The only reason I haven't been posting lately is that I've been very busy with other things including, http://www.GenomicMedicineInitiative.org, http://www.PhotoCalorie.com, fulfilling travel and speaking obligations and writing research grants. I've received no pressure from anyone with regard to any activities of ResForum.org and, indeed, have been working on some new features of the site with regard to a broader range of dietary supplements and their possible health effects. In fact, one of these projects is to adapt our PhotoCalorie iPhone application to cover not only foods, but dietary supplements as well. What do you all think of this? What features would you like to see in such an app?

Thanks for your continued interest and contributions.

Dr.B

You may be right. I don't think the big issues are for reveratrol, though.

We will know  a lot more in the next few months.

Actually, neither has been very active even prior to the Pfizer study. I think there are probably a few reasons they aren't posting now.

DavidWilson said:

My guess is that GSK has put pressure on the authors of this blog not to contribute to it.  GSK has alot riding on their proprietary molecules (NCE's) and they are not about to let unpatentable resveratrol take away any profits.   This blog was formed when all was seemingly good in the NCE world.  Now, things have seemingly changed.  Resveratrol is still king as will be announced tomorrow. 

Any thoughts?

I think there could be several reasons. Why would Dr. Sinclair start a resveratrol blog in the first place if he knew that GSK would pressure him not to contribute to it? Also, I don't think it is at all clear that Pfizer's study or a previous one has refuted the effectivenes of the GSK compounds like SRT 501 or STR 2104. Maybe, but what they claim to have shown is that resveratrol and the compounds don't activate SIRT 1 directly. I think the issue is complex and that we'll know more this year. SRT 501 showed great promise with diabetes two years ago. Yet SRT 501 didn't activate SIRT 1 directly either according to Pfizer. (Anyone ever here of the word indirectly?)

Here's to hoping that the announcement will show strong benefits for basic resveratrol! 

I agree with your indirect activation assertion.  What puzzels me is the timing of their dissappearance.  Basically right after the Pfizer study came out.  Whats more, there has been no overt activity on the Healthy Lifespan Institute.  I know these people are Very Busy.  I hope alliegences to GSK don't thwart the progress of the Institute. 

My guess is that GSK has put pressure on the authors of this blog not to contribute to it.  GSK has alot riding on their proprietary molecules (NCE's) and they are not about to let unpatentable resveratrol take away any profits.   This blog was formed when all was seemingly good in the NCE world.  Now, things have seemingly changed.  Resveratrol is still king as will be announced tomorrow. 

Any thoughts?

I think there could be several reasons. Why would Dr. Sinclair start a resveratrol blog in the first place if he knew that GSK would pressure him not to contribute to it? Also, I don't think it is at all clear that Pfizer's study or a previous one has refuted the effectivenes of the GSK compounds like SRT 501 or STR 2104. Maybe, but what they claim to have shown is that resveratrol and the compounds don't activate SIRT 1 directly. I think the issue is complex and that we'll know more this year. SRT 501 showed great promise with diabetes two years ago. Yet SRT 501 didn't activate SIRT 1 directly either according to Pfizer. (Anyone ever here of the word indirectly?)

Here's to hoping that the announcement will show strong benefits for basic resveratrol! 

Any thoughts?