298 replies to this topic

[zorba990]

I've been taking relatively small doses (2 ml or so) at a time, but still have reflux. Could be unrelated, but I've been reflux free for several years, until just recently.

Ever been tested for H. Pylori? I curious as to whether C60 might be capable of bringing that out of hiding which might exacerbate symptoms (then I would expect the symptoms to gradually go away).

[niner]

I don't think that C60 encourages SOD2 production at all; I've never heard any evidence to that effect. It's an antioxidant itself. If anything, I'd expect it to result in a reduction in SOD, since there would be fewer free radicals around to signal a need for more.

I think this is part of the mechanism of increased SOD2 production. The free radicals attach to the C60, yet we believe that the C60 can hang around within lipid membranes for extended periods; this represents something of a concentration of ROS molecules. While in this state they may not pose a danger; but the cells may be reacting to their presence anyway.

This accounts for the theory that the C60 is acting as a catalyst. The continuing effect long after dosing correlates with the extended period it would take to eliminate the C60 from the body.

SOD is a couple orders of magnitude more effective at dealing with endogenous hydrogen peroxide. C60's anti-oxidant mechanism is merely to grab individual ROS molecules and hold them - and it has a finite number of attachment points to do this with. It simply does not have enough attachment points to account for the extended effects.

Are there any reported effects from C60 that can not be explained by a dramatic reduction in hydrogen peroxide levels within the cells?

Yes, I've jumped to a conclusion; but this stone didn't wiggle much when I landed on it.

Edgar, where are you getting your information? This stuff about 'attachment points' is nonsense. That's not the way C60 works. It is certainly not 'concentrating' ROS.

[Edgar]

http://pubs.acs.org/....1021/nn700151z Where the functional limit for 'attaching' hydroxyl groups to C60 is 36-40.

http://www.doiserbia...3100804042D.pdf Where some uses of the resulting molecule are described.

Since this hydroxylation of C60 has been demonstrated to occur in the presence of hydrogen peroxide... That's where this nonsense comes from.

Et tu, Niner? I don't mind hearing more about how you think it works.

[niner]

http://pubs.acs.org/....1021/nn700151z Where the functional limit for 'attaching' hydroxyl groups to C60 is 36-40.

Since this hydroxylation of C60 has been demonstrated to occur in the presence of hydrogen peroxide... That's where this nonsense comes from.

Et tu, Niner? I don't mind hearing more about how you think it works.

You're saying that ROS form bonds to fullerenes, and they just don't. Your first link describes a chemical reaction that takes place at high temperatures. This is nothing like what is happening in the body. Rather than forming bonds to fullerene, ROS give up an electron to it. Fullerenes can take on more than one electron at a time, but typically electrons will cycle on and off; building up a significant charge is energetically disfavored.

What's with the et tu? I guess it's rude of me to call a spade a spade, but that happens a lot in science. You're making declarations that sound like they're being presented as fact, but they're really just speculations based on an inadequate understanding of chemistry. I don't mind if you speculate, but you ought to label it as such. This is how a lot of erroneous "Internet Wisdom" gets started. Someone says something wrong, it doesn't get corrected, and before you know it everyone thinks it's true. I know I'm being grouchy, but there's been a lot of hubris displayed in these C60 threads by people who come up with half-baked "theories" that have no scientific basis.

[Lister]

I do wonder about the extended effects of C60... I can't test for it however it did feel as though the effects of C60 lasted well beyond the 72 hour period when I stopped taking it.

Taking C60 is dangerous due to the significant unknowns involved. If we have to stop and clear it from our system how long will it take? Considering we have no definitive answer to that question do we have a reasonable "best guess"?

I’m sure there are quite a few people reading this and other threads that are debating starting on C60. It would be nice to give them at least a rough estimate of how quickly they could escape the effects of C60 should something go wrong.

[Logic]

Some of the references in the link below should shed some light (punny) on the C60 and sunlight/burn question.

http://www.zimbio.co...saster 25 years

[taho]

I take about 30 mg of 99,9% C60 disolved in olive oil per day and have been doing that for three weeks.

Thus far effects are nothing exceptional. I do feel that I have more energy, but nothing that could not be placebo.

