7 replies to this topic

[LucidMind]

Late last year Revgenetics stated on their website that they could not longer recommend TA-65. Recently they reversed their position and are now recommending it with no explanation about their reversal. Both opposing views are still listed on their site. What is going on?

I have been loyal to Revgenetics for their curcumin and resveratrol capsules, but I am now I am having doubts.

Anybody have an explanation?

Thanks

Attached Files

•  Screenshot 2014-01-15 15.59.10.png   529.25KB   46 downloads
•  Screenshot 2014-01-15 16.03.55.png   297.07KB   43 downloads

[blood]

I can't see those images, maybe because I am not a member.

Is it possible to make the images available for non-members?

[makso]

I can't see those images, maybe because I am not a member.

Is it possible to make the images available for non-members?

can't see them either?

[rwac]

It should be visible now.

[AgeVivo]

it would be good that such products are tested on mouse lifespan tests. It would give an idea of the the carcinogenic risk / lifespan increase potential

[LucidMind]

I am quite surprised no one has been able to answer this question including Anthony from Revgentics.

[follies]

I agree it is surprising there is no comment from Anthony. He is in a pissing match and I was shocked when he came out and said he has never taken TA-65. I don't think I will buy from revgenetics again.

[HighDesertWizard]

I think this 55 minute study literature and anecdotal evidence overview presentation is interesting and suggests Telomerase Activation makes a difference.