(Updated 7/17/20). Have you heard of the anti-aging supplement Protandim? Maybe you saw a YouTube video of when Protandim was featured on ABC's PrimeTime? Protandim called an “Nrf2 activator” has been said to be the “only supplement clinically proven to reduce oxidative stress in humans by an average of 40 percent in 30 days.” That’s fancy talk for Protandim is a type of antioxidant supplement. Unlike other products, Protandim is said to work by helping the body increase its own natural antioxidant enzymes. Sounds good, but does Protandim work, or is it a scam? These are some of the questions I will address in this review. The good news is there are clinical studies on Protandim. I will use that research in this review and help you understand it. By the end of this review, you'll have a better idea if Protandim is right for you.
Other Anti-Aging Supplement Reviews
What Is Protandim?
Protandim might sound like a drug but it's really a dietary supplement. It's said to combat free radical damage (oxidative stress) by stimulating the production of the body's own natural antioxidant enzymes such as catalase, superoxide dismutase (SOD), and glutathione.
The idea goes like this: instead of taking individual antioxidant supplements (like vitamins C, E, etc.) in the hopes they will battle free radicals and combat aging and disease, Protandim is supposed to augment or ramp up your own naturally occurring free radical defenses.
It's a novel concept to be sure.
The supplement website (LifeVantage.com) says the supplement is “clinically proven to reduce oxidative stress to levels of that of a 20-year-old.” Oxidative stress refers to the stress (cellular damage) caused by free radicals.
What Does The Name Mean?
My guess is the name was chosen because the ingredients are supposed to “pro-actively” work in “tandim” to help defend us against aging and disease.
Who Makes Protandim?
Protandim is a product of a company called LifeVantage Corporation. LifeVantage is actually a publicly traded stock on the NASDAQ. Its stock symbol is LFVN.
The company is located at 9785 S. Monroe Street, Suite 300 Sandy, UT 84070. If you google this address you will see a building with “LifeVantage” at the top. That is good. It tells us the company has a physical location.
Contact LifeVantage
Call the company at 866-460-7241.
The Better Business Bureau gave LifeVantage an A- rating when this review was updated. See the BBB file for updates and more information.
Protandim Ingredients
According to the product's website, there are 5 ingredients in each caplet of Protandim which add up to 625 mg:
| Amount Per Serving (1 caplet) | Percent Daily Value |
|---|---|
| Calcium (as dicalcum phosphate & calcium carbonate) 77 mg | 8% DV |
| Proprietary Blend Consisting of the following | 675 mg |
| Milk thistle extract (Silybum marianum) seed. | |
| Bacopa extract (Bacopa monnieri) whole herb | |
| Ashwagandha extract (Withania somnifera) root | |
| Green tea extract (Camellia sinensis) leaf | |
| Turmeric extract (Curcuma longa) rhizome |
Notice in the table above they tell us the source of each ingredient:
- The milk thistle extract is derived from the seeds of the plant
- The bacopa extract is derived from the whole plant
- The ashwagandha extract is derived from the root of the plant
- The green tea extract comes from the leaves of the plant
- The turmeric extract is derived from the underground stems (rhizome) of the plant
Other Ingredients
The supplement label also tells the supplement has these other ingredients:
- Microcrystalline Cellulose
- Croscarmellose Sodium Silica
- Modified Cellulose
- Stearic Acid
- Magnesium Stearate
- Maltodextrin
- Medium Chain Triglycerides
These other ingredients play no role in the effects or benefits of the product. They make up the caplets and/or help with the delivery of the ingredients into the body.
I want to commend the LifeVantage company for sponsoring much of the research below. It's rare to find a product with so many clinical studies.
Protandim Research
Protandim is different from a lot of supplements because there really is clinical research on this product. Below is a summary of the Protandim research with links to the studies for those who want to see them for themselves.
Because scientific studies can be wordy and complicated for most people, I will summarize the study and put the research in the proper context to make it easier to understand.
2016 Protandim Research
Study
The Effect of Protandim® Supplementation on Athletic Performance and Oxidative Blood Markers in Runners.
Study summary: In this investigation, researchers tested if taking Protandim (675 mg/day) for 90 days would improve 5K running performance and reduce TBARS. The study involved 38 runners who were randomly given either Protandim or a placebo.
Results: After 90 days, those taking Protandim (1x/day) showed no improvement in running performance compared to those taking the placebo. In addition, Protandim did not reduce TBARS or alter levels of antioxidant enzymes superoxide dismutase (SOD) or glutathione peroxidase (GPX) during resting periods. The researchers report however that in those over age 35, Protandim improved SOD twice as much as those taking the placebo.
See the full review of this study
Study
Longer lifespan in male mice treated with a weakly estrogenic agonist, an antioxidant, an α-glucosidase inhibitor or an Nrf2-inducer.
Study summary: Here, researchers sought to determine what effect various compounds had on extending the life of mice. Protandim was one of the compounds tested. The other compounds tested in the study were fish oil, ursodeoxycholic acid (a bile acid, used to dissolve gall stones), and the diabetes drug, metformin. Different mice received the different compounds for their entire lifespan.
Beginning at 10 months of age, mice received Protandim at a dosage of 600 parts per million (ppm) in their food. This amount was chosen because it was similar to the Protandim dosage used by people. When the mice were 17 months old, the dosage was increased to 1200 ppm because this was thought to be better.
Study results: researchers noted male mice getting Protandim had a 7% increase in average lifespan. The supplement did not lengthen the life span of female mice. The researchers also point out that while the average lifespan was increased, the maximum lifespan did not increase. Regardless, this was a mouse study.
2013 Protandim Research
Study
Study
Upregulation of phase II enzymes through phytochemical activation of Nrf2 protects cardiomyocytes against oxidant stress
Study results: Researchers noted that mouse heart cells treated with Protandim increased the production of an antioxidant/anti-inflammatory enzyme called Heme oxygenase 1 (HO-1) as well as Nrf2. This was a test-tube study using isolated mouse heart cells.
This investigation is derived from a Masters's Thesis in 2010. The title of the MS Thesis is “UPREGULATION OF HEME OXYGENASE-1 AND ACTIVATION OF NRF2 BY THE PHYTOCHEMICALS IN PROTANDIM .” It is not unusual for a quality MS thesis or other graduate work to go through the peer-review process and be published.
2012 Protandim Research
Study
Antioxidants for the Treatment of Patients with Severe Angioproliferative Pulmonary Hypertension? Published in the journal, Antioxidants in Redox Signaling.
Summary: This is a rat study. Protandim increased antioxidant enzymes in rats, protecting the hearts from damage.
Study
Phytochemical activation of Nrf2 protects human coronary artery endothelial cells against an oxidative challenge published in the journal, Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity.
Summary: This is a test tube study. Human coronary (heart) artery cells were treated with Protandim (20 micrograms per milliliter) or placebo (ethanol). All cells were then treated with hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) to induce free radical damage. Cells treated with Protandim showed less cell death than those getting the placebo.
Study
Protandim does not influence alveolar epithelial permeability or intrapulmonary oxidative stress in human subjects with alcohol use disorders.
Summary: This investigation showed the supplement did not work. To be fair, this was a strange study. Researchers looked at 30 alcoholics . The researchers stuck tubes down the throats of the subjects to take fluid samples from their lungs. They randomly gave the people 1350 mg of Protandim per day or a placebo, for a week. They tested for various things to see if Protandim helped the people. It didn’t.
I don't know how relevant this study is to whether Protandim works or not. I mentioned it because it was a human study. For a much more in-depth review of this study—written by a doctor—see the review posted on ScienceBasedMedicine.org.
2011 Protandim Research
Study
Oxidative stress in health and disease: the therapeutic potential of Nrf2 activation.
Summary: This is a test tube study. Essentially, Protandim altered cellular pathways involved in antioxidant enzyme production and colon cancer, cardiovascular disease (heart disease), and Alzheimer's disease. This is encouraging, but, humans are more complicated than isolated cells. This study doesn’t prove the supplement reduces the risk of any of these diseases.
Study
The role of manganese superoxide dismutase in skin cancer.
Summary: This is a mouse study. Here, researchers reported the supplement reduced tumor growth in mice. For the most part, this appears to be a review of previous research relating free radical damage to the development of skin cancer.
Study
Protandim attenuates intimal hyperplasia in human saphenous veins cultured ex vivo via a catalase-dependent pathway.
Summary. This is a test tube study. Basically, a blood vessel was bathed in Protandim. Researchers noted the supplement reduced the thickening of vein cells.
2010 Protandim Research
Study
The Dietary Supplement Protandim Decreases Plasma Osteopontin and Improves Markers of Oxidative Stress in Muscular Dystrophy Mdx Mice.
Summary. This is a mouse study. Mice were genetically created to have muscular dystrophy. They were given Protandim at a dosage similar to what is recommended for humans. After 6 months, the mice given Protandim showed a 46%reduction in the free radical breakdown of fat (TBARS). TBARS stand for ThiobarBituric Acid Reactive Substances.
The greater the TBAR level, the greater free radical damage. Thus, reducing TBARS is taken to be a good thing. This doesn't prove Protandim helps muscular dystrophy. People with muscular dystrophy should discuss this with their doctor for greater insights.
Study
The chemopreventive effects of Protandim: modulation of p53 mitochondrial translocation and apoptosis during skin carcinogenesis.
Summary: This is a mouse study. Protandim reduced damage to the mitochondria of mouse cells. of this study. The mitochondria, often called the “powerhouse” of the cell, make energy —and makes free radicals in the process. The mitochondria are a major area of anti-aging research.
Study
Chronic pulmonary artery pressure elevation is insufficient to explain right heart failure.
Summary. This is a rat study. Researchers tested if the supplement helped pulmonary blood pressure. After 6 weeks, Protandim did not reduce pulmonary artery blood pressure or the number of lung lesions. These researchers did say “our data point to a cardioprotective effect of Protandim.” But, this is a vague statement.
2009 Protandim Research
Study
Protandim, a fundamentally new antioxidant approach in chemoprevention using mouse two-stage skin carcinogenesis as a model.
Summary: This is a mouse study.
Study
Synergistic induction of heme oxygenase-1 by the components of the antioxidant supplement Protandim.
Summary: This is a test tube study. Cells treated with supplements showed significant increases in glutathione, an antioxidant compound. This is the study LifeVantage lists as “proof” Protandim increases glutathione levels by 300%. It may raise glutathione 300% – in a test tube – but does the same effect occur in people?
2006 Protandim Research
Study
The induction of human superoxide dismutase and catalase in vivo: a fundamentally new approach to antioxidant therapy.
This is a human study. 39 healthy men and women, age 20-78 years were given Protandim (675 mg per day) between 30 and 120 days.