What I have noticed is that I have become somewhat clumsy. I have to be extra carefull on how I hold things, otherwhise they tend to promtly fly from my hands. Not sure why this is, but I will suspend taking c60 if clumsiness increases any further.

[zorba990]

I do wonder about the extended effects of C60... I can't test for it however it did feel as though the effects of C60 lasted well beyond the 72 hour period when I stopped taking it.

Taking C60 is dangerous due to the significant unknowns involved. If we have to stop and clear it from our system how long will it take? Considering we have no definitive answer to that question do we have a reasonable "best guess"?

I’m sure there are quite a few people reading this and other threads that are debating starting on C60. It would be nice to give them at least a rough estimate of how quickly they could escape the effects of C60 should something go wrong.

This wasn't the same ooC60 but it says 5 days for 20% so that would be roughly a month for full clearance if it is linear.
http://www.scienceda...90513065619.htm
Of course thats water soluble ones, fat soluble ones maybe longer ...? MIght be that a radio tagging experiment is more import to get done first so people know what escape time is...

This part was creepy:

The metallofullerenes showed slow clearance from all tissue except bone, where it steadily increased with time, a totally unexpected result, according to Wilson. Says Cagle, "In theory, it is possible that we could selectively target bone tissue for delivery of drugs...

Edited by zorba990, 11 July 2012 - 12:29 AM.

[tintinet]

I take about 30 mg of 99,9% C60 disolved in olive oil per day and have been doing that for three weeks.

Thus far effects are nothing exceptional. I do feel that I have more energy, but nothing that could not be placebo.

What I have noticed is that I have become somewhat clumsy. I have to be extra carefull on how I hold things, otherwhise they tend to promtly fly from my hands. Not sure why this is, but I will suspend taking c60 if clumsiness increases any further.

I haven't notice clumsiness, but I have felt slightly off balance occasionally. Transient feeling, though, and I haven't fallen down, yet.

[Lister]

I feel a little sluggish now and then here too. It feels as though I'm a bit over loaded. While I said I would cut back my dose from 1.5 mg/day to 0.75 mg/day I haven't yet. I still feel like I should though... Funny how I'm one of the few people here taking what appears to be the rat dose; other seem to be taking vastly higher doses.

I probably shouldn't try and get into the biomedical discussion too far for fear of showing my clear ignorance however I feel like this article has some relevance to the skin effects. I don't understand it completely so I could just be reposting or posting something irrelevant.

http://www.em-consul.../article/151191

Doesn't sound good... What do you guys think?

Also if C60 continues to build in the bones indefinitely does that mean we could see troubles with bone density/structure? Or am I going to be able to start cutting down my foes with C60 enhanced Claws like Wolverine?

[tintinet]

I feel a little sluggish now and then here too. It feels as though I'm a bit over loaded. While I said I would cut back my dose from 1.5 mg/day to 0.75 mg/day I haven't yet. I still feel like I should though... Funny how I'm one of the few people here taking what appears to be the rat dose; other seem to be taking vastly higher doses.

I probably shouldn't try and get into the biomedical discussion too far for fear of showing my clear ignorance however I feel like this article has some relevance to the skin effects. I don't understand it completely so I could just be reposting or posting something irrelevant.

http://www.em-consul.../article/151191

Doesn't sound good... What do you guys think?

Also if C60 continues to build in the bones indefinitely does that mean we could see troubles with bone density/structure? Or am I going to be able to start cutting down my foes with C60 enhanced Claws like Wolverine?

The (I agree: creepy) bone build up issue had me thinking Wolverine also.

ISTM, in the end, every effect we are currently attributing to C60 will end up being placebo with, perhaps, some effects of olive oil alone.

The skin article 'sounds' good to me, FWIW.

[niner]

I feel a little sluggish now and then here too. It feels as though I'm a bit over loaded. While I said I would cut back my dose from 1.5 mg/day to 0.75 mg/day I haven't yet. I still feel like I should though... Funny how I'm one of the few people here taking what appears to be the rat dose; other seem to be taking vastly higher doses.

I probably shouldn't try and get into the biomedical discussion too far for fear of showing my clear ignorance however I feel like this article has some relevance to the skin effects. I don't understand it completely so I could just be reposting or posting something irrelevant.

http://www.em-consul.../article/151191

Doesn't sound good... What do you guys think?

