3585 replies to this topic

[sensei]

The 371 date is the valid date Which is Dec 30 2013.

 

Fees, and meeting the reqts of international inventions patented in US.

 

This will likely cause them to not be granted the patent, BECAUSE, it is more than a year after they published the study, and the method of manufacture, AND

 

plenty of individuals and companies were actually manufacturing and using C60OO more than a year prior to the 371 date.

 

If my reading of the law is correct, they messed up big time by publishing far in advance of applying for the patent.

[Turnbuckle]

The 371 date is the valid date Which is Dec 30 2013.

 

Fees, and meeting the reqts of international inventions patented in US.

 

This will likely cause them to not be granted the patent, BECAUSE, it is more than a year after they published the study, and the method of manufacture, AND

 

plenty of individuals and companies were actually manufacturing and using C60OO more than a year prior to the 371 date.

 

If my reading of the law is correct, they messed up big time by publishing far in advance of applying for the patent.

 

Scroll down--

 

[0001] This application claims benefit of Tunisian Provisional Application No. TN 2011/327 filed Jun. 30, 2011 the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference. 

 

http://www.wipo.int/.../faqs/faqs.html

Edited by Turnbuckle, 13 January 2015 - 12:27 AM.

[sensei]

 

The 371 date is the valid date Which is Dec 30 2013.

 

Fees, and meeting the reqts of international inventions patented in US.

 

This will likely cause them to not be granted the patent, BECAUSE, it is more than a year after they published the study, and the method of manufacture, AND

 

plenty of individuals and companies were actually manufacturing and using C60OO more than a year prior to the 371 date.

 

If my reading of the law is correct, they messed up big time by publishing far in advance of applying for the patent.

 

Scroll down--

 

[0001] This application claims benefit of Tunisian Provisional Application No. TN 2011/327 filed Jun. 30, 2011 the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference. 

 

http://www.wipo.int/.../faqs/faqs.html

 

 

For the US Patent the 371 date is the date that holds -- google 371 date 

[Turnbuckle]

No. This is a national filing with benefit of the priority date of the original foreign filing (which in this case was in Tunisia). Did you click on the link? That would have explained it under the PCT. From the USPTO--

 

 

 

An applicant who uses the Patent Cooperation Treaty gains the benefit of:

 

(A) a delay in the time when papers must be submitted to the national offices;

(B) an international search (to judge the level of the relevant prior art) and, for international applications filed on or after January 1, 2004, a written opinion on the question of whether the claimed invention appears to be novel, to involve an inventive step (to be non-obvious), and to be industrially applicable before having to expend resources for filing fees, translations and other costs;

(C ) a delay in the expenditure of fees;

(D) additional time for research;

(E) additional time to evaluate financial, marketing, commercial and other considerations; and

(F) the option of obtaining international preliminary examination.

 

The time delay is, however, the benefit most often recognized as primary. Ultimately, applicant might choose to submit the national stage application. The national stage is unique compared to a domestic national application in that

 

(A) it is submitted later (i.e., normally 30 months from a claimed priority date as compared to 12 months for a domestic application claiming priority).

(B) the status of the prior art is generally known before the national stage begins and this is not necessarily so in a domestic national application.

(C ) if the filing of an international application is to be taken into account in determining the patentability or validity of any application for patent or granted patent, then special provisions apply. See MPEP §  1895.01 , subsection (E) and MPEP § 1896 .

 

 

 

Edited by Turnbuckle, 13 January 2015 - 02:13 AM.

[sensei]

 

No. This is a national filing with benefit of the priority date of the original foreign filing (which in this case was in Tunisia). Did you click on the link? That would have explained it under the PCT. From the USPTO--

 

 

 

An applicant who uses the Patent Cooperation Treaty gains the benefit of:

 

(A) a delay in the time when papers must be submitted to the national offices;

(B) an international search (to judge the level of the relevant prior art) and, for international applications filed on or after January 1, 2004, a written opinion on the question of whether the claimed invention appears to be novel, to involve an inventive step (to be non-obvious), and to be industrially applicable before having to expend resources for filing fees, translations and other costs;

(C ) a delay in the expenditure of fees;

(D) additional time for research;

(E) additional time to evaluate financial, marketing, commercial and other considerations; and

(F) the option of obtaining international preliminary examination.

 

The time delay is, however, the benefit most often recognized as primary. Ultimately, applicant might choose to submit the national stage application. The national stage is unique compared to a domestic national application in that

 

(A) it is submitted later (i.e., normally 30 months from a claimed priority date as compared to 12 months for a domestic application claiming priority).

