Forum

RevGenetics said:

Again, you continue to avoid the question:

You either agree with the data provided by Westphal and David Sinclair from Sirtris, regarding polysorbate 80 and micronized resveratrol, or you don't.

Which is it going to be?

A

There is somehing called "inerpreting the data" which I'd need Sinclair to explain. 

Post edited 5:49 am – January 5, 2010 by FM2020

RevGenetics said:

Look up USPTO document 20060292099, or ask David Sinclair about it.

A

While looking it up, I came across an interview you gave. You stated, "We even appreciate the down-right tough criticism we get from folks."

Now that's funny! Remebmer when I criticized you for posting Sinclair's 250-500mg but not including that he also recommended to consider taking only up to 250mg and that he even told you directly taking above 250mg was venturing into greater unknown territory? Remember that, just before the navigator banned me as he protected you, the advertiser at immist resveratrol forum? What was your response then? That I should consider counseling. Now, that doesn't seem like appreciation to me. That's the thanks we consumers get for pointing out a vendor used Sinclair's name without giving the full story?

Anyway, another link went to a RevGenetics page where there was a graph. However, 1) I don't see a comparison with a blend like Longevinex.  2) It isn't clear that the higher peak is important for whatever benefits resveratrol offers. It would be great if Dr. Sinclair would comment.

RevGenetics said:

FM2020,

Thanks for trying to avoid the question, but I will try to make this simpler and take it one step at a time:

You either agree with the data provided by Westphal and David Sinclair from Sirtris, regarding polysorbate 80 and micronized resveratrol, or you don't.

---

Can you provide a link to the data? I have no idea what you are talking about.

What is so damn hard about providing a link?

Post edited 11:12 pm – January 3, 2010 by FM2020

RevGenetics said:

---

FM2020,

Do you dispute the Sirtris data regarding Polysorbate 80 and micronized resveratrol?

Maybe you should provide evidence as to why you dispute the data. I surely would like to see it.

You wrote:

"According to Sirtris data, a formulation of resveratrol and tween 80 produced a high increase in absorption over all methods tested in the data. So why not take something that is as close to the Sirtris data as possible?"

First, it is up to you to link to this data to back up your claim. Second, according to what Bill Sardi (Longevinex president) wrote in an email to a forum reader to be placed on the ImmInst resveratrol forum, Sirtris' SRT501 is a close formulation to that of Longevinex, the brand Sinclair helped formulate and that he himself said he took for over three years. But I would want to see evidence from Sardi as well to back the claim Longevinex is quite similar to SRT501. For now, I'm agnostic.

But since you post here, just link your claim to the data. I'm agnostic there as well.

P.S. RevGenetics, I notice you haven't updated the dose recommendation in a year: Jan 2009:

Below are the two David Sinclair interviews in their entirety. In them he states 1000 bottles of red wine a day. The fact that these two interviews took place almost 10 months apart shows that Dr. Sinclair has not wavered regarding the dosage he and his team feel are good for the benefits in humans.

You go on to say people should start taking resveratrol at 300mg-500mg, which happen to be the units you were selling. What a coincidence. You added that 100mg was too low without providing evidence. You might want to add that Dr. Sinclair has seemed to have "waivered" according to his ebook: 

"If you decide that you want to take resveratrol, consider taking no more than 250

mg per day" – Dr. Sinclair

Why not update  your site after a almost a year since I'm sure you want to be on the level with your customers and not leave off important information about what Dr. Sinclair has recently said as you did over at the imminst resveratrol forum a few weeks ago.

2tender said:To readers; see post 15 regarding this. Sirtris is the current leading "think tank" for Resveratrol. 

So, you won't provide evidence to back this up? Sirtris is not a think tank but a company, and they are not using Nitro 250 or anything similar. 

2tender said:Nitro 250 IS the product that closest approximates one of the Resveratrol derivatives used in  some studies that were done by the Worlds leading experts in the field of Resveratrol. That is the sole reason I take it. I do apologize for my lack of computer skills which limit me from posting links , making paragraphs, etc. 

---

There is nothing to back up the claim that Nitro 250 is the closest approximation of anything. You post all the time here and at immortality institute put no one taught you how to cut and paste a link??

2tender said:The topic here is a question about which product is the current best. Nitro 250 is the objective answer.

How is that an "objective answer" when you have not provided any evidence?

We know Dr. Sinclair was behind the formulation of Longevinex and later Vivix. He also took Longevinex himself for over three years. I don't know if those are "objectively" superior to other products out there, and one would need tests to determine that.

The topic here is a question about which product is the current best. Nitro 250 is the objective answer.

Post edited 11:21 am – December 15, 2009 by Postak

How would you define "most effective" if the effects are rather vague and not measurable. One cannot tell by plasma levels alone if something is effective or not.Not to speak about the unknown effect area (which is probably greater then the procalimed or known effects) Still waiting for double blind placebo controlled studies to see some undeniable evidence of effects in human.

Besides that, resveratrol is resveratrol, if it's tested and 98/99% then it's all the same. I think resveratrol is comparable to all the creatine variants when it comes to marketing. Usually transport mechanisms/ absorption enhancement and other "patent compositions" only exist to make companies more able to distinguish themselves on the same market. At the end creatine monohydrate gives you the most bang for the buck compared to other bullshit and usually more expensive formulas. Companies need an extra dimension to compete on, else the only dimension would be the price. Even if a formula (micronized, +quercetin, with vit d or whatever) would increase the absorportion, would that neccisarily be a good thing?

Having said that, probably the best place to get resveratrol is Revgenetics. They are really concerned about quality. No worries about "hidden information" (like they call it in economics) when buying stuff at revgenetics. Still the first question you should ask yourself is What will it bring me for $40 a month or $480 a year and how are you able to tell that it's worth it. I go to the gym 5 times a week for $40 a month and the effects of such a live are better documented.