Also if C60 continues to build in the bones indefinitely does that mean we could see troubles with bone density/structure? Or am I going to be able to start cutting down my foes with C60 enhanced Claws like Wolverine?

The rat dose was 1.6mg PER KILOGRAM body weight. Anthony is the only person taking that much, which amounts to something like 140mg per dose for him. I think everyone who has reported a dose is taking more than you. Did you link the wrong article? That one just points out the antioxidant effects of various fullerenes- I didn't see anything bad. The business of accumulating in bones might be specific to one of the water soluble fullerenes. I would be really surprised to see these hydrophobic C60-fatty acid adducts accumulating in bone. There hasn't been any evidence of bone problems in the literature or peoples' reports that I'm aware of, though the human data on this is pretty spotty.

[stephen_b]

The rat dose was 1.6mg PER KILOGRAM body weight. Anthony is the only person taking that much, which amounts to something like 140mg per dose for him.

I wonder if the scaling factor of 1/6 might be a better start. That would come to 18.4 mg for me and 23.3 mg for Anthony's rat. Of course, who knows...

[Anthony_Loera]

Hi Lister,

I have no issues, except that temporary reflux when I take the 4/5 cup (about 140mg) which I deal with a teaspoon of baking soda... and, as niner pointed out, I seem to be the only one using the "The Rat Dose" at 1.6mg per kilogram of body weight ... and I am finishing it up soon. This would actually be my second week of taking this, my first week was finished a while back before my trip to Las Vegas or The Sequoias.

Sorry guys... I am afraid I don't feel or look like Wolverine, or Captain America yet... but I also can't rule out that nothing is happening.

Cheers
A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 11 July 2012 - 06:40 PM.

[tintinet]

WRT to the dosing issue, here's some of what's posted at SV's website:


"Source for the olive oil: Zeta Extra virgin Originale. Expiry date 13/05/2013 (the C60 will greatly extend this date)
We experimented with C60 and oil from different suppliers and this oil quickly yields the characteristic ruby red color mentioned in the original rat study. SES is the most reputable supplier of C60. Zeta produces excellent olive oil. As with all high-quality extra virgin olive oils, this oil causes a slight "burning" taste in the throat.
The shelf life of this product is nearly unlimited due to the extreme protective qualities of the C60 - the researchers in the rat study found no degradation after five years, with bottles kept at room temperature, opened monthly, so the oil got exposed to oxygen during that time as well. This means you do not need to keep this product refrigerated. The vacuum filtration process removes all dissolved air and the C60 protects against peroxidation.
Recommended daily dose for an adult 1.5 mg/day, every day, making a bottle last 30 days. Dosing recommendations will probably be modified as we get better hypotheses on how it exstends life. They may be up-adjusted (no allometric scaling if it is not a metabolite) or down-adjusted (when C60 becomes a permanent constituent of the mitochondrial membrane and is recycled). We do not know whether the rat dose was optimal either. It could be that a lower dose would have worked just as well.
The oil in one full dropper contains 1.5 mg C60. It is only possible to fill the dropper pipette halfway, so you need to suck the oil up twice and empty the dripper twice into a teaspoon, yielding approx. half a teaspoon per daily dose.
When dosing directly into a teaspoon, be careful not to spill any oil.
Our C60 is 99.95% pure according to chromatography resultshere, has been vacuum-oven dried, stirred for two weeks, centrifuged at 5000 g for one hour and filtered through a 0.22 μm filter. Our Buckminsterfullerene-olive oil production is done professionally in a real laboratory, exactly according to the parameters and procedures of the original study where they found that C60-olive oil treated rats lived 90% longer than the control group. The bottles are sterilized by us in a hot-air oven and our qualified staff wears masks and gloves. The bottles are tamper-sealed. The 0.22 μm microfilter removes any bacteria that may have been introduced by the stirring process, and the C60 is an extremely potent preservative, giving the oil a shelf life of at least two years, as can be verified from the original rat study.
With a human dose of 4 mg/day every day and taking allometric dosing into account, a person of average weight (70 kg/154 lbs.) will ingest the same qty. C60 as the rats did, adjusted for weight, on average, per day. However, the original LD50 study tried to poison the rats with C60, so it is likely that the longevity effect will be attained at lower dosages as well. Since people will take this every day for years, we advise a 1.5 mg daily dose. The rats were given 24 doses over a period of 7 months. If a person were to treat him/herself similarly, treatment should continue for 15 years, 20% of the lifespan of a human being. Read more about C60 dosing here.
It is not known how C60 greatly extends the life of mammals. Hypotheses vary from extremely effective antioxidant action to DNA-demethylation (which would permanently rejuvenate an individual on the genetic-molecular level). The latter hypothesis fits the observed test results of various Buckminsterfullerene animal trials better than the former, with old mice aquiring the problem-solving power and memory of young mice, and rats nearly doubling their expected lifespan with just two dozen administrations of C60.
With a dose of 1.5 mg C60 per day, the approx. 1000 to 2000 mitochondria in every cell of the body will have around 1000 Buckyball molecules at their disposal for each individual mitochondrion. The elimination time is officially 10 hours, but there is evidence that lipofullerene C60 can remain very much longer in the mitochondrial lipid bilayer - possibly for years, since it may be recycled after apoptosis."