(B) the status of the prior art is generally known before the national stage begins and this is not necessarily so in a domestic national application.

(C ) if the filing of an international application is to be taken into account in determining the patentability or validity of any application for patent or granted patent, then special provisions apply. See MPEP §  1895.01 , subsection (E) and MPEP § 1896 .

 

 

 

 

 

Yes I read it -- they didn't file an international patent.  They filed a National Patent, and then filed a US Patent

 

And even though they claimed 2012 -- the 371 date is the actual date that they met All the requirements for a US patent application which exceeded the 12 month limitation imposed by the Paris Convention -- from June 30 2011 in Tunisia

 

 Direct or Paris route: you can directly file separate patent applications at the same time in all of the countries in which you would like to protect your invention (for some countries, regional patents may be available) or, having filed in a Paris Convention country (one of the Member States of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property), then file separate patent applications in other Paris Convention countries within 12 months from the filing date of that first patent application, giving you the benefit in all those countries of claiming the filing date of the first application (see Question 11);

[Turnbuckle]

You are exhausting, sensi. Just read the US patent application--

 

PCT Filed: June 28, 2012

PCT NO: PCT/TN2012/000003

 

That international application can be found here.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 13 January 2015 - 03:25 AM.

[sensei]

i STAND CORRECTED.

[Turnbuckle]

If you look at the international patent application I referenced above, you will find the written opinion of the international search authority under the documents tab, which finds that none of the claims are patentable due to lack of novelty or lack of an inventive step, or both. So the claims will have to be narrowed substantially.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 13 January 2015 - 08:29 PM.

[sensei]

If you look at the international patent application I referenced above, you will find the written opinion of the international search authority under the documents tab, which finds that none of the claims are patentable due to lack of novelty or lack of an inventive step, or both. So the claims will have to be narrowed substantially.

 

I don't know if this totally torpedos the US application, because basically the PCT application was found to be baseless.

 

Basically, the only novel use identified was contributing to the longevity of the rats (claim 12 'mammals' based on claim 8).

 

They threw out the human claim.

 

That seems like the human claim in the US Application would be invalid, because the human claim in the TN filing and the PCT filing was found to be invalid. 

[Kalliste]

Other days, I wake up and feel pretty tired even though I took 3-4ml C60 the day before. I'm not sure about the sleep thing anymore,

[Turnbuckle]

 

If you look at the international patent application I referenced above, you will find the written opinion of the international search authority under the documents tab, which finds that none of the claims are patentable due to lack of novelty or lack of an inventive step, or both. So the claims will have to be narrowed substantially.

 

I don't know if this totally torpedos the US application, because basically the PCT application was found to be baseless.

 

Basically, the only novel use identified was contributing to the longevity of the rats (claim 12 'mammals' based on claim 8).

 

They threw out the human claim.

 

That seems like the human claim in the US Application would be invalid, because the human claim in the TN filing and the PCT filing was found to be invalid. 

 

 

The US PTO is not bound by the international finding, but they're certainly not going to go any easier on the inventors. I've gotten many patents in the past, and generally speaking the claims are all rejected in the first office action, and then you have to argue why the action was incorrect and/or amend the claims to make them patentable. When all that is done and the office still won't budge, you can appeal. I've appealed three times pro se and won twice. So this patent is not down and out, but they are facing some tough challenges. For one thing--as niner pointed out--they may not be claiming what they invented. They are saying the C60 is dissolved when it is likely reacting to form a chemical soup.

[sensei]

 

 

If you look at the international patent application I referenced above, you will find the written opinion of the international search authority under the documents tab, which finds that none of the claims are patentable due to lack of novelty or lack of an inventive step, or both. So the claims will have to be narrowed substantially.

 

I don't know if this totally torpedos the US application, because basically the PCT application was found to be baseless.

 

Basically, the only novel use identified was contributing to the longevity of the rats (claim 12 'mammals' based on claim 8).

 

They threw out the human claim.

 

That seems like the human claim in the US Application would be invalid, because the human claim in the TN filing and the PCT filing was found to be invalid. 

 

 

The US PTO is not bound by the international finding, but they're certainly not going to go any easier on the inventors. I've gotten many patents in the past, and generally speaking the claims are all rejected in the first office action, and then you have to argue why the action was incorrect and/or amend the claims to make them patentable. When all that is done and the office still won't budge, you can appeal. I've appealed three times pro se and won twice. So this patent is not down and out, but they are facing some tough challenges. For one thing--as niner pointed out--they may not be claiming what they invented. They are saying the C60 is dissolved when it is likely reacting to form a chemical soup.