Study Summary:
1. Protandim caused a significant increase in the antioxidant superoxide dismutase (SOD) in red blood cells.
2. TBARS declined by 40% after 30 days
3. SOD in red blood cells increased by 30% after 120 days
4. Catalase decreased by 40% after 120 days
5. There was a non-significant rise (4.9%) in uric acid.
6. No change in CRP levels was seen.
7. No change in HDL, LDL or triglycerides were seen.
Protandim Research Summary
Here is a quick summary of the research:
| Study Year / Title | Study Type (Human, mouse, etc.) |
| 2016 Research | |
| The Effect of Protandim Supplementation on Athletic Performance and Oxidative Blood Markers in Runners | Humans |
| Longer lifespan in male mice treated with a weakly estrogenic agonist, an antioxidant, an α-glucosidase inhibitor or a Nrf2-inducer | mice |
| 2013 Research | |
| Upregulation of phase II enzymes through phytochemical activation of Nrf2 protects cardiomyocytes against oxidant stress | Mouse heart cells |
| 2012 Research | |
| Antioxidants for the treatment of patients with severe angioproliferative pulmonary hypertension? | Rats |
| Phytochemical Activation of Nrf2 Protects Human Coronary Artery Endothelial Cells against an Oxidative Challenge | Test tube study |
| Protandim does not influence alveolar epithelial permeability or intrapulmonary oxidative stress in human subjects with alcohol use disorders. | Humans |
| 2011 Research | |
| Oxidative stress in health and disease: the therapeutic potential of Nrf2 activation. | Test tube study |
| The Role of Manganese Superoxide Dismutase in Skin Cancer | Mice |
| Protandim attenuates intimal hyperplasia in human saphenous veins cultured ex vivo via a catalase-dependent pathway | Test tube study |
| 2010 Research | |
| The Dietary Supplement Protandim® Decreases Plasma Osteopontin and Improves Markers of Oxidative Stress in Muscular Dystrophy Mdx Mice | Mice |
| The Chemopreventive Effects of Protandim: Modulation of p53 Mitochondrial Translocation and Apoptosis during Skin Carcinogenesis | Mice |
| Chronic Pulmonary Artery Pressure Elevation Is Insufficient to Explain Right Heart Failure | Rats |
| 2009 Research | |
| Protandim, a Fundamentally New Antioxidant Approach in Chemoprevention Using Mouse Two-Stage Skin Carcinogenesis as a Model | Mice |
| Synergistic induction of heme oxygenase-1 by the components of the antioxidant supplement Protandim. | Test tube study |
| 2006 Research | |
| The induction of human superoxide dismutase and catalase in vivo: a fundamentally new approach to antioxidant therapy. | Humans |
To be fair, it's possible I may have missed some research. I'll update this table as I become aware of new research.
My Thoughts On The Research
While Protandim has been the subject of several clinical investigations, only 3 of them involved humans. They are:
- The 2006 study (click to see study)
- The 2012 study (click to see study)
- The 2016 study (click to see the study)
Protandim And Weight Loss
Can Protaindm help you lose weight? There is no good evidence for this. None of the above clinical investigations was about weight loss. To the credit of LifeVangage, they do not market this supplement for weight reduction.
Protandim And Multiple Sclerosis
Is this supplement worthwhile if you have Multiple sclerosis (MS)? Some have put forth the idea that disruption of free radical stress – via stabilizing Nrf2 (the stuff this supplement is supposed to improve) – might help MS. So, is there any proof? There was an investigation presented in 2011 at the 5th Joint triennial congress of the European and Americas Committees for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
The title of the presentation was: Nrf2 activators: a novel strategy to promote oligodendrocyte survival in multiple sclerosis? Here, researchers treated rat and human oligodendrocytes with several compounds ― one of which was Protandim ― and then exposed the cells to a chemical to create free radical damage.
These researchers noted Protandim was seen as “the most potent inducer” of Nrf2 antioxidant enzymes defenses. In other words, Protandim helped the most.
This is intriguing, but it's not the same as giving it to people with MS to see if their symptoms improved.
There is also some evidence that stimulating Nrf2 might reduce cellular inflammation via inhibition of NFkb. Inhibition of NFkb is also something another supplement – called Anatabloc – was supposed to do. Currently, though there is little human proof for Protandim improving quality of life in those with MS.
See the Anatabloc review.
Protandim And ABC Primetime
In 2005, this supplement was featured on ABC's Primetime news show. In this segment, ABC correspondent John Quinones met with Dr. Joe McCord, a respected researcher whose name appears on many of the Protandim clinical studies. According to his Wikipedia page, as a grad student, Dr. McCord was involved with the discovery of Superoxide Dismutase, an important free radical savaging enzyme. Here is the ABC Primetime segment :
Basically, John Quinones gets a blood test to measure his TBAR level (an indicator of oxidative stress). He's given Protandim for 2 weeks and then returns to the lab where he has his blood tested again.
Dr. McCord tells John Quinones the supplement caused a “45% reduction” in oxidative stress and goes on to say this is the level seen in a “newborn baby”. The ABC Primetime segment is often used as proof the supplement really works. But, as I see it, one problem is John Quinones doesn't have is blood tested by an independent lab. This is bad science in my opinion.
Of course, the Primetime segment is interesting. But it's been over a decade since this segment aired. You'd think such an impressive result would warrant a follow-up. I wish Primetime and John Quinones would do a follow-up story.
Update. Dr. McCord is now involved with the PB125 supplement.
Protandim And The FDA
In 2017, the FDA reached out to LifeVantage to inform them they considered Protandim to be a drug and not a supplement based on claims made about it as an NRF2 Synergizer. Basically, the FDA was saying the claims being made at the time, made people think the supplement could treat disease. This is something not allowed under US supplement regulation. This may be the reason for the dramatic change in the LifeVantage website and marketing. There are no more claims about the effects of the supplement. Instead, the company now calls itself “a wellness and personal care company” and makes references to “bio-hacking.”
Do Doctors Endorse Protandim?
While the supplement is not endorsed by the American Medical Association (they don't endorse any supplement), I'm sure some physicians believe in it – and others who don't.
Does Protandim Have Caffeine?
According to the product website, each tablet has 1.8mg of caffeine. That's much less than in a cup of coffee and most energy drinks. I don't think this small amount would keep people up at night, but because we are all different it might be wise to not take it close to bedtime.
Is It Kosher?
No. this supplement is not kosher or organic. It is however made in the US. That is good.
Protandim Side Effects
Are there any Protandim dangers out there? I don't think so. I believe this supplement is pretty safe. I am not aware of any side effects. That said, here are a few general things you might want to think about if your not healthy. This list is not complete:
- Start with less than the recommended dosage for the first week to see how you respond
- Speak to your doctor/ pharmacist if you are pregnant or breastfeeding
- Stop taking the supplement at least 2 weeks before having surgery
- Speak to your doctor /pharmacist if you take any prescription drugs like blood thinners
One study noted the supplement might raise uric acid levels (by 4.9%). Would this be bad for those who suffer from gout? Currently, there is no direct proof gout pain is increased by Protandim. See the review of Tart Cherry Juice for more info.
While allergic reactions are likely uncommon, LifeVantage does mention this possibility in some people. Specific symptoms mentioned on the LifeVantage website include:
- gastrointestinal disturbances (i.e., stomach ache, diarrhea, vomiting)
- sometimes as a headache or rash on the hands or feet
Stop taking the supplement if you experience these symptoms.
The company website warns against using the supplement if you are undergoing chemotherapy or radiation therapy for cancer. This is likely because of the unknowns of combining antioxidants with some cancer therapies. If you have cancer or are getting treatment for it, ask your doctor. I'm glad the LifeVantage company informs people about this.
LifeVantage also stresses the importance of talking to a doctor if you have any autoimmune disease like arthritis or Type I diabetes. I'm not aware of any problems in anyone but I appreciated the company mentioning this.
How To Measure Your TBARS
Remember TBARS are a measure of free radical damage (oxidative stress) of cells. Protandim is said to reduce TBARS. The TBAR test is also called a Lipid Peroxidase test. Ask your physician about this test. For those who really want to know if Protandim is working, getting this test done first—and a month later— might be a good idea. I'm not sure if insurance covers the test or not. Talk to your doctor for more information on this.
Aged Garlic Extract also has some evidence it might reduce TBARS (click to see review)
TrueScience Brand
True Science is a brand name under which various beauty products made by the company can be identified. Products offered under the True Science brand include:
- Shampoo
- Scalp serum
- Facial cleanser
- Eye serum
What is PhysIQ?
PhysIQ is the brand name associated with various fitness-related products. This brand includes:
- Fat burn supplements
- Prebiotics
- Whey protein
- Appetite suppressants
Protandim For Dogs
Protandim Dogs (formally called Canine Health) is for pets. According to the LifeVantage website, this supplement contains 150 mg of the same ingredients as Protandim – as well as omega 3 fatty acids and collagen. The website goes on to say: “Reducing oxidative stress in dogs may reduce many of the disorders associated with aging in canine.” To support this, the organization states a 3rd party animal health company has found the supplement reduces oxidative stress in dogs.
Protandim vs. PB125
PB125, by Pathways Bioscience, is another supplement whose makers claim can reduce TBARS and activate NrF2. PB125 is the supplement by Dr. Joe McCord and associates. Recall Dr. McCord used to be associated with the LifeVantage company.
While PB125 is said to be the next generation of NrF2 activators, no studies have yet compared these supplements to each other to see which is better. The ingredients in both products are different for the most part.
See the PB125 Review for much more information.
Protandim vs. Tru Niagen
The Tru Niagen supplement boasts research showing it can raise NAD+ levels in humans. Tru Niagen is based on nicotniamide riboside a form of niacin (vitamin B3).
The idea of slowing aging by raising NAD+ is different than Protandim. So far no clinical studies have compared these supplements to each other. While the original Protandim does not contain nicotinamide riboside, the Life Vantage company does offer another version called the “NAD Synergizer” which contains niacin.
Protandim vs. Elysium Basis
Basis by Elysium is a popular anti-aging supplement that contains very different ingredients than Protandim. Like Tru Niagen, Elysium Basis also is an NAD+ booster supplement. So, which is better? Unfortunately, there are no head-to-head studies yet.
See the Elysuim Basis Review for more insights.
Protandim vs. SeroVital
You've probably seen TV ads for SeroVital. How does Protandim compare to SeroVital? Both supplements contain different ingredients and are touted to work differently.
While Protandim is said to help boost our bodies antioxidant enzymes, SeroVital is marketed to raise human growth hormone (HGH).
If we just look at the research, Protandim wins hands down. The makers of Serovital only have one study.
Where To Buy Protandim
This supplement is not sold in stores like Walmart, Target, Cosco, CVS, Walgreens, Kmart, or BJs. It's also not sold at GNC or Vitamin Shoppe. Rather, it's mostly purchased from LifeVantage independent distributors.
It is also available online as well although when using a distributor, you may get the individualized attention you might not get by buying it yourself.
Protandim Price
According to the LifeVantage website, a one-month supply (30 capsules) costs $59.99 retail. If you order it through a LifeVantage distributor, it costs $49.99 – and that is on a monthly basis. In other words, that means auto-shipments. If you want to purchase one month only to test drive it first, speak to your LifeVantgage independent distributor.
Protandim Yearly Cost
Let's round the price up to $50 a month. In one year, the supplement would cost you $600. Shipping and tax may be extra. If you only want to order 1 bottle to try yourself, you can get it on Amazon too.
My Suggestions
If you can afford it, go ahead and give it a try for a month or so and see if you feel any better. If you really want to know for sure, get your TBARS measured first.
Remember, exercise will also reduce TBARS too.
Protandim Pro & Con
Here's a quick summary of what I liked and didn't like. These are my opinions. Yours may be different.
| Pro | Con |
|---|---|
| There are clinical studies on Protandim | Not all the studies are on humans |
| Company has been around a long time | Not available in stores |
| Company sponsors research on Protandim | Expensive |
| Lots of hype about benefits |
Does Protandim Work?
While I'm intrigued at the prospect of slowing down aging, I'm can't say for sure if Protandim works or not. The research is intriguing but in my opinion three's not enough human research yet to draw conclusions. So, does Protandim really work? Let's just say I'm looking forward to more human clinical studies.
Here is it is on Amazon If you want to check it out/see what others are saying
Possibly the most unintelligent comment yet Gary. Only 3 weeks and your eye sight, asthma, Grey hair and sleepless nights are cured? In fact you were sooo amazed at some point during this short time that you started selling Protandim on Amazon at a loss! Even the most diehard Lifevantage snakes tell you that it takes more than one month of taking this miracle to see the benefits. Go sell crazy somewhere else.