[tintinet]

More dosing information from SV's website:







Human dosing vs. rat dosing


You can buy our C60-olive oil solution for your pet rats so that they will likely live nearly twice as long. We can’t recommend you taking it yourself, because that would be a criminal offense, as we have been told by our attorney. We’d be closed down by the FDA, this domain would be confiscated, the site shut down, our premises raided, our computers confiscated and us fined or sent to prison. So please don’t take it yourself. Actually, don’t give it to your rats either, because we are not even sure that suggestion is legal. We are not licensed veterinarians. You can, however, use our Buckyball-olive oil mixture to lubricate your aging sewing machine with. That is perfectly legal says our attorney. At least for the time being, until C60 becomes a restricted “nanoparticle” substance, as part of a new “nanomaterials licensing law” or something.
But just for hypothesis sake. Let’s say you would buy the C60 oil for your rats but then you’d change your mind and want to take it yourself anyway. How much would most likely be a sufficient daily dose?
The rats were given 1.7 mg/kg body weight 24 times in a 7-month period.
The rats weighed on average 600 grams.
Using allometric scaling, we get the following results for a human being weiging 70 kilo (154 lbs.):

A person weighing 70 kilo should get a dose of 36.208 mg 24 times in a 7-month period, which translates to 4 mg/day if the dose is taken daily instead of once every nine days, as with the rats.
And that person should take that dose every day for 15 years, as that is 20% of the average lifetime of a person. Seven months is 20% of the average lifetime of the rats used in the study.
However, there is not much reason to believe that this dose of 4 mg/day is required to enjoy the beneficial effect. The rat study’s goal was to find toxic effects, not establish medicinal properties.
There is for example the anecdotal report from someone who took a single 2 mg dose and said that 4 hours after taking it, he could run 3 km, something he had not been able to do for ten years.
Since humans will take this substance every day, year after year, we think it is reasonable to recommend 1.5 mg/day, slightly more than a third (37.5%) of the dose used, allometrically, in the rat study. Then there would still be up to a thousand C60 molecules at the disposal of every mitochondrion in the body.
We (will) sell bottles with 45 mg C60 dissolved in 50 ml olive oil. 45 / 1.5 = 30 days. So one bottle would last a person one month, and that person would then take a very small amount each day with an eye-dropper type pipette that’s in the bottle.

[Lister]

Thanks Tintinet! When I read that dosing info last it wasn't that extensive. I think she's updated it.

FYI just yesterday I had assumed the pains had gone but the Kidney pain is back and building again. I'm going to stop for now and consult my doctor. I have a feeling I have an infection and that's what's causing the issue. I was hoping the Kidney pain was unrelated to C60 however part of the reason I stopped was to test and see. The pain faded and went away after ceasing C60 consumption. After restarting it took 4 days for the kidney pain to restart again. No one else is experiencing this pain including my Roommate who's dosing from the exact same bottle.

Theories?

Also yesterday my roommate went to the gym for the first time after starting C60. Today she reported that she had vastly better endurance. Also key is she claims her balance is better (meaning C60 is effecting her MS symptoms).

Edited by Lister, 11 July 2012 - 07:12 PM.

[Edgar]

I apologize, Niner. I didn't mean to sound so authoritative, I just had some questions and ideas that I thought fit the facts.