 

 

It might also turn on the issue of novelty -- they likely found citations for C60 dissolved in oils pre-2011 (original Tunisian application) heck here is one i found from 2010

 

 

Clinical evaluation of fullerene-C60 dissolved in squalane for anti-wrinkle cosmetics. J Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2010 Oct;10(10):6769-74.

 

"Highly purified and organic solvent-free fullerene-C60 was dissolved, at nearly saturated concentration of 278 ppm, in squalane prepared from olive oil, which is designated as LipoFullerene (LF-SQ) and was examined for usage as a cosmetic ingredient with antioxidant ability. "

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21137794

 

So there already exists published prior art of Lipo-fullerenes created by dissolving in a compound found in an edible oil -- used for the express purpose of better health for humans

 

And the same group apparently tried to patent roughly the same thing in 2004-2005

 

"Compositions comprising water-insoluble fullerenes and their use for preventing damages caused by free radicals

WO 2005105214 A1"

 

http://www.google.co...5105214A1?cl=en

 

Here is a patent granted for use of fullerenes as stabilizers for oil

 

Use of fullerene c60 as a stabiliser for oils comprising phosphoglycerides

 

https://www.google.c...nts/EP1907519B1

Edited by sensei, 14 January 2015 - 05:08 PM.

[sensei]

5 grams 99.95% pure from sesres on it's way

[resting]

5 grams 99.95% pure from sesres on it's way

 

What is the extent of the experiment? How much are you going to take?

[sensei]

 

5 grams 99.95% pure from sesres on it's way

 

What is the extent of the experiment? How much are you going to take?

 

 

 

Either 45mg/day or 45mg every other day until I run out.

 

That gives me 110 doses = 110 days or 220 days

 

I may do a couple of 1.7mg/kg days like the rats got that would be a 135mg dose for me

Edited by sensei, 16 January 2015 - 08:17 PM.

[aribadabar]

 

 

Either 45mg/day or 45mg every other day until I run out.

 

That gives me 110 doses = 110 days or 220 days

 

I may do a couple of 1.7mg/kg days like the rats got that would be a 135mg dose for me

 

 

No HED conversion?

[sensei]

 

 

 

Either 45mg/day or 45mg every other day until I run out.

 

That gives me 110 doses = 110 days or 220 days

 

I may do a couple of 1.7mg/kg days like the rats got that would be a 135mg dose for me

 

 

No HED conversion?

 

No, that would = about 15 mg/day -- I take 45 every other as it is already -- and I have taken 135mg in one day just to see the effects.

Edited by sensei, 16 January 2015 - 08:42 PM.

[Aronte]

Hi

How long you can keep the c60 (1 g) in its original packaging? I have bought one  gram late 2013 ...

[sensei]

Hi

How long you can keep the c60 (1 g) in its original packaging? I have bought one  gram late 2013 ...

 

I would call the chemical supplier and ask.

 

But,  As long as the packaging remained intact, it's probably fine.

[Turnbuckle]

Hi

How long you can keep the c60 (1 g) in its original packaging? I have bought one  gram late 2013 ...

 

Should last least 600 million years. 

 

The accidental discovery of natural fullerenes was made by geochemists at Arizona State University at Tempe while studying a coal-like mineral taken from rock sediments apparently formed during the Precambrian era, more than 600 million years ago. The rare black mineral, 99 percent carbon, was noticed by scientists more than a century ago in seams of very old rock near the town of Shun'ga in Russian Karelia some about miles northeast of St. Petersburg. The scientists named it shungite, after the town.

 

http://www.nytimes.c...people-did.html

 

[wannabeageless]

Is anyone supplementing with MitoQ and C60oo?   I purchased MitoQ during the recent special and now I"m wondering if it provides any benefits that are superior to the C60oo.

 

Also, I'm curious if any of the expert biochemists have determined if there is an estimated equal dosage amount for the mitochondrial antioxidant effects, such that 5 mg MitoQ has the effiicacy as ___ mL of C60oo.

[pone11]

Is anyone supplementing with MitoQ and C60oo?   I purchased MitoQ during the recent special and now I"m wondering if it provides any benefits that are superior to the C60oo.

 

Also, I'm curious if any of the expert biochemists have determined if there is an estimated equal dosage amount for the mitochondrial antioxidant effects, such that 5 mg MitoQ has the effiicacy as ___ mL of C60oo.