It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if Lifevantage started selling Protandim for $30 a bottle very soon. Have you seen their stock tank over the last year? Did you see how they just fired the top distributor in the world, Jason Domingo?
Greg B,
You don’t seem to understand what I’m saying about unsubstantiated claims. The FTC has guidelines for supplement advertising, and those guidelines clearly spell out what advertisers are allowed to claim about what their product does. A few weeks ago I linked to the FTC site and copied some of the guidelines, along with the example I mentioned in my last post of an unsubstantiated claim. Go back and read it. These aren’t my rules, they are from the FTC. CLEARLY, one study without a placebo control would NOT meet the requirements in the guidelines. Shoot, even if it were properly done, it wouldn’t be enough to pass muster.
http://business.ftc.gov/documents/bus09-dietary-supplements-advertising-guide-industry
You said: ” The measure was of an objective number from blood tests. One can not psych himself into a lower T-Bar score; it either goes down, or it does not.”
While I agree that the placebo effect is primarily evident in subjective measurements (such as pain perception), why did LV’s own ridiculous study on alcoholics show that TBARS went down for the group taking the placebo?
The lack of placebo control was not the only problem with that first study, though. It’s already been pointed out that company insiders were used in the study, it was of a small sample size (and the number of subjects seemed to vary). There is also evidence of data rigging, which Vogel documented on the Lazyman site.
At any rate, even without these issues, this one study would not be nearly enough to meet the FTC requirements to substantiate the claim that Protandim lowers oxidative stress in humans.
You say: ” If i understand you correctly, you are concerned that Protandim may protect early-stage cancer cells by reducing the number of free radicals which could kill them off. But the normal number of free radicals is not enough to do that, else cancer would never need to be treated; our bodies would just take care of such problems by themselves.”
Yes, you understood me correctly (except that I really don’t think Protandim does ANYTHING, so my concern is slight). However, my rhetorical question to you would be…..how do you know that the “normal number of free radicals is not enough” to kill off early-stage cancer cells? How could we possibly know if some early stage cancer cells aren’t being killed off on a daily basis in our bodies? Sure, some people get cancer, but not everyone. Who knows…..what if mopping up free radicals by activating Nrf2 ends up causing MORE people to get cancer?
You said: ” If I remember correctly, the study you had previously was about how some companies use studies of various ingredients to try to claim their specific products are good. That is not proper, because just because a certain ingredient may do good doesn’t mean that a particular product has the right amount of it, has processed it correctly, or doesn’t counter-act it with other ingredients in the product. Only studies done on the actual product itself can be considered valid. This is why so many are excited about Protandim–the studies have be done on Protandim itself, not merely some of the ingredients.”
You may have me mixed up with Vogel on that one. Vogel focused on the type of junk science that is done on products like this. I did say that the vast majority of Protandim studies are not on the actual product, though. From your own statement above, you say that it is important that “a particular product has the right amount of it, has processed it correctly….” The majority of studies were done with an injection of an alcohol extract of Protandim, and in much greater concentrations than a consumer would get. This doesn’t sound “proper” to me. Not to mention, the test subjects were rodents, or it was done in a test tube. It’s just not the same as a human ingesting a pill.
You say: “why have so many researchers approached Dr McCord and LV asking to do studies with it?” Why would a researcher need to ask to do a study? Certainly there are competent researchers out there that could do independent research without any involvement by McCord. We haven’t seen any evidence of ongoing research.
As for “so many are excited about Protandim”…….I think that the excitement is pretty much limited to the distributors. It certainly isn’t making the news.
Tried the product for 2 months and saw no changes in my health. It was as if I took nothing at all, except my wallet is a bit lighter. I would advise against purchasing it. A good diet and exercise would benefit you more.
A lot of people who take Protandim don’t notice a change in their health, at first, because “feeling better” is not what Protandim is designed to do for you. It is designed to lower Oxidative Stress. If you took it regularly for two months, it did just that. Your health was improved, even if you could not feel it, because OS is the main biochemical cause of aging. By activating Nrf2, and upregulating your survival genes, Protandim is a good form of preventive maintenance for your body. Diet and exercise, while good, do not lower Oxidative Stress, and do not activate Nrf2.
Greg, Im not sure about the lack of effect of diet and exercise. just did a quick pubmed search.
here is a study that noted adaptations to long term exercise lowers TBARS
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23916597
Here is a study where fish oil supplements reduced TBARS
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24225668
Here is a study noting healthier diets (Mediterranean diets) reduced oxidative stress and TBARS
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23866833
I have looked at the studies you linked, but the abstracts don’t indicate by how much OS and T-Bars are lowered by these methods. We know that Protandim lowers them by an average of 40% after 30 days. Do any of these other methods do as well? I seriously doubt it. As I said in a previous post, if there had already existed a good way to lower OS, there would have been no need to develop something like Protandim. It is because there was nothing effective out there that Myhill thought that combining herbal extracts might work, and why Dr McCord got so excited when he saw how well the final formula worked.
OK Greg, I dont know how much they lower OS either by looking at the summaries I provided. They do provide some evidence though to counter what you hinted at above.
I don’t do “hints”; I say exactly what I mean. What do you think I have hinted at?
Greg, I meant your reference above that nutrition and exercise didn’t lower oxidative stress and that protandim was the only way to do it.
I did not make myself clear. Good diet probably does lower Oxidative Stress a little, in that junk food increases free radical production, so the better one eats, the less OS he will have. Moderate exercise may also help, though lots of physical activity adds to the problem, as it forces your body to use more oxygen and burn more food fuel, and the by-product of that is more free radicals (just as driving your car faster produces more exhaust).
Protandim is not the only way to reduce OS, but it is the most powerful way presently known to do it. But it is a supplement to healthy eating and moderate exercise, not a substitute for them.
Thanks Greg 🙂
Greg B
No matter how many times you repeat it, your (LV’s) claims that Protandim lowers oxidative stress in humans is unsubstantiated according to FTC guidelines (and common sense).
Also, you need to be aware that even if the claims of activating Nrf2 are true, it may not necessarily prove to be a good thing.
https://www.caymanchem.com/app/template/Article.vm/article/2168%3Bjsessionid=55BADB4183BD678D2955D650DA29B6F7
If I read the study you linked correctly, activating Nrf2 and reducing free radicals may be counter-productive to persons undergoing cancer treatment, as the free radicals help kill cancer cells. We already know that, which is why we don’t recommend that persons with active cancer take Protandim (though I did hear Dr McCord say once that he has seen research which suggests that Protandim may help cancer patients undergoing chemo by protecting healthy cells, while concentrating the increased free radical production, which chemo is designed to do, on the cancerous cells (but he said more research was needed before saying that cancer patients should take Protandim).
I don’t understand how you can say that saying that Protandim lowers Oxidative Stress in humans makes no sense, when the human clinical study done shows that it does exactly that.
This is the part that stuck out to me:
“This suggests that the beneficial activity of Nrf2, which protects normal cells from basal levels of ROS, can be subverted by cancer cells to protect themselves from the cellular stress-inducing conditions of the tumor microenvironment. In order to survive, even cancer cells must adapt to this toxic environment, moderating ROS levels below a certain threshold and within a range that permits their growth and survival. In such a situation, an active Nrf2 pathway could maintain a favorable redox balance and upregulate ARE-dependent genes to generate antioxidants in cancer cells to promote their survival. This tumor-protective role of Nrf2 has been referred to as its “dark side”.”
So, what about the early stage of cancer…..BEFORE you even know you have it? Sounds like it is possible that activating Nrf2 could be protecting the cancer cells and promoting the growth of cancerous cells.
I said the claim that Protandim reduces oxidative stress in humans is unsubstantiated. One poorly done study does not meet the FTC guidelines for a substantiated claim. I outlined this a few weeks ago in the comments, with references. There was an example given (from the guidelines) of a supplement that did NOT meet the substantiation requirements and it had 3 human studies (and at least one had a placebo control). Protandim has only one study with positive results on humans, and it had no placebo control. No way would it satisfy the requirements for a substantiated claim.
If i understand you correctly, you are concerned that Protandim may protect early-stage cancer cells by reducing the number of free radicals which could kill them off. But the normal number of free radicals is not enough to do that, else cancer would never need to be treated; our bodies would just take care of such problems by themselves. But we know that doesn’t happen. cancer untreated usually ends up killing the person with it.
What chemo does is greatly increase free radical production, in hopes that the cancer cells will be overwhelmed before too much damage is done to healthy cells. It is during this process that Protandim may be contra-indicated. But before such treatment Protandim would be a good thing, in that it would be helping to protect healthy cells from OS damage and becoming cancerous themselves. For persons who don’t have any cancer, Protandim works to protect cells from OS damage and becoming cancerous.
as for the claim that Protandim reduces OS be unsubstantiated, if such was the case, why have so many researchers approached Dr McCord and LV asking to do studies with it? If the study showing it does lower OS was poorly done, how did it pass the peer-review process and get published? Poorly done studies are usually rejected by editors.
If I remember correctly, the study you had previously was about how some companies use studies of various ingredients to try to claim their specific products are good. That is not proper, because just because a certain ingredient may do good doesn’t mean that a particular product has the right amount of it, has processed it correctly, or doesn’t counter-act it with other ingredients in the product. Only studies done on the actual product itself can be considered valid. This is why so many are excited about Protandim–the studies have be done on Protandim itself, not merely some of the ingredients.
As for there not being placebo control, in this case one wasn’t really necessary, since how the subjects felt was not being measured. The measure was of an objective number from blood tests. One can not psych himself into a lower T-Bar score; it either goes down, or it does not. I would like to see another such study done with a control group, however, to see how much of a difference Protandim makes over traditional methods of lowering OS (vitamins, CoQ-10, exotic berry juices, red wine [any volunteers for that group? 😉 ].
I’m considering having blood work done before, and then 3 months into taking it…
Curious, great I’ll be glad to hear what happens.
Be sure that you ask for a test to measure Oxidative Stress specifically. Standard blood tests don’t usually measure that.
if you want to take it to the next level, after you have your pre/post results, go off protandim for a month (to get it out of your system) and then just take tumeric for a month. Then test OS again. If protandim really works, I’ve often wondered if tumeric might be the “secret sauce.”
Among the things Dr McCord tested while doing his research was if individual ingredients would be effective by themselves. What he found was that the combination of the five herbal extracts, in the amounts in Protandim, worked synergistically to activate Nrf2 and lower Oxidative Stress so well. The ingredients by themselves actually did little, but in combination they did quite well. Dr McCord himself was rather surprised at this, but repeated tests confirmed it.
Greg, I’d really need to see a published study showing that individual ingredients -taken individually – dont work the same as protandim is alleged to. There is a lot of research on tumeric and inflammation and oxidative stress. For example, here is a rat study from 2007 noting tumeric reduced OS – and TBARS –
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18049430
I’d love to see a head to head comparison between protandim and tumeric.
I’d like to see such a comparison study also. I followed the link to the study, and the abstract did not say how much the tumeric lowered OS. I do know that if tumeric by itself lowered OS significantly, it would have been known about already, and no need for developing something like Protandim would have existed. Also, this study was on rats, not humans, and I thought non-human studies were of no importance!
Greg, yes, Im not the biggest defender of rat studies (because we’re not rats) although rats do share some some genes in common with people as this NIH news release mentions http://www.genome.gov/11511308 . That said I still prefer people studies
Do we know how much tumeric is in Protandim?
I am considering taking Protandim…. I would love to see the response from Christopher on the questions that “good Joe” posed to him…. has he responded yet?