I don't disagree the repeating of misinformation here is somewhat rampant. The information from Sarah's website is a case in point: We speculated here, it was summarized there, then it appears here as a source. Yikes.

[zorba990]

Thanks Tintinet! When I read that dosing info last it wasn't that extensive. I think she's updated it.

FYI just yesterday I had assumed the pains had gone but the Kidney pain is back and building again. I'm going to stop for now and consult my doctor. I have a feeling I have an infection and that's what's causing the issue. I was hoping the Kidney pain was unrelated to C60 however part of the reason I stopped was to test and see. The pain faded and went away after ceasing C60 consumption. After restarting it took 4 days for the kidney pain to restart again. No one else is experiencing this pain including my Roommate who's dosing from the exact same bottle.

Theories?

Also yesterday my roommate went to the gym for the first time after starting C60. Today she reported that she had vastly better endurance. Also key is she claims her balance is better (meaning C60 is effecting her MS symptoms).

You need to get a full workup from a competent health professional and see what is going on. C60 maybe just creating a push for an underlying condition or you could be having a full on toxic reaction to it...just too many unknowns at this point. Stop taking it and go see a doctor.

[Anthony_Loera]

I agree, Sara's site is built on the speculation and posts from this site...

I find it funny when folks point to her site, as a source for dose and claims here on this site.

Cheers
A

[niner]

The rat dose was 1.6mg PER KILOGRAM body weight. Anthony is the only person taking that much, which amounts to something like 140mg per dose for him.

I wonder if the scaling factor of 1/6 might be a better start. That would come to 18.4 mg for me and 23.3 mg for Anthony's rat. Of course, who knows...

In this case, there's a good chance that scaling it would be better. Mostly because there are safety unknowns, and drinking that much oil is gross. There's also the possibility that the megadose is critical to the result. I hope someone does a study with a short-lived creature (would fruit flies or worms work? not sure if you could dose them.) to check out these questions.

[SarahVaughter]

Our dosing recommendations are one of the very few things that are not inspired by this site. To back up our recommendations, we supply detailed calculations and arguments. We think that there is little reason to believe that the C60 should be taken in large doses with long breaks in between. Absorption may be much better in more regular, smaller quantities than downing nearly a full cup.It would be foolish to ignore the #1 thread on C60 on the entire Internet though, both in quality as in quantity.

But the idea was inspired by a news"paper" article, not this site. We found this site because it scores so high for Buckminsterfullerene in olive oil.

Edited by SarahVaughter, 11 July 2012 - 08:04 PM.

[niner]

Our dosing recommendations are one of the very few things that are not inspired by this site. To back up our recommendations, we supply detailed calculations and arguments. We think that there is little reason to believe that the C60 should be taken in large doses with long breaks in between. Absorption may be much better in more regular, smaller quantities than downing nearly a full cup.

Sarah, would you be willing to share your calculations and arguments here? I'm interested in your thinking on C60 dosing.

[SarahVaughter]

They have just been pasted in this thread (two postings). Basically, it's daily dosing, allometrically, 1/3rd of the dose used, per kilo (allometrically), as the rats because the study was a toxicity study so there is reason to believe a lower dose will work just as well, esp. because people are extremely unlikely to derive the same benefits as rats. Also, a modest safety factor.

[JohnD60]

The information from Sarah's website is a case in point: We speculated here, it was summarized there, then it appears here as a source. Yikes.

I am not sure that is exactly what happened, but I repeat your Yikes. It isn't that hard to make the stuff. Quoting any manufacturer of C60-OO as an authority is a mistake. If anyone doubts that, read this thread from the beginning.

Edited by JohnD60, 13 July 2012 - 05:25 AM.

[Lister]

The information from Sarah's website is a case in point: We speculated here, it was summarized there, then it appears here as a source. Yikes.

I am not sure that is exactly what happened, but I repeat your Yikes. It isn't that hard to make the stuff. Quoting any manufacturer of C60-OO as an authority is a mistake. If anyone doubts that, read this thread from the beginning.

Let me try and give you the long version of what you just said:

“Quoting any manufacturer of C60-OO as an authority is a mistake because C60-OO is a serious product with years of dedicated research and a proven ability to improve human health and wellness overall. We should all be using the hundreds of accurate proven scientific studies regarding the human trials of C60.”