 

If you don't already know how aerobic metabolism works, I would strongly encourage you to do some self study on how glycolysis, krebs cycle (aka citric acid cycle), and electron transport chain (part of oxidative phosphorylation) works.   If you are going to be on a web site like this one, I strongly believe that having just a basic undergraduate-level understanding of these activities will enhance your understanding of these discussions about 500%.    There are LOTS of videos on Youtube.  Wiley has some decent college-level coursebooks implemented as free presentations online.  I came down with a metabolic disorder in late 2013 and have been inching my way out of that during the last six months.  I ended up having to immerse myself in these concepts to facilitate conversations with doctors, and I can say that now that I have a cursory understanding of these subjects it has enhanced my ability to understand what supplements do greatly.   

 

Understanding the electron transport chain is particularly important.   This is where more than 85% of your ATP gets produced.   This is also where most of the free radicals are being created that (may) age you.   What's important about this to your question is that the electron transport chain takes place on the inner mitochondrial membrane.   Each tissue cell of your body has about 1000 mitochondria.   Inside each mitochondria there is a separate curving membrane.  It is that secondary internal membrane where electron transport chain takes place, and that is where CoQ10 is primarily used.   CoQ10 is used in the inner membrane of the mitochondria to shuttle electrons between some of the complexes that are part of the electron transport chain.   It's a critical role, and If you take statins, have diabetes, or are just getting older, it's levels can be compromised.   

 

All of this background is to help you understand MitoQ.   Most CoQ10s apparently don't actually get to where they need to be used.   They are getting into the cellular environment, but not penetrating into the mitochondria.   The unique characteristic of MitoQ is that it actually gets incorporated in much higher amounts into the inner mitochondrial membrane.  If it does what they claim it does, that seems like an incredibly important supplement.

 

With C60oo, no one really understands what it does.  It might change gene expression.  It might act as an antioxidant.  It might have some poorly understood function to reduce free radicals directly.   Who knows - but whatever it does - that would complement CoQ10 not replace it.

Edited by pone11, 17 January 2015 - 08:45 PM.

[wannabeageless]

Thank you pone for taking the time to send me in productive directions.  I certainly don't have a background in the sciences and find reading pubmed articles, scientific journals, and many of the postings here above my head - but not below my fascination level.   But it places me in a position where I have to ask sophmoric questions that may be looked down upon on forums such as this if I'm ever to learn.  Currently, I rely on blogs that sometimes come across as sketchy and find that the tidbits I pick up on this forum have more credibility.

 

I'll keep reading up..... and I'll keep asking dumb questions...

Edited by wannabeageless, 17 January 2015 - 09:29 PM.

[Kalliste]

I have taken 5ml of c60 with up to 20mg o MitoQ on the same day. Did not feel anything in particular.

[Logic]

Thx for the informative post Pone11.
However I cannot agree that is obvious that MitoQ and C60oo will compliment each other:
As you say; none is sure how C60oo works and however unlikely, it may not 'play nicely' with MitoQ?

So has anyone taken both MitoQ and C60oo together and if so have you 'seen' any benefits???

[aribadabar]

 

I have taken 5ml of c60 with up to 20mg o MitoQ on the same day. Did not feel anything in particular.

 Same here  - 45ml C60 every other day + 10mg MitoQ per day here with nothing to report that I can specifically ascribe to MitoQ. Some smell boost only to report so far - but that was prior to starting MitoQ. The putative hearing improvement I reported in the anecdotes thread may have been due to an increased sound volume during the test so it is not robust enough (yet) unlike the smelling one. 

 

[pone11]

Thx for the informative post Pone11.
However I cannot agree that is obvious that MitoQ and C60oo will compliment each other:
As you say; none is sure how C60oo works and however unlikely, it may not 'play nicely' with MitoQ?

So has anyone taken both MitoQ and C60oo together and if so have you 'seen' any benefits???

 

That's pure speculation, and I think it is a fair response to ask should we be frightened of any idea we can conjure?   I mean C60+00 might not work well with saturated fat.  Should I stop eating saturated fat?   C60+00 might not work well with vitamin D.  Should I banish all vitamin D from the diet?   And - more importantly - should I take those potentially very damaging actions just because I can ask the question "does C60OO interact negatively with X?"

 

This stuff is hard enough when there is actual science involved.   If we now have to additionally fight every ghost that our mind can conjure, we are going to shrivel up and implode in a puff of smoke.   I have enough stress without introducing new hypothetical stress.