Curious mind, nope, Christopher never responded to me after I asked he write his answers here so everybody could read them. I’m actually disappointed.
Curious, what are you expecting Protandim to do for you? If you do decide to try it, keep in mind that it reduces Oxidative Stress. How exactly reducing OS will affect you can not be predicted, since OS affects people differently. What is known is that high OS levels are not good, and lowering that number will benefit you, even if you don’t “feel” anything for a while.
On your say-so, Greg, according to dubious and pseudo scientific testing oxidative stress is reduced. Is it reduced one iota of 8 minutes at $28.00 a day? A half an iota for 3 minutes a day? Notice how all MLM’s make cloud-like statements? It is very likely that one, non GMO banana, peeled and consumed gives you more bang for the buck.
I think the only way to know if it really reduces oxidative stress is go get the test done before starting protandim (such as the TBAR test). Then after a month, get oxidative stress tested again. That is the only way to know if it reduces OS or not.
Interesting attitudes. You can believe in what you learn in school only. But Science does not have all the answers. You can have an open mind and experience other ways or thinking as well. I think one should look at more than just book learning. Even with books if one researches back to original sources often the later books change the ideas from the original thinking and original ideas to something quite different. We only have our five senses. What if they are are not accurate all the time?
Dogmatism does not only appear in religion and politics.
jimgmaine, its possible my conclusions are incorrect as Ive said many times but I did not use book learning but rather the same scientific studies protandim distributors point to. There are indeed some things that are outside of the scope of science, but Protandim is not one of them.
Jimgmaine, bringing your comment back to the topic, i’s not only science and academic book lurnin’ that enable one to dismiss Protandim as a scam. Au contraire. I have friends who didn’t finish high school and they are streetwise enough to see through a scam like Protandim even faster than the scientists would. In fact, it’s more likely that some of them would be running a scam like this. They are infinitely smarter than those LifeVantage miscreants.
Hi All, yes this is bad joe. I realize now, (du-uh), that there are no delineations of identity between Good Joe and me. Sorry for the confusion. Not to worry though, unless, you are a bully or a revisionist historian. I got the auto unction to go for those jugulars. It is a learned response, long story, so sorry if any gentlefolk got apprehensive. I’m harmless unless you are running some scam and just begging for a head slap. Yes, i work for the Nutrition police.
Oh no, we can see Joe Cannon’s picture when he posts, so the confusion on my part was that maybe a (new) third Joe had posted about the hyperventilating distributor, because it just didn’t sound like you, “Bad Joe!” Hopefully if any more Joe’s post, they will add a last initial.
LisaRob, LOL I forgot you all could see my picture 🙂
You should have hung up Bad Joe, because the hyperventilating sales desperado you spoke to was lying to you. There aren’t 20 trials in progress. That’s how this scam operates. It’s one lie on top of another.
Bad Joes said: “I am bad joe…”
You certainly are; no debating that.
“…directing my previous reply towards Vogel, asking for his identification credentials as a basic parameter to any apology any bully gets from me.”
(a) No one cares whether or not you apologize; (b) your “bully” accusations are an ad hominem; are in themselves a form of bullying; have nothing to do with the topic of discussion.
“You, Vogel need to apologize to the gentle folks you verbally abused on this comment board.”
No, I really don’t. This is not your house and you have no business trying to extort apologies for non-existent slights. Save your indignation for the purveyors of snakeoil and pyramid schemes that we were talking about before you came along like a nightmarish party crasher to piss in the punch bowl.
Do you think the day will come when you contribute something meaningful and intellectually honest to this discussion instead of trying to police it and acting like a blowhard (rhetorical question FYI)?
Vogel, you say ‘bad” Joe should not comment because this is not his house. Well, unless you are Joe Cannon under another name, it is not your house either!
So anyone who disagrees with you ought not be allowed to post? Are you a fascist?
Greg, I’m the only joe Cannon here I can assure you. Nobody is a fascist (and if they are, whatever..). Personally I think all of the talk about MLM detracts from the real issue – the science of protandim has problems. Nobody can argue this issue. For example, we still have not heard from Christopher, the protandim distributor, who a few weeks ago, boldly commented that he would answer the list of questions I posed, but later balked when I asked that he write his answers here, rather than via the phone as he suggested.
The MLM talk is somewhat relevant in that some people think that any product marketed via that route is bogus. Many of us distributors have heard the “if it was a good product it would be in stores” excuse so often that we are sensitive to any mindless criticism of network marketing.
But your concerns about the science have been noted. There are no real problems with the science, as science, else the studies would not have passed the peer-review process. Desiring to see more human clinical studies before deciding about Protandim is understandable, but to dismiss the product because most of the studies are animal and test-tube is not.
If such studies were irrelevant, then they would not be conducted for just about every such product developed. Now it is possible that the results of animal and test-tube studies will not be reflected in humans, and may actually turn out to be harmful, but that happens primarily in new, artificial drug products, not in herbal supplements. Protandim has been out there long enough now to know whether or not it is dangerous.
Greg, having a study pass peer review does help its creditability but Ive read peer review studies that were not well done. There are also peer reviewed studies that find things that are just not true also. Having said that, all the protandim studies Ive seen have been peer reviewed, but since the majority of them are test tube or mouse studies, that’s is an issue for me given that the product is marketed to people.
I see no evidence protandim is dangerous and I dont think it is. But I also see little in the way of direct human evidence that it helps humans. It might and Ive said many times I’m completely open to the possibility that protandim is everything its touted to be. I just want to see the human evidence. Right now, its not there.
Greg B said: “Desiring to see more human clinical studies before deciding about Protandim is understandable, but to dismiss the product because most of the studies are animal and test-tube is not.”
I certainly don’t “desire” to see more human clinical studies on Protandim, as any such studies would be a colossal waste of resources and almost impossible to justify scientifically and ethically. All the evidence that is needed to dismiss this ill-conceived product already exists in spades.
Test tube and rodent studies do not constitute evidence relevant to human therapy — that’s a simple fact. In the field of medical research there is something called the evidence hierarchy (aka evidence pyramid, level of evidence, etc.). The level of proto-evidence you are talking about is simply not considered relevant to humans. From a legal perspective, no product claims can be made on the basis of rodent/test-tube studies.
Acceptable evidence (as defined under U.S. regulations) must be provided before making any kind of marketing claims suggesting a product can cure, treat, prevent, or mitigate the symptoms of any disease. The swindlers involved in the Protandim scam (the one you’re trying in vain to defend) simply try to skirt the law.
Vogel, if animal and test-tube studies do not constitute evidence relevant to human therapy, why are so many such studies performed for products intended fro use by humans? Just about all drugs and supplements begin their study careers with animal and test-tube studies, and only those that show positive results go on to being tested on people. Should that change? Do you want to volunteer to be a human guinea pig, and take something that the researches have not already determined through animal studies in not likely to kill you?
So you don’t want further studies done on Protandim, despite the mostly positive results so far? Are you anti-science? Do you think we ought to remain ignorant? Would you have told Dr Salk to stop research on his polio vaccine because much of his early research was done in test-tubes and on animals before going on to humans? Would you have stopped Dr Fleming from developing penicillin because much of his research involved test-tubes and animals?
Greg, if I can chime in on that, animal and test tube studies are often done because:
1. they are the beginning of research. If positive effects are seen, this often leads to human studies
2. you can control what happens to animals better (control food/calories/exercise etc) than that of humans
3. test tube/animal studies are cheaper to do
That said, we cant extrapolate what happens in animals /test tubes to what might happen in people.
i have a hyperventilating Protandim sales associate on the other line claiming 20 Universities have trials going on. How come nobody here said that? Does this company do things that only some folks get to know about?
Vogel, straight up, where do you get your science? Do you have lab access to analyze what Protandim does or doesn’t do?
Joe, I dont know about the trials that the 20 universities have going on. I only report on what is published. As for the hyperventilating sales associate, ask him/her where those 20 university studies are in the pipeline because they are not listed on ClinicalTrials.gov here is the link to the protandim studies
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=Protandim&Search=Search
I’m saddened the protandim metabolic syndrome study was withdrawn
Greg, nobody challenged the safety of Protandim. We ARE concerned about what bang for the buck is derived.
For example, you want $630.00 just to sign up to find out what in the heck you and other Protandim sales associates are hyping about.
Meanwhile, one of your competitors wants .09 cents a capsule:
1. mg N-acetyl cysteine decreases oxidative stress in workers exposed to lead via stimulating GSH synthesis. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23731375
$10.99/120 caps NAC 400 mg
bronsonvitamins.com/nac-n-acetyl-cysteine400mg-2387.html
Is it any wonder why Vogel is out of sorts? But mostly, is it any wonder folks give the automatic ‘NO’ when they hear MLM? Bang for the buck, brother. Don’t forget you heard that novel principle of Business 101, right here on Supplement Geek.
Wait….is this yet another Joe, or “Bad Joe”? I ask because this Joe (with the hyperventilating distributor on the line) sounds less skeptical than Bad Joe!
Joe,
LV distributors have been claiming for YEARS that over 20 universities worldwide are studying Protandim. I believe they had that on their website for awhile, but I’m not sure if it’s still there. There is absolutely no proof that this is true, and in fact LV has been caught flat out lying about studies in the past.
I personally caught them (Myhill) in a lie about research supposedly being done at UMN on diabetes. They posted a quote from a researcher, and I tracked the researcher down to verify the quote. The researcher got back to me immediately and denied saying it. Within two days, LV took the web page down containing the quote. I can only assume the researcher, or his lawyer insisted they remove it.
As I posted earlier in the comments:
As for the studies being “independent,” here is a quote from Doug Robinson from the 2013 conference call discussing their fiscal fourth quarter. Someone asked about why LV hasn’t replaced Darlene Walley as Chief Science Officer, and why more studies haven’t been published recently. This exposes that the studies are not really independent, and many, if not most, are conducted by members of LV’s Scientific Advisory Board:
Doug Robinson said:
“First, on the Scientific Advisory Board, we do have a Scientific Advisory Board with some of the same members that we’ve had in the past. They consult regularly to us. Many of the Scientific Advisory Board members are actually members of the research organizations that are conducting studies as we speak as they consult with us in that way.”
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1692702-lifevantages-ceo-discusses-f4q-2013-results-earnings-call-transcript?
This was Robinson’s chance to brag about all the scientific research being done on their “medical breakthrough,” but he doesn’t mention a thing about 20 universities worldwide….just that some studies are being conducted by members of their scientific advisory board. Pretty unimpressive.
For arguments sake, lets just say it’s true and 20 universities are studying Protandim. So what? What does it matter until the results are published? It’s all speculation, hype, and smoke and mirrors until then.
To Yellow Joe (not “Good Joe” the blog host)
I can’t let your unwarranted accusation go unchallenged. I am not on the payroll of anyone relevant to this discussion, and it’s unwarranted and cowardly of you to insinuate that I am. I’ll accept your apology in advance.
Good Joe Bad Joe. Do tell us a bit about your credentials before i chum up to you. Bullying is serious business these days. I don’t take it lightly.
I’m already confused with this good joe bad joe stuff lol but if its me, check me out at joe-cannon.com.
O, sorry, Joe and Vogel for being unclear. We know you, Joe, are the biologist/chemist facilitator ‘Voice of Reason’, possessing ‘above and beyond’ normal patience. You are correctly identified by Vogel as “Good Joe” as your peaceful, articulate qualities are surely first class.
I am bad joe, directing my previous reply towards Vogel, asking for his identification credentials as a basic parameter to any apology any bully gets from me. You, Vogel need to apologize to the gentle folks you verbally abused on this comment board.