Oh wait! I can’t say that can I? Your first mistake wasn’t quoting a manufacturer regarding human dosing and results as an authority... it was taking the stuff in the first place expecting to have solid proof of exactly what will happen to you. (I’m speaking in general here not specifically to you John or others)

We’re lucky if we find info on C60 human dosing that has some solid basis in reality. Don’t expect objective proof of things when you’re talking about something that we’re still not sure is safe to take.

It amazes me how much bickering goes on over truths we can’t possibly have. We’re all groping around in the dark here... some of us just have better flash lights than others. Regardless the vast majority of info is subjective at best. Again taking any info regarding human dosing of C60-OO as a fact is a mistake (not just the manufacturers). Quoting a manufacturer is just as good as quoting a Russian scientist at this point.

[niner]

The information from Sarah's website is a case in point: We speculated here, it was summarized there, then it appears here as a source. Yikes.

I am not sure that is exactly what happened, but I repeat your Yikes. It isn't that hard to make the stuff. Quoting any manufacturer of C60-OO as an authority is a mistake. If anyone doubts that, read this thread from the beginning.

Let me try and give you the long version of what you just said:

“Quoting any manufacturer of C60-OO as an authority is a mistake because C60-OO is a serious product with years of dedicated research and a proven ability to improve human health and wellness overall. We should all be using the hundreds of accurate proven scientific studies regarding the human trials of C60.”

Oh wait! I can’t say that can I? Your first mistake wasn’t quoting a manufacturer regarding human dosing and results as an authority... it was taking the stuff in the first place expecting to have solid proof of exactly what will happen to you. (I’m speaking in general here not specifically to you John or others)

We’re lucky if we find info on C60 human dosing that has some solid basis in reality. Don’t expect objective proof of things when you’re talking about something that we’re still not sure is safe to take.

It amazes me how much bickering goes on over truths we can’t possibly have. We’re all groping around in the dark here... some of us just have better flash lights than others. Regardless the vast majority of info is subjective at best. Again taking any info regarding human dosing of C60-OO as a fact is a mistake (not just the manufacturers). Quoting a manufacturer is just as good as quoting a Russian scientist at this point.

C'mon, Lister; John didn't say that at all, or even imply it. Quoting manufacturers (so far) as authorities is a mistake because they aren't authorities. Period. I don't think anyone is mistaking the present state for solid objective information. We're trying to gather what information we can. It's early days. People who don't like the risk/reward profile of this venture can just wait a few years. I'm sure that there will be a number of peer reviewed papers that will get deeply into this. You might have to wait five years for things to really be nailed down. I don't want to wait that long, personally.

[Lister]

The information from Sarah's website is a case in point: We speculated here, it was summarized there, then it appears here as a source. Yikes.

I am not sure that is exactly what happened, but I repeat your Yikes. It isn't that hard to make the stuff. Quoting any manufacturer of C60-OO as an authority is a mistake. If anyone doubts that, read this thread from the beginning.

Let me try and give you the long version of what you just said:

“Quoting any manufacturer of C60-OO as an authority is a mistake because C60-OO is a serious product with years of dedicated research and a proven ability to improve human health and wellness overall. We should all be using the hundreds of accurate proven scientific studies regarding the human trials of C60.”

Oh wait! I can’t say that can I? Your first mistake wasn’t quoting a manufacturer regarding human dosing and results as an authority... it was taking the stuff in the first place expecting to have solid proof of exactly what will happen to you. (I’m speaking in general here not specifically to you John or others)

We’re lucky if we find info on C60 human dosing that has some solid basis in reality. Don’t expect objective proof of things when you’re talking about something that we’re still not sure is safe to take.

It amazes me how much bickering goes on over truths we can’t possibly have. We’re all groping around in the dark here... some of us just have better flash lights than others. Regardless the vast majority of info is subjective at best. Again taking any info regarding human dosing of C60-OO as a fact is a mistake (not just the manufacturers). Quoting a manufacturer is just as good as quoting a Russian scientist at this point.

C'mon, Lister; John didn't say that at all, or even imply it. Quoting manufacturers (so far) as authorities is a mistake because they aren't authorities. Period. I don't think anyone is mistaking the present state for solid objective information. We're trying to gather what information we can. It's early days. People who don't like the risk/reward profile of this venture can just wait a few years. I'm sure that there will be a number of peer reviewed papers that will get deeply into this. You might have to wait five years for things to really be nailed down. I don't want to wait that long, personally.

