers for MLM marketing )

[Ivan Ajkula Joksimovic]

Dean from TA Sciences has emailed me back stating the following:

I spoke with Bill last Sunday and he said he and his father still take TA-65 and will continue. If product B was so powerful why would he continue to take TA-65 .Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

I hope Bill Andrews replies soon as well, to maybe help clear this up.


A

You're right.

On the educational seminar, "The Solution to Cellular Aging", October 4th,which we announced in our blog, Bill Andrews has publicly said that he and his father have been taking TA-65 for a long time, and that they will continue taking it in the future! I don’t understand. If he claims that Isagenix Product B is a better product than TA-65 why is he using TA-65. You must admit that this really stinks!



You can find the ingredients of their products on the site of isagenetix. http://www.isagenix....product_b.html. Where is the telomerase activator? Of course, there is no telomerase activator. There is nowhere written telomerase activator, but only Telomere Support. Do you know what Telomere Support means? Telomeres support means slowing down the shortening targeting oxydation, inflammation, methylation but not telomerase activator, the same as claiming telomere support on your low glycemic index diet, gym membership or antioxidants mix you buy from a pharmacy. Then how do they explain their claims that Product B replaces TA65 and not only that, but also that it is far more better in doing that? This is about two different things. Telomere support is not the same as telomerase activation. It is scientifically proven that the only way to activate telomerase is to take TA-65 supplement. And this is the reason why they withdrew earlier claims of telomerase activators from their commercial.



Do you know what is "pharmacokinetics"? Pharmacokinetics is a branch of pharmacology dedicated to the determination of the fate of substances administered externally to a living organism. It describes how things are absorbed in the gut and distributed throughout the blood volume and ultimately the cells. Does Isagenix Product B have this data? No! Only TA-65 has this data, because no one else has bothered to test their products in this way.


I wonder whether Isagenix Product B has been tested for safety and efficacy? The Safety and Efficacy Record for TA-65 is powerful. 5 years of development and safety testing before the introduction of TA-65. There are currently hundreds of clients taking TA-65, some for as long as 3 years. Not a single adverse reaction reported by our licensed physicians. Not a single diagnosis of new cancer. Not a single report of increased cancer load for clients who already had cancer. Not a single diagnosis of new cardiovascular disease. Since TA-65 was tested for safety and efficacy, investigating each claim apart , like a reduction in critically short telomeres, bone density improvements, inflammatory marker reduction, skin and improvements in blood glucose and other “age related” biomarkers, it is the only supplement that has that data.Other products that try to compare with TA-65, or claim that they are more efficient, haven’t undergone such research. They do not even have safety data. They are made by combining several pre-existing supplements that have proven safe, but these combinations can be extremely toxic and cause problems, which individual use of these supplements doesn’t cause. Neither Isagenix Product B or any other "competitor" of supplement TA-65 haven’t undergone human studies, or even mice studies. Do you want to be their experimental mice?

The above mentioned company claims that Product B is several times more effective than TA-65! Great! Ok, then give me Isagenix Product B, but before that show me the human studies first. Indeed, where are the scientific studies that support the claims of Isagenix Product B? There aren’t any! Do you wonder why? Why there is no scientific research of Isagenix Product B on humans? Isn’t that a little weird? Still, this product is allegedly for people. Isn’t it dangerous to consume something that has no scientific proof and the fact that it is not harmful to human health?

This is simply about a million gain through a multi-level marketing (MLM) Isagenix is a MLM marketing scam; the product is secondary. The point of Isagenix is for the dealer to sign up more dealers under him, who buy lots of products hoping to sell them to friends, family, and strangers...which brings profit to the dealer who signed up all those dealers. Each of -those- dealers in turn sign up more dealers, who have to buy product in hopes of selling it to friends, family, and strangers, and the original dealer gets a piece of THEIR sales in commission as well. The guy on the top of the pyramid makes tons of money...

Until all the people beneath him realize that no one wants to buy their crap, and stops selling it. Then, the guy on the top has to rely exclusively on his own personal sales, and discovers none of HIS friends or family wants the crap either. And then, he goes out of business.


It's a pyramid scheme that uses unproven, potentially dangerous, fraudulent food supplements that make medical claims, which is illegal, in an attempt to make the guy at the top rich.


Do you understand now what this is all about? These are not my claims, but it is simply the fact. If you really want to sell expensive poison for mice to your family or friends so that a small group of people at the top of this pyramid can grow rich, then feel free to contact Isagenix and start selling for them, or even in a worse case start consuming Product B youself. In short, even in the inprobable case that is if we would have agreed with all the claims of Isagenix Product B that are mostly false which is scientifically proven, at the end remains the question: "Where are your studies that show what does it do in live people"?

[Andey]

Are you affiliated with TAScience ?
Can I ask you same question that we asked Phil before ?
Can you tell us main telomerase activator substance in it ?
Can you say that margin on TA-65 is less that on so bad MLM company ?

No offense, just to clarify )

Edited by Andey, 29 October 2012 - 12:15 PM.

[Kevnzworld]

Are you affiliated with TAScience ?
Can I ask you same question that we asked Phil before ?
Can you tell us main telomerase activator substance in it ?
Can you say that margin on TA-65 is less that on so bad MLM company ?

No offense, just to clarify )

I don't think the issue is " margins ". Its the method of marketing which he clearly illustrated. A genuinely tested and studied breakthrough product wouldn't need to be marketed and sold this way.
We've all been exposed to multi level marketers knocking on our doors " ding dong its Avon calling ", the Tupperware parties, jewelry parties, Amway salesmen, all trying to build their pyramid fortune. The tactics and sales model never change, just the products being hocked.
That's where the problem occurs for me. I think it's fine for some guy to sign up and open his franchise selling a line of jewelry, cleaning products or even cosmetics to his neighbors.
It's an entirely different thing when the uneducated minions begin going door to door making exaggerated and unfounded health claims regarding nutritional supplements after getting ginned
up full of MLM marketing hype.
That is the definition of the modern day " snake oil " salesman

The label of the product reads like the kitchen sink of supplements. I take many of them. I think the problem is when the term " telomerase activation " is introduced without the appropriate scientific evidence. Isagenix concocts a product with a hot buzzword ( telomere ), makes claims of it's efficacy and promises to do studies that substantiate those claims...later. It's the perverbial cart before the horse.

Edited by Kevnzworld, 29 October 2012 - 05:03 PM.

[Ivan Ajkula Joksimovic]

Are you affiliated with TAScience ?
Can I ask you same question that we asked Phil before ?
Can you tell us main telomerase activator substance in it ?
Can you say that margin on TA-65 is less that on so bad MLM company ?

No offense, just to clarify )

Isagenix Pproduct B cannot

• Make medical or curative claims
• Claim it reverses aging process
• Claim it lengthens telomeres
• Claim it induces telomerase (enzyme
that can reverse telomere shortening



Written at the bottom of the FAQ page

http://www.isagenix....26-64a6571b3d4e