Hey “Bad Joe”, do you see the words “Vogel’s Credentials” anywhere in the tile of this thread? You shouldn’t take irrelevancy and logical fallacy lightly. Smarten up.
Vogel, is that your version of doing the Hokey Pokey?
Joe. You have way more patience than most. God bless you. Keep up the great work. Greg, get a life. Vogel, who’s payroll are you on? You sound like a employee of some quackwatch duck show. LisaRob, burned out on MLM’s? I am with you on that.
The product changed between 2006 and 2012? You call that a tweak? Hmmm, data before the “tweak” therefore becomes irrelevant.
Joe you are right. With 20 mil profits. and the other zillion tagged on the buyout, sounds like they had ample money to do some basic human trials. It is my experience the trials are missing because they did the trials and the trials came back negative. Nothing else to do but throw the trials out…
Thanks to all except you Greg for your time wasting efforts. At least Vogal, although a bully, was brief.
Godspeed,
Joe
Joe, thanks I’m glad you found my review helpful.
Just my two cents worth on Protandim……I have a friend who is a distributor and I agreed to try it for three months. I am a 45 year old female all-natural bodybuilder…..I eat very clean and have no heath problems. After three months of using Protandim I can honestly say I cannot tell a difference in the slightest either way. Maybe if I had health problems I would notice more of a difference? Not sure. I have read many reviews on Amazon and people swear it has helped them, so that’s cool. But for me, I really can’t say I’ve noticed a difference at all. So I stopped my monthly shipment.
The one thing I do wish to mention is that my friend who sells this stuff pushes it pretty hard. Too hard. And she tries to convince people that this is a cure-all for every medical problem known to mankind.
I’m not sure if she has taken it upon herself to do this or if she has been instructed to tell people this. While I’m sure that the herbs in Protandim are beneficial to certain situations more than others, I can’t say I feel it’s right to take such a radical approach.
May as well call it snake oil or something.
So while I really like this particular friend, I have to say that she has given me a very negative opinion about the company and product, I realize it’s due to her particular approach, but I don’t agree with it. I’m a bit concerned as to whether or not she’s going to have a major problem with me stopping use of this “miracle cure-all pill” but if she does, I guess she’s just going to have to come to terms with it. I have better things to spend $40 a month on.
As for the skin cream, I’ve been using that as well. Its good, I like it, I’ve been using it for a couple months, but is it worth $70 a bottle? Probably not. Pretty expensive for the small amount you get. I’m looking into other professional products that are better and definitely less expensive. So it’s doubtful that I will continue with the TrueScience cream either. But, here again, it’s not bad at all, no complaints except for the price tag.
Off the soapbox now, thanks for taking the time to read. In a nutshell I guess if a person is curious, try Protandim or TrueScience and see if it makes a difference for you. If it’s worth the money, then use it, if not, find something that works better for you. Just like anything else on the market.
Shasta, thanks for writing and much success with the bodybuilding. I know much dedication you put into what you do.
If your distributor has been promoting Protandim as some sort of cure-all, then she has said more than she should. The only claim we are allowed to make about Protandim is that it lowers Oxidative Stress. We should not be saying that it will diagnose, prevent, treat, or cure any disease. We can tell why high OS levels are not good., but we can not say that lowering them will result in any specific result for anyone. Shame on your distributor for misleading you.
You can be sure of one thing–your OS levels are lower now than when you started on Protandim, that just hasn’t yet manifested itself in a way you can feel. Here is a youtube video by a weightlifter that may interest you–youtube.com/watch?v=kBFDWVQU9JQ
Greg, actually I dont even think you are allowed to say Protandim reduces oxidative stress. According to DSHEA, structure function claims are all that is allowed. I’m no expert on how claims should be structured but “reduces oxidative stress” sounds way too specific and “drug-like” to me. Just a heads up on this Greg.
The LifeVantage website makes this statement/claim:
“Comprised of natural plant ingredients, Protandim is a patented, science-based formula that has been researched, tested and validated by renowned universities and institutions. It is the only supplement clinically proven to reduce oxidative stress in humans by an average of 40 percent in 30 days.”
I’m not sure if that’s a structure/function claim or not, but I am fairly certain that it doesn’t meet the FTC substantiation requirements, and at the very least, it is blatantly misleading. To claim that the product has been “clinically proven” and “validated by renowned universities and institutions” is ridiculous in the context of that statement. .
Anyone reading that statement would assume that the studies done at the renowned universities directly support the claim of reducing oxidative stress in humans, and that is simply untrue. None of the studies replicated or validated the claim of reducing “oxidative stress in humans by an average of 40% in 30 days”. Only the one very flawed human study done by LV supports that claim. The other studies were test tube and rodent studies which were not done to validate the claim being made in the statement.
Am I the only one who thinks that statement is grossly misleading?
lifevantage.com/products/protandim/
LisaRob, Im not sure if its a structure function claim either. I’ll assume their people cleared the statement before it went live.
First, it is not an allowable structure function claim. Second, DSHEA does not require pre-clearance of supplement marketing claims. It places the onus on the manufacturer to ensure that any claims made are accurate and compliant with the law. Companies are required to submit their claims to the FDA so that they can be placed on file, but the FDA makes no effort whatsoever to ensure the compliance or accuracy of the claims. That’s why DSHEA sucks for consumers. It was a byproduct of the lobbying efforts of supplement manufacturers; it was never designed to serve the public interest.
Getting back to the oxidative stress data, the company is basing their claim entirely on the results of one incredibly shoddy error plagued company-run study that was not blinded randomized or controlled; only involved a dozen or so subjects; and utilized only a single rather unreliable measure of oxidative stress in plasma. No government agency would ever even for a millisecond consider a worthless study like this to support any kind of product marketing claim.
It’s beyond ridiculous that we’re even having this conversation, but Greg B get some of the thank for leading the exercise in futility. That’s what these trolls do best. If they can’t beat your argument, they’ll just try to tire you out and impose a mental tax.
Thanks for the info, Vogel.
Greg B. or no Greg B., the oxidative stress claim is made by Lifevantage, and in a VERY misleading statement on their official website.
Not only is the claim unsubstantiated, they imply that the claim is validated by renowned universities and institutions. It’s tough to hold LV accountable for what their distributors say (even though we both know the company encourages distributors to make illegal claims), but certainly they can be disciplined for what they put on their own website. This, combined with the links to studies on the website, should be of some interest to the FTC……not that I’m holding my breath, I’m sure they have bigger fish to fry.
Greg B, you have already crossed over the legal line here on several occasions by claiming that Protandim has anti-inflammatory properties; that it made you sleep better and improved your eyesight; and that it can delay or prevent the onset of age-related diseases.
Therein lies one of the most fundamental problems with this evil scam. People like you, Mr. Distributor, who are either too dense to recognize your own hypocrisy or too greedy and dishonest to care.
You haven’t made a SINGLE valid comment here to date. Not one.
Joe, since you’re compiling a list of Protandim studies, you will want to add this important but obscure study:
Vandenburgh H, Shansky J, Benesch-Lee F, Skelly K, Spinazzola JM, Saponjian Y, Tseng BS. Automated drug screening with contractile muscle tissue engineered from dystrophic myoblasts. FASEB J. 2009 Oct;23(10):3325-34.
This was a study (conducted, incidentally, by the same research group-for-hire that LFVN contracted to do the 2010 osteopontin study in mice) which showed that Protandim had potentially deleterious effects in a pre-clinical model of muscular dystrophy (i.e., Protandim significantly decreased tetanic force). The company’s sickening dishonesty is reflected in the fact that they have NEVER mentioned that this study even exists. It is easy to overlook this study because it does not come up on a basic keyword search for Protandim on PubMed. The fact that the company would suppress negative results (much like they tried to whitewash the failed study in alcoholics or the critical flaws in their first tainted clinical study) is further evidence of the dishonesty that pervades this scam at every conceivable level.
You will probably also be interested in these other studies; this is the research that originally established that curcumin upregulates NRF2.
Balogun E, Hoque M, Gong P, Killeen E, Green CJ, Foresti R, Alam J, Motterlini R. Curcumin activates the haem oxygenase-1 gene via regulation of Nrf2 and the antioxidant-responsive element. Biochem J. 2003 May 1;371(Pt 3):887-95.
Dickinson DA, Iles KE, Zhang H, Blank V, Forman HJ. Curcumin alters EpRE and AP-1 binding complexes and elevates glutamate-cysteine ligase gene expression. FASEB J. 2003 Mar;17(3):473-5. Epub 2003 Jan 2.
Notice that these studies were published back in 2003 – six years before LFVN ever mentioned anything at all about their product affecting NRF2. This is what supplement MLMs do – piggyback and lie.
Here’s how the scenario plays out. First, an MLM company hires someone to look through the scientific literature to find something interesting that an ingredient, say vitamin C for example, does in a test tube. Then they create a novel product that combines that ingredient with a bunch of other after-thought ingredients (preferably ones that are obscure, exotic sounding, and trendy), and they patent the new formulation, claiming that it’s unique and original. Next, they design and execute a study or two replicating the already established fact that the key ingredient (e.g., vitamin C) does what it was previously shown to do in test tube models (like inhibit oxidation for example).
Lastly, they pretend that their unoriginal test tube findings are novel and important, and they attribute the demonstrated in vitro effects of the product not to the principal active ingredient (vitamin C in this case) as logic would dictate, but rather to the exotic obscure ingredients (or even more implausibly, to the synergistic combination). The product’s allegedly unique “proprietary formula” is used as justification for charging outrageous sums of money for trivial amounts of what are in reality commonplace, cheap, and basically inert ingredients. This is exactly what LFVN has done with curcumin and Protandim.
These studies that the company paid for can be thought of as slam-dunk ripoff experiments. In the case of Protandim, the “epic” finding that they got from their 2009 study (where the effect of the product on NR2 was first claimed) is that curcumin did what it was expected to do, based on studies that were conducted more than half a decade prior. This is how shoddy dishonest science is conducted and it is the HALLMARK of MLM supplement “science”.
Sometimes, even after stacking the deck, the studies paid for by supplement companies like LFVN still fail to yield the expected positive results, and when that happens, they simply bury it like they did with the MD study or whitewash it like with the study in alcoholics.
Bear in mind that this research is not intended for the benefit of the scientific and medical communities. It is executed for the sole purpose of deceiving their target audience (i.e. potential and existing distributor and customers).
Vogel, thanks I did miss that study in my original review. I think LisaRob may have mentioned in previously. Im not sure. I’ve noticed how some products do tend to have one or two key ingredients with other stuff tossed in such as my recent review on this product, that’s advertised on TV http://supplementclarity.com/androzene-sex-supplement-review/
How much civility is due the fox in the hen-house? I showed more than that.
I feel disinclined to bend over backwards to appease the sensibilities of conmen and dimwits. That’s just my MO. I justify my brusqueness and intransigence by always telling the truth, providing facts, and never basing the crux of my arguments on logical fallacy. That’s more than I can say for Greg B.
Vogel, I dont think we have to insult people to get our points across. I know there are passionate arguments on both sides of the MLM issue and I can understand how frustration on either side may cause us to say things we’d probably not say if we were discussing this at the local bus stop. For me, I just believe in science and facts.
Earlier you mentioned the china study. I would like to add the book whole by cambel as well. It actully goes in to the sience behind real food versus supplement.
Ken, thanks and the book Whole is on my reading list. For those who have not heard of it, here is the book Whole on Amazon.
Wow. I’ve missed so much since I last posted. That Greg B is quite the nutter. Virtually everything he’s said to date (up to about 50 worthless pages by now) has been twisted and ass-backwards. Only a MLMer would dare to give such long winded condescending lectures about the nuances of medical research when it’s so laughably obvious that he knows nothing about the subject.