 

Superficially, I don't see any reason why a necessary component of the electron transport chain - CoQ10 - would negatively interfere with another antioxidant.   If it does, then I'll have to make some decision when the science better understands what C60 does.    I'm at the stage where I am still watching C60 because I don't feel there is enough science yet to establish long term safety.

 

On the question of how you measure the effects of CoQ10 supplementation, I would expect three different cases:

 

* If you are very old, or on statins, or suffering from some serious mitochondrial impairment, then CoQ10 might have a dramatic effect, which might be felt as reduced cramping in muscle, increased metabolic energy.   I think you would feel something subjectively.

 

* If you have slight impairment to your CoQ10 levels, then I would  that you will not feel much.   The way you might detect this though is by testing metabolites, and I have some specific ideas on that (below).

 

* If you are young or have intact CoQ10 levels, then unlikely you are going to see any measurable change in aerobic metabolism.

 

For the case where you need to measure metabolites, I would be looking at two things:

 

1) Measure your NAD+/NADH ratio before supplementation, then measure it again after you have supplemented for a while.   Since NADH is output by the krebs cycle, and since NADH is converted back to NAD+ by complex i of the electron transport chain (ETC), I would expect that improvements in the ETC would result in measurable improvements in the NAD+/NADH ratio.  A researcher gave me a way to approximate that ratio from pyruvate and lactate in a formula, and I'm still try to work out how to use that.

 

2) Get some direct measure of your ATP output.   These tests I only find in research studies, and I am still looking for someone who can do it commercially.  There is a guy in UK who is doing this commercially for chronic fatigue syndrome patients, but it's difficult to order the test and it costs a lot.   And you have to ship blood overnight to the UK.

 

I believe that severe CoQ10 deficiency can also affect creatine kinases and there are tests for those.  Maybe someone else can talk about that because I don't know much about it.

Edited by pone11, 17 January 2015 - 11:42 PM.

[ambivalent]

Thank you pone for taking the time to send me in productive directions.  I certainly don't have a background in the sciences and find reading pubmed articles, scientific journals, and many of the postings here above my head - but not below my fascination level.   But it places me in a position where I have to ask sophmoric questions that may be looked down upon on forums such as this if I'm ever to learn.  Currently, I rely on blogs that sometimes come across as sketchy and find that the tidbits I pick up on this forum have more credibility.

 

I'll keep reading up..... and I'll keep asking dumb questions...

 

Stick around wanna: I could do with the company :-)

[sensei]

I certainly don't have a background in the sciences and find reading pubmed articles, scientific journals, and many of the postings here above my head - but not below my fascination level.   But it places me in a position where I have to ask sophmoric questions that may be looked down upon on forums such as this if I'm ever to learn.  Currently, I rely on blogs that sometimes come across as sketchy and find that the tidbits I pick up on this forum have more credibility.

 

I'll keep reading up..... and I'll keep asking dumb questions...

 

 

If it makes you feel any better, it's probably a fair statement to say that NOBODY understands the complete set of mechanisms by which C60OO, C60-OH-Hyd  (poly-hydroxylated fullerenes), and C70 cause the biological effects that they cause.

 

Various citations in the literature speak to in vivo animal studies, and the results (Baati rats, hair regrowth and follicular genesis in mice). Many in vitro animal and human studies show altered gene expression, stem cell differentiation, immunological/inflammatory/allergic modulation and more.

 

There is much speculation about what is going on. The fact that C60OO is a profoundly powerful anti-oxidant that protects cells against ROS was clearly demonstrated in vivo by Baati and the Carbon Tetrachloride challenged rats in his study.

 

Other than that and some speculation based on sterochemical modeling and simulation, and guesses based on effects and known mechanisms of cell biology -- we don't really know.

 

I am an experimental subject ( I like to think I gave myself full disclosure and informed consent  ) but I have to take guesses as to why certain things are happening.  

 

For instance my hair color reverting from gray to dark and now to the color it was when I was in my 20's.  We know that a buildup of Hydrogen Peroxide in the follicle causes  graying. We also know that damage to the melanocytes in the follicle causes graying.  But what we don't know is by what mechanism C60OO causes the color change.

 

Is it:

 

Increased production of glutathione peroxidase

C60 itself that neutralizes the H2O2

reversion of cells from an older almost senescent state to a younger state

upregulation or downregulation of certain genes

 

or some other mechanism or combination

 

Hopefully these things will become more clear soon.

[Clacksberg]

More to the point is anyone else using c60OO and seeing hair colour reverting back to original colour?

Fascinating stuff anyway..