That's why I said "(I’m speaking in general here not specifically to you John or others)". The reason I bring this up is because people seem to be feeling insecure about posting info they've found for fear of others calling it out as irrelevant or "Not an authority".

I know that it may be frowned upon in the Medical and Scientific community but when we're so far into the Bleeding edge as we are here, use of the words "Maybe", "Perhaps", "Could" should be used instead of "Is" or "Is Not".

I know you're all gnawing at the bit to get some solid proof of what's going on here (and I’m right there with you) but you're just going to have to accept that we have a pool of info and a lot of it is just hearsay. It's a difficult task but you need to look at that pool and try your best to pull objectivity out of it without warding off the providers of that information.

We should be very clearly informing our readers of the possible dangers involved in C60. We should also be encouraging everyone taking it regardless of their means and methods to provide us with as much information as they can. If you're in a position to look at that info and instantly go "Oh that's total BS" then I would suggest that instead of saying "Look! That's total BS" you should be saying "This could possibly be that... or maybe something else?"

If you don't encourage an open conversation taking into account the dynamic group of lab rats you have here you're risking eliminating that critical piece of info that could make all the difference.

[Turnbuckle]

This wasn't the same ooC60 but it says 5 days for 20% so that would be roughly a month for full clearance if it is linear.
http://www.scienceda...90513065619.htm

It will most likely be a decaying exponential, so that after one month the remaining percentage of fullerene will be .8^6, or 26%.

[niner]

The reason I bring this up is because people seem to be feeling insecure about posting info they've found for fear of others calling it out as irrelevant or "Not an authority".

I know that it may be frowned upon in the Medical and Scientific community but when we're so far into the Bleeding edge as we are here, use of the words "Maybe", "Perhaps", "Could" should be used instead of "Is" or "Is Not".

I know you're all gnawing at the bit to get some solid proof of what's going on here (and I’m right there with you) but you're just going to have to accept that we have a pool of info and a lot of it is just hearsay. It's a difficult task but you need to look at that pool and try your best to pull objectivity out of it without warding off the providers of that information.

We should be very clearly informing our readers of the possible dangers involved in C60. We should also be encouraging everyone taking it regardless of their means and methods to provide us with as much information as they can. If you're in a position to look at that info and instantly go "Oh that's total BS" then I would suggest that instead of saying "Look! That's total BS" you should be saying "This could possibly be that... or maybe something else?"

If you don't encourage an open conversation taking into account the dynamic group of lab rats you have here you're risking eliminating that critical piece of info that could make all the difference.

We all want good information. It is not at all frowned upon in the scientific community to use words like "Maybe, perhaps, or could", in fact that is the norm. We try not to overstate things. Actually, there's been a recent history here of non-scientists pushing their personal "theories" in far too extreme a fashion, and not being willing to accept polite explanations that whatever it is they're claiming isn't right. If someone posts something that's wrong, and it is scaring people or causing discussion to veer off in unproductive directions, I really don't think we're doing anyone any favors if we say "maybe that's right" . I think we should politely explain that it isn't right, and give the reason why it's not. If people continue to push their obviously-wrong point, frankly, they are being arrogant and hubristic and someone needs to say something. Some of the people on this site are scientists who understand things like chemistry and pharmacology, and have a lot of experience. Most people here are laypersons with varying levels of scientific knowledge, ranging from nil to pretty good. If one of them says "Hey, I found this paper that looks pertinent, is it important?", no one is going to give them a hard time about that. If they say "You guys are all gonna die! This paper proves it!", then they better expect to get shot down if it's a bunch of BS.

None of us should overstate things, and we should all approach posting with some humility. No matter how much each one of us thinks we know, I can guarantee you that someone else on the forum knows something about it that you don't, and in some cases, some people know a hell of a lot more about it than you. If there's something you don't have a good understanding of, don't project your lack of understanding on everyone else. But by all means, if you have something you think is important, go ahead and post it. Particularly if you are using C60. We would REALLY like to hear about your experiences. If you're taking C60, you are the world's foremost authority on what you are personally experiencing.