LisaRob and others have been doing a fine job of making Greg eat his words, but I’ll go a round or two with Greg if he’s up for it (…and I will make him cry).
I’ll be glad to burst Greg’s bubble by saying that, medically speaking, Protandim does nothing for nobody. Oh wait, with the possible exception of those metal flakes the product was spiked with; that might have medical effects. That’s only one of the thousand or so details their idiot distributors would rather we all forget — like the details I posted before about Chemins, David Brown, and the connection with lethal epehdra-based supplement scams.
What a sad lot in life it is to be a Protandim distributor. I might feel a scintilla of pity were it not for the fact that they are illegally marketing this crap as a cure for cancer, diabetes, MS, autism, etc.
No need to mix words. Call a spade a spade. Snakeoil hucksters are a menace to society, even more so when they are energized by the MLM quasi-pyramid scheme model, as in the case of LifeVantage.
I think we can discuss Protandim and the research and keep the discussion civil.
I can understand why you feel the need for kid gloves Joe, given that you are the host and moderator of this site. But when someone drops in on a discussion and tries to drown everyone out with noise and blatant BS, my instinct is not to be indulgent and deferential but to call a spade a spade.
Greg B came here to lie and to propagate a destructive scam. I am challenging him on everything he’s said to date because it has been utter nonsense, copied and pasted from the company’s playbook. If he accepts my challenge, I will deconstruct everything he’s said and irrefutably prove point by point why it’s BS. Greg B will then simply fade away into oblivion.
Be aware that when scammy MLM companies like LifeVantage find out that a critical site like your exists and is high in the Google rankings, they actually pay to have SEO specialists attack it and fill it with noise and BS, just like what Greg B did. Sometimes renegade distributors take it upon themselves to attempt damage control and whitewash criticism, violating company policy and FTC regulations in the process by failing to disclose that they have a financial interest.in suppressing criticism.
Keep in mind that Protandim distributors (guys like Greg B presumably) are attempting to con little old ladies out of their pension money by telling them that this herbal garbage scam-bait cures cancer. If I was in the same room with one of these hucksters, I would feel more inclined to push their head through a plate glass window rather than engage in polite banter.
Nonetheless, it’s your house and your rules, so I’ll try my best not to offend your sensibilities again while I’m figuratively tar and feathering this clown.
Vogel, that’s an interesting observation about companies hiring SEO people to infiltrate a site, filling it with fake people. I know SEO people were hired in other capacities but not in this way. Thanks for the heads up on this.
Oh man, you don’t know the half of it Joe. is is not an isolated phenomena either; it is what MLMs do as a routine part of their business. It has been that was since Amway/Quixtar started the first high profile Google Bomb campaign many years ago.
http://www.linksandlaw.com/technicalbackground-google-bombing.htm#The_Amway_Quixtar_Google_Bombing_Example.
http://amthrax.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/orrin-qrush-the-many-blogs-of-orrin-woodward-part-one/
Here’s another good example — cancer quack Stan Burzynski made the news after he got busted for using an SEO/PR mercenary to target a little kid who had criticized the doctor’s bilking of cancer patients.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhys_Morgan#Burzynski_Clinic_and_antineoplastons
Just two days ago, notorious MLM apologist Troy Dooly got busted by the SEC because he had secretly been accepting payments to promote and do internet whitewashing on behalf of fraudulent MLMs.
This guy made a point of dropping by to critical internet discussions about certain MLMs (his clients) and pretending to be a neutral party; all the while trying to sow fear/uncertainty/doubt (FUD) and whitewash on behalf of the people who were paying him under the table.
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2013/33-9460.pdf
http://amlmskeptic.blogspot.com/2013/10/breaking-news-sec-slaps-troy-dooly-of.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt
On the macro level, these companies pour barrels of cash into the coffers of the Direct Selling Association (DSA) and several other “natural product” lobby groups who in turn put the screws to the government to soften legal regulations. This creates a vicious cycle; the laws get looser; the MLMs make more money; they give more to finance the DSA and the campaigns of ‘friendly’ politicians; the laws get looser, and so on. Ultimately it’s the public that looses out and they lose BIG. This is why these scams are able to continue and only infrequently get the attention they warrant from regulatory agencies like the FDA and FTC.
But getting back to Greg B, if he is in fact a distributor, as he claimed he was, then his presence here and the comments he has made so far have violated both the terms of his distributor agreement and US law. He surely would knows that too, and that if he were to reveal his name and distributor ID#, as he is required to do, we would report him and then the company would have no choice but to terminate him. He knows that he could also be facing enforcement action by the FDA (for the illegal and misleading health claims he had made about the product), as well as the SEC and FTC.
People like Greg B have at the very least the tacit approval of the company, but if he were ever outed, they wouldn’t be able to distance themselves fast enough. For them, It’s all about always maintaining plausible deniability. Therein lies the evil of using MLM to fraudulently market bogus snakeoil products.
Greg B could be a renegade distributor acting on his own behalf, and/or he could have been compensated by the company as an SEO/PR mercenary for doing this on their behalf. Given the absurdly low quality of the contributions Greg has made to date, it would be hard to fathom that anyone would be compensating him for his efforts, but fortunately it is very difficult for scummy companies to hire good talent willing to do this sort of thing. They have no choice but to hire bumbling clods instead, like Greg, Troy Dooly, and Marc Stephen (Burzynski’s hitman).
Vogel, that is interesting stuff and you obviously are far more knowledgeable about the MLM side of this than I am. Whether what you say happens at other sites has occurred here I dont know. While I’m pretty good at sorting out the spammers, ultimately we will never know.
That said, I think if anyone looked at my conversations with the various protandim distributors who have commented here, I think they would be wise enough to see what happens when we start discussing the state of the science of Protandim.
So far none of them have been able to refute anything I’ve stated about the studies in my review.
Joe I was approached by a friend who is a distributor and gave me a bottle for free to take. Having diabetes and being on a few different meds like Lisinopril and Simvastatin I was intrested in seeing if it would help me. 2 things I wanted to know if you could help me with,
one he told me that it would not interfere with the other meds I take because it metabolizes in the liver and not the kidneys,
and also that the FDA approved the statement that it reduces oxidative stress by 40%.
He was clear to say that it can not be regulated by the FDA because it is not a drug but that the FDA approved the statement that it reduces oxidative stress because it does in fact do that, do you know if that is true or not?
Also I would like to add that I don’t know if it is coincidence or not but I have gotten benefit from taking it, I feel like it definitely helped clear my head and reduced the amount of dark and anxious thoughts I was experiencing for months before. I would just like to know the facts for sure the input has been amazing and amusing at some points but I do appreciate your transparency and believe your intentions are not malicious but warranted.
I wondered if this does what it says why doesn’t everyone know about this and why isn’t everyone taking it? Thanks for this blog it’s awesome and informing, the more people keep their emotions in check and cite just the facts they know and what they know the better it is.
Boggs, Thanks for writing. I’m honestly not sure where the primary area of metabolism of protandim is – liver or kidneys? That said, until formal testing in humans specifically looks at protandim-drug interactions, I dont think anyone can say there are no interactions. As far as the FDA is concerned, while I am not sure I doubt that they would say its ok to make the claim protandim reduces oxidative stress by 40% – yet not”regulate” it in some way. The truth is that Protandim – as well as all supplements in the US – do have some FDA regulation. Its called the dietary supplement health and education act. I discuss this and other things on my questions page http://supplementclarity.com/supplement-questions/
I am glad you are experiencing some benefits from Protandim and hope it continues.
You said you were a diabetic? Are you a type II diabetic? if yes, I want you to know that the odds are very good that with a little weight loss and a little exercise, your diabetes will go away – and stay away -as long as keep doing it. You may not even need your cholesterol or high blood pressure meds anymore. Ive seen it happen in others. I just wanted to mention this in case nobody else did. For further reading, here are some things from my personal site that you may find interesting:
http://www.joe-cannon.com/natural-cure-for-diabetes/
http://www.joe-cannon.com/interview-yolanda-bowles-diabetes-exercise-nutrition-cure-type-ii-diabetes/
Thanks for your quick response, the truth is I am finding a lot of pro and con input on Protandim. I read the article on protandimretort.com and found it to be interesting and honest at least I think it was and that’s where I am having a conflict. I like very much that you are only asking relevant and pertinent questions concerning the research of Protandim, I don’t feel like you are saying there is no possible way it works you just want to see more proof and more human study research which I think is absolutely merited and open as well as honest.
I am having trouble who to believe as far as the people who are for and against the validity of the benefits Protandim has when taking it, it’s like a conspiracy theory. I heard the phone call with The GM of the Baltimore Ravens Ozzie Newsome which was great but now I’m thinking to myself how do I know that was actually him because I didn’t see the person who was on the call, bottom line if you want people to believe it does what it says then where are the numbers?
They are basing the whole thing on the test John Quinones took in 2006 and the T-BAR test is not something you can go to your doctor to get so how can the everyday person taking it actually test if it is working? On the retort website it is stating that the first human trial proved that it did indeed work in lowering T-BAR levels is that your belief from the investigating you have done?
And thank you on the info about Diabetes I am a type 2 diabetic so exercise and diet have gone a long way in helping control it and I know if I get serious enough about working out and the way I eat I can eliminate it all together.
This is a great blog you have thank you for being open and honest anyone who gets on here to cause conflict is foolish whether you are pro Protandim or not this is a great tool to evaluate responses and testimonies as well as gain knowledge and perspective.
Boggs, my pleasure. While I’m sure that there are some people making false internet testimonials about Protandim, I am also pretty sure what you heard on the call was the GM of the Ravens (Ive heard his name tossed around by other distributor and hes so high profile that I dont think his name would be used if he wasnt involved with the company at some level).
If you made it through all 900 or so comments you’ll see my interaction with various protandim distributors. Most of them mean well and some of them ask the same questions I do. There are also others who choose not to ask questions and believe the “party line” that protandim is everything its made out to be. maybe it is and maybe it isn’t? That said, one of my rules is that when faced with two answers, generally the simple answer is the correct answer. Unlike those who sell it, I dont have anything to gain. While I will always have an open mind, having looked at the science and interacted with a few distributors, I’d like more human research before I’d use it over a lesser expensive option like tumeric alone.
Please do take your type II diabetes seriously Boggs. Today is the time to act because it will get worse. Protandim wont stop it. Here is something else I wrote about type II diabetes and what it can lead to http://www.joe-cannon.com/can-type-ii-diabetes-be-cured/
Read the interview I linked to above about what that woman went though – and where she is today. She’s an inspiration!
Joe should I be concerned that Protandim could actually lead to medical problems? Some of the reading I’ve done has stated that taking antioxidant supplements can actually cause harm or even feed or cause cancer is that a true statement? Or if someone is on chemo or radiation could taking Protandim make it worse? What have you heard or learned about this?
Boggs, I dont see any evidence that Protandim will hurt anyone or cause any disease. I see no proof it causes cancer either. The caution about antioxidants possibly “feeding” cancer is a general caution mentioned for all antioxidants if the person is getting treatment for cancer. Some cancer therapies -like radiation – kill cancer by generating free radicals. Since antioxidants decrease free radicals, in theory, they might reduce these cancer treatments from working as well as they should. This is likely why LV also mentions this on their website.
That said, I’m not aware of any evidence that this occurring, but because cancer is so complex – as are the treatments – it is best to speak to an oncologist about this if people are taking any antioxidants, just to play it safe.
I guess the only “bad” thing I can see from any supplement is thinking that the product – any product – will replace being healthy in other ways (eating more fruits/veggies, exercise etc). I dont think Protandim will hurt your diabetes and so if you want to take it, that’s great, if it gets you to take steps to be healthy in other ways such as what we discussed earlier. Taking protandim – or anything else – without also doing those other things, I think is a mistake. All supplements are meant to “supplement” other healthy behaviors, not replace them. I think if we all keep that in mind, we will be ok 🙂
Joe your responses are great! As well as Lisa wow so detailed and backed by facts and proof which is what I am looking for, now is it safe to assume that getting antioxidants from foods like fruits and vegetables is better than taking supplements to get those antioxidants?
I have read a book called the Spectrum by Dr. Dean Ornish where he has stated that over 30 years of research he has seen people with all kinds of diseases and ailments improve or actually reverse ailments by eating whole grain foods, legumes and unrefined soy products.
People with heart disease waiting for transplants actually didn’t need a transplant after changing their lifestyles and eating nutrient dense foods and eliminating processed and refined foods from their diet. And obviously if you are in good health then following a healthy lifestyle will help you stay healthy and prevent many ailments, that 70% of all diseases are preventable!
I am not depending on Protandim to cure my diabetes I still take all my meds as directed. my goal is by 40th birthday in June that I will no longer need any of my meds and live pill free completely this is my biggest desire.
Thank you for your input as well as you Lisa it is great knowledge packed information I am going to continue to take Protandim for now I have been on it about 2 months and I do not know if its coincidence or not but I sleep better and have more energy and my thoughts are a lot more positive in nature and I have less thoughts that are morbid or fearful of dying.
I have made a conscious effort to change these feelings and take control of my mind and health by going to the gym and making better choices on the foods I eat. Your input and honest questions about the claims and studies of Protandim are valid to say the least and again I will say they are in no way malicious or negative of Protandim.
Anyone who is taking Protandim or is involved as I am should want to know the truth and demand the truth and not be blind to the flaws in the studies and research, if you want to get behind something and are presenting to others you should want to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it’s all legit and on the level. If they are misleading people purposely to make money that is scary and down right evil preying on peoples health concerns or hopes for a true health breakthrough.
You are doing a good thing and I feel in my heart you are looking out for people by posing these questions good for you,you should be commended for your insight and inquisitive mind.
Boggs, thanks I appreciate that and I agree with Dr Ornish as well. Another good book you may want to check out is the China Study. The author is a scientist who did the research on the benefits of eating fruits and vegetables. The book is full of facts.
Much success on getting off your diabetes meds by your 40th birthday! Keep me posted on your progress 🙂
Boogs44:
First of all, I don’t know why anyone would take medical advice from a supplement salesperson. Like all MLM businesses, anyone can sign up to be a distributor; there are no educational qualifications.
I’ve seen the claim (by McCord) that Protandim is safe because it metabolizes in the liver and not the kidneys. The fact that McCord would make such a statement should be a huge red flag (along with all the other red flags regarding this company and those selling the product).
You should read this:
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/drug+metabolism
Here is a quote:
“The primary site of drug metabolism is the liver, the organ that plays a major role in metabolism, digestion, detoxification, and elimination of substances from the body.”
Here is a link to one of the drugs you are taking, where it states:
“Simvastatin undergoes extensive first-pass metabolism in the liver. Rapidly hydrolyzed to the beta-hydroxyacid of simvastatin and its 6′-hydroxy, 6′-hydroxymethyl, and 6′-exomethylene derivatives.”
http://www.drugs.com/ppa/simvastatin.html
I don’t have a bottle of Protandim with their new labeling, but the old label says, “Clinically Proven to Reduce Free Radical Damage*”
The asterisk leads to the statement on the label:
“*This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.”
So, no, the FDA has not approved any statements regarding free radical damage or oxidative stress. The supplement industry is very loosely regulated. I can see from pictures on the web that the new labeling on Protandim does not have the same statement (at least not on the front label) regarding “Free Radical Damage,” but has replaced that with “The Nrf2 Synergizer.”
You are spot on in wondering why everyone is not taking this product if it does all it says it does. This is just a few simple, inexpensive herbs being hyped and sold as a medical breakthrough.
The company selling it has been caught in multiple lies (which are well documented) and should not be trusted. I caught them making up a quote from a researcher at UMN in regards to diabetes research. A company with a legitimate product doesn’t need to lie about anything, and would back up their claims with relevant research. A medical breakthrough would be all over the news, and researchers would be churning out studies and conducting clinical trials. There is no evidence of that happening.
Lisa let me just say that your responses are great, to the point and backed by facts and knowledge of the information. Thank you for your response and input I am gathering information and am looking forward to see if any of these concerns and questions about the flaws in the research on Protandim will be addressed or answered.
I know of one person who has cancer that is taking it in your opinion should I tell them to stop taking it? Or at least let them know about the info I am finding out about?
Thanks for the kind words, Boogs44.
As for your friend with cancer, I think the more information he has, the better. At the very least he should tell his doctor that he is on a supplement which supposedly boosts the level of antioxidants in his body. However, if he is a distributor, it is not likely he will listen to you.
I will quote Vogel’s response to this topic from a few weeks ago:
“It is generally recommended that those undergoing cancer chemo or radiotherapy avoid taking antioxidant supplements. The mechanism by which cancer treatments destroy cancer cells involves the generation of free radicals. In theory, taking a supplement to protect normal cells from free radical damage would also protect cancer cells from free radical damage and would therefore undermine the treatment.”
“LifeVantage, the maker of Protandim, advises not taking the product during cancer therapy, not out of any legitimate concern for their customers but rather to mislead consumers into thinking that the product is a legitimate cancer treatment.”
“In reality, the product is unlikely to be a potent enough antioxidant to have any impact on the efficacy of cancer therapy. The only clinical evidence of the product’s antioxidant effects comes from that godawful 2006 study. The flaws in that study run so deep that it would appear that it was never intended to have any scientific value but rather was designed from solely to fool people.”
Boogs44, if you Google “antioxidants and cancer treatment,” you will find quite a bit of information. One I came across and found interesting:
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/777516
Another was:
http://m.cancer.gov/topics/factsheets/antioxidants
I hope this helps.
This whole argument is sad. If you study herbs you will see just Ashwagandha by it self has thousands of years of use by Doctors in India. We in the West isolate our selves mentally from other cultures and loose the benefits of their vast experience.
If we could spend just a year of our lives in an Asian country with an open mind we might learn a lot. I had to go to Thailand in 2009 to have Green light Laser Surgery as it was done there by Thai surgeons trained in the US, but could not be done here until much later. This one herb has been used successfully in India for thousands of years
Ah well Tai Chi has been used in China for thousands of years as well and is only being tried here in the last 50 or 60 years. We have a very young country and culture.
Here is an article on “Appeals to Ancient Wisdom” which explains why you shouldn’t trust that tactic when used to sell you on something:
http://scienceornot.net/2012/05/15/appeals-to-ancient-wisdom-trusting-traditional-trickery/
Here is a quote:
“Why do people use this tactic?
People turn to this tactic when they lack scientific evidence to support their models. They want tor persuade you that because the traditional view has persisted for a long time, it outweighs the scientific evidence. But unfortunately, these models usually persist for reasons that have little to do with their success in explaining the real world.”
To Greg B,
I take it from your reply that you are a distributor of Protandim..
I understand full well about MLMs as I once distributed or sold for Usana Vitamins, one of the highest quality vitamins on the market…
MLMs really don’t have much credibility as it only requires a person to pay an initial distribution fee and then a monthly commitment to market the item, one just refers the buying public to the marketing claims of the company….. as has been done with LV…
As for the studies of Protandim, out of the 12 or so done, Dr Joe McCords name appears on most of them, would this not be a conflict of interest…? considering he is on the board for LV as a paid consultant..
How is it that one can do a peer – reviewed study when that persons name is on the studied item as its inventor…?
His name isn’t even on the patent… are there not enough red flags for you or anyone to investigate..?
You did not even reply to the one human study on alcoholic men that protandim completely failed and so much so that the men on the placebo did far better than the men on Protandim..
Only 2 studies were done on humans….
We are trying it only due to family that distribute it and a hope that it might actually do some of the things it claims to do.
I am medically trained, I study / research all of the items, especially food items that we take… the extreme danger of “Refined Sugar” look at this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
or, this one
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/m/episodes/2013-2014/the-secrets-of-sugar
look at either of these or both, then come back and tell me if Protandim, by itself, without any changes to a persons diet, will help anyone…..
Peer – reviewed studies are only as good as the integrity of the Company or University doing them….. don’t think for one minute that money and profit does not play into a large part of the total picture.
one more
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/brief-update-protandim/
this has to do with the human study on alcoholic men, which can be found, but one has to look very deep to get the full study, most will only find the study without the finished results….. why….? it was completed in 2010…. so why not publish the results…?
Because they were unfavorable for the marketing of Protandim….
Here is another study (on DMD…Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy) which is never discussed by LV because the results were unfavorable:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3236595/
The interesting thing about this study is that one of the authors, B. Tseng, is the same author used on the DMD study that LV often refers to as the “Harvard Study,” even though the study was done in Colorado (Tseng was affiliated with Harvard.) This study showed that Protandim had the exact opposite effect of what they were hoping to find. McCord was not on this “Harvard” study, and it was an utter failure for Protandim.
LisaRob, thanks for that study. I missed it. I noticed the researchers got their Protandim from GNC and not LV. Was Protandim sold at GNC as recent as 2009 (the publication date of the study)?
I believe 2009 was the year they switched over to MLM, so yes, it would make sense that it was still able to be purchased from GNC.
Thanks LisaRob!
LisaRob,
I thought it was illegal for LV or any company to show or direct prospective buyers to pubmed to get the results and not just an abstract of the study.
Generally one is required to belong to the publication, which means paying a monthly or annual fee these studies…and to give out free information of completed peer reviews or University trials is usually only available for purchase…. am I wrong…? another conflict of interest…?
B. Daniels:
I’m not a lawyer, but based on the following, one can conclude that it is illegal to use the studies to market the product, but LV hasn’t been taken to the mat for that yet. Their website has a link to this page, which links to the studies:
http://bigbluecalendar.mhsoftware.com/custom/en/studies.htm
Here is a link to a Warning Letter from the FDA to a company called Nature’s Pearl, for using studies illegally to promote their product:
http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2012/ucm301639.htm? goback=.gde_151361_member_111854439
Here are some quotes from the letter where the FDA discusses the website of Nature’s Pearl:
“Under the tab, “Science” and on the webpage titled “News Articles”:
• “The chemical· constituents of muscadine grapes … have shown several antitumor effects.”
“Further, the “News Articles” webpage on your website lists research and articles about the usefulness of the ingredient grape seeds in treating or preventing diseases.”
“When scientific publications are used commercially by the seller of a product to promote the product to consumers, such publications may become evidence of the product’s intended use. For example, under 21 CFR 101.93(g)(2)(iv)(C), a citation of a publication or reference in the labeling of a product is considered a claim about disease treatment or prevention if the citation refers to a disease use, and if, in the context of the labeling as a whole, the citation implies treatment or prevention of a disease.”
“The following are examples of reference citations used to market your Nature’s Pearl™ Premium Muscadine Grape Seed Supplement for disease treatment and prevention on your website:
• “Unique Grape Seed Extract Inhibits Prostate Cancer Cell Growth in the Laboratory. U.S. National Institute of Health, September 1, 2007.”
• “Grape Seed Extract Kills Laboratory Leukemia Cells. ScienceDaily, January 1, 2009.”
• “Effect of Muscadine Grape Seed Supplementation on Vascular Function in Subjects with or at Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: A Randomized Crossover Trial. J Am Coli Nutr October 2010 vol. 29 no. 5 469-475”
• “Inhibition of cancer growth by muscadine grade (sic) seed and grape skin extracts. Wake Forest University Health Sciences’ presentation at 2011 AACR Meeting, Orlando, Florida, April 5, 2011.”
You can see that LV uses this same tactic to promote Protandim…..and according to the FDA, it is illegal.
Thank you Lisarob… enough said 🙂
Below is link to the FTC guidelines for supplement advertising. Again, I’m not a lawyer, but after reading them, I would question whether Lifevantage should even be allowed to make the claim that Protandim lowers oxidative stress in humans. I think they fall short in several of the categories listed below, and especially in the area of Substantiating Claims.
http://business.ftc.gov/documents/bus09-dietary-supplements-advertising-guide-industry
Here are the categories covered. Go to the website and read what it says under each the following areas:
“II. Application of FTC Law to Dietary Supplement Advertising
A. Identifying Claims and Interpreting Ad Meaning 1. Identifying Express and Implied Claims 2. When to Disclose Qualifying Information 3. Clear and Prominent Disclosure
B. Substantiating Claims 1. Overview 2. Ads that Refer to a Specific Level of Support 3. The Amount and Type of Evidence 4. The Quality of the Evidence 5. The Totality of the Evidence 6. The Relevance to the Evidence to the Specific Claim
C. Other Issues Relating to Dietary Supplement Advertising 1. Claims based on Consumer Testimonials and Expert Endorsements 2. Claims based on Traditional Use 3. Use of the DSHEA Disclaimer in Advertising 4. Third Party Literature”
Consider this Example given of an unsubstantiated claim:
“Example 17: An advertiser makes an unqualified claim about the anti-clotting effect of a supplement that contains a compound extracted from fruit. There are three studies supporting the effect and no contrary evidence. One study consists of subjects tested over a one-week period, with no control group. The second study is well-controlled, of longer duration, but shows only a slight effect that is not statistically significant. The third study administers the compound through injection and shows a significant anti-clotting effect, but there is some question whether the compound would be absorbed into the bloodstream if administered orally. Because the studies all have significant limitations, it would be difficult to draft even a carefully qualified claim that would adequately convey to consumers the limited nature of the evidence. The advertiser should not base a claim on these studies.”
LV just has one human study to support their claim of reducing oxidative stress, and it had no control group (not to mention all the other issues with the study). The example above has three human studies, one of which had a control group, and STILL doesn’t meet the requirements for substantiation.
If you read through that whole section, LV comes up short in every area of Substantiating Claims, and I’m just referring to the official claim of reducing oxidative stress, not all the “medical breakthrough,” disease-specific claims distributors make (blood pressure control, diabetes control, MS, cholesterol control, cancer prevention, etc.).
“MLMs really don’t have much credibility as it only requires a person to pay an initial distribution fee and then a monthly commitment to market the item, one just refers the buying public to the marketing claims of the company….. as has been done with LV…”
REPLY–So how is that any different than products in stores supported by advertising, which just contain the claims of the company?
As for the studies of Protandim, out of the 12 or so done, Dr Joe McCords name appears on most of them, would this not be a conflict of interest…? considering he is on the board for LV as a paid consultant..
“How is it that one can do a peer – reviewed study when that persons name is on the studied item as its inventor…?”
REPLY–Dr McCord’s name appears on many of the studies because he either was one of the lead researchers, or he was consulted by those who were. This is only logical, since he is one’s of the world’s leading authorities on free radical biology (indeed, he is the co-discoverer of SuperOxide Dismutase, a major anti-oxidant enzyme).
You don’t seem to understand the peer-review process. A study is done, then submitted to a journal. The editor of the journal then sends the study to a few experts on that subject (with the names of the researchers redacted, of course). Those reviewers then thoroughly examine the study, looking for flaws in the science. They also ask the original researchers questions (through the editor, as neither party knows who the others are) to clarify points.
Only when the reviewers are satisfied that the study reports legitimate science will it be published. Most studies submitted to journals do not pass this process. So even if Dr McCord wanted a study to come out favorably for Protandim, if it wasn’t good science it would not be published (and you insult his reputation to imply that he cheated on any study).
“His name isn’t even on the patent… are there not enough red flags for you or anyone to investigate..?”
REPLY–Dr McCord’s name is not on the patents–at his own request! The men whose names are on it asked him for permission to add his, since he played a vital role in determining the final formulation, but Dr McCord declined. He was not, and still is not, looking for personal fame and fortune.
“You did not even reply to the one human study on alcoholic men that protandim completely failed and so much so that the men on the placebo did far better than the men on Protandim..
Only 2 studies were done on humans….”
REPLY–I have discussed both of these topics in reply to earlier comments. Please scroll above.
“We are trying it only due to family that distribute it and a hope that it might actually do some of the things it claims to do.”
REPLY–the only thing we claim Protandim does is lower Oxidative Stress better than any other product on the market. It is not designed to prevent, treat, or cure any particular disease, and we don’t say it does; if any distributor says something beyond that it lowers OS, he was out of line. What exactly are you expecting Protandim to do for you?
“look at either of these or both, then come back and tell me if Protandim, by itself, without any changes to a persons diet, will help anyone…..”
REPLY–Protandim will help everyone who takes it, by lowering their OS levels. But the positive effects of doing so will certainly be reduced by poor diet, lack of exercise, high exposure to toxins and pollutants, etc. Again, we do not claim Protandim is a cure-all.
“Peer – reviewed studies are only as good as the integrity of the Company or University doing them….. don’t think for one minute that money and profit does not play into a large part of the total picture.”
REPLY–see my comment above on the peer-review process.
“this has to do with the human study on alcoholic men, which can be found, but one has to look very deep to get the full study, most will only find the study without the finished results….. why….? it was completed in 2010…. so why not publish the results…?
Because they were unfavorable for the marketing of Protandim….”
REPLY–We send interested parties to the pubmed.gov website, where all the published studies, including this one, can be found and read. We do not hide it.
Uh, he’s not on the patent because he didn’t contribute enough to the development of the product to be considered as an “inventor.” In his own words:
http://strangelyperfect.tv/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/McCordLetterToPaulMyhill2005.jpg
Don’t be fooled, McCord has made millions.
🙂 ….. exactly….!
it’s all and only about money and profits…… if any of the manufacturing corporations and companies actually cared about our health and well being we wouldn’t need any supplements…… and cancer would already be cured
“Don’t be fooled, McCord has made millions.”
REPLY–Would you mind telling us how you became privy to how much money Dr McCord has earned? Did the company give him lots of money and stock? Why would LV do that if he only played a small role in developing Protandim (as you claim)?
“Uh, he’s not on the patent because he didn’t contribute enough to the development of the product to be considered as an “inventor.” In his own words:
http://strangelyperfect.tv/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/McCordLetterToPaulMyhill2005.jpg”
REPLY–thank you for this link. It confirms what I said above about why Dr McCord’s not being on the patents is not something suspicious, or a reason to be concerned. He did not have the original idea to combine several herbal extracts to fight OS; Paul Myhill did. Dr McCord tweaked Myhill’s formula, and then conducted extensive experiments to determine what it would do. Because of his contributions Myhill and Driscoll wanted to add Dr McCord to the patents, but he humbly declined.
You can read that letter, and come to that conclusion? Does McCord say anything about experiments and tweaking of the formula? Nope, he said the “discussions” he had over the previous 11 months did not significantly contribute to the intellectual property and thus, he is not qualified as an “inventor”.
Then,”Mr. Integrity” allowed LV to claim for years that he was the “inventor,” with no mention of Myhill to be found! Humble? Not so much.
As further evidence of this, here is an excerpt from a letter written by Myhill when things blew up:
“The CORE botanical formula I forwarded to Joe included the current five botanicals, plus one additional one – all in the EXACT same proportions/weights as the current formula (all 1/3 of the original to get it into one pill), but with Milk Thistle subsequently bumped up at my suggestion. The other ingredients were part of an “all-in-one” (multi-formula) addition to that CORE botanical formula that I developed. Given such indisputable facts (and that the initial patent was filed one month before we even met Joe), how am I NOT the creator? How is Joe THE creator? The simple email record, and even a letter from Joe himself, clearly show that the current company communications are downright false and misleading . . . and, in the eyes of many, perpetuate an ongoing fraud – one that the SEC and FTC should be made aware of.”
“I initially stated that “nobody lied,” desiring to give this current management team the benefit of the doubt and chalking it to human error and the discontinuity of company management in general. But then, month after month went by with the same erroneous materials still being widely distributed by the company, despite their own admission to me that Joe isn’t the creator. These same materials are on the company website TODAY. I just don’t get how a company can keep doing that, with full knowledge that the materials are sending the wrong message to current and new distributors. Many times I wrote emails (which I’d be happy to share with you) and each time nothing was done to take down the offending materials.”
– See more at: http://strangelyperfect.tv/12482/paul-myhill-publishes-letter-from-joe-mccord-on-facebook/#sthash.NVDz8ItC.dpuf
Why would LV pay McCord millions? Because telling people your “medical breakthrough” product was invented by some guy with a business/marketing degree usually doesn’t go over very well! They brought in McCord to add some credibility to the product.
McCord’s compensation is found in the SEC filings. He was listed as a 10% owner of the company, has been given stock options, had a salary, and received .50 for every bottle sold. Then he was inexplicably given a handsome retirement payoff after signing a non-disparagement agreement. They had an “at will” employment agreement, so this retirement package was not required by any contract.
This has all been covered before, but I guess people don’t want to scroll back through all the comments.
My wife and I have been taking Protandim for a month now, my wife had taken it for a month in July while I researched it from every angle.
so far no positive benefits have been noticed..
I have serious suspicions concerning the claims made by LV and the one human study on alcoholic men is not promoted at all by LV…
Also the word “synergy” is suspect, as when LV took the supplement to Japan, Protandim had to be altered as one of the 5 original ingredients had to be changed due to the fact that the original formula would need to be sold as a prescription, so LV, altered the formula by removing one of the original ingredients and putting another in its place……. and yet it Protandim still maintained its ” Synergy ” ……….?
All of this along with the fact that it is sold through MLM and not through GNC as originally tried, leads me at least to think of the word ” Snake Oil ” …..
We are still trying it as we purchased a 3 month supply, so the jury is still out, but leaning heavily towards thumbs down…..
Protandim is sold via network marketing because it has to be explained to be appreciated, and a bottle sitting on a shelf can not explain itself. If we sold retail we would have to spend huge amounts of money on ad campaigns to educate the public. It is less costly, and more effective, to educate and sell via distributors.
As for what you are feeling, that is not the proper criteria for judging Protandim. It is not designed to be a feel-good pill. All we claim it does is lower Oxidative Stress, and if you have been taking it every day for a month, it has done so, and will do so even more over the next couple of months. Since OS affects people in different ways, how lowering it benefits people will vary. Some feel almost immediate effects, while some don’t feel anything for several months, or even a year.
For some what it may be doing is delaying, or even preventing, the onset of age-related diseases. Thousands of scientific studies over the past 20 years have shown beyond doubt that Oxidative Stress is harmful to humans. There is no product available today, either OTC or by prescription, that has been shown to lower OS levels as well as Protandim.
As for being “snake oil”, does snake oil get over a dozen peer-review studies published in medical journals? Do major universities study snake oil, at their own expense? Would the Defense Department pay for a study of snake oil?
I have also wondered about the formula marketed in Japan, and will try to find out more about it. But there is no doubt that the formula marketed in the US, Canada, and Australia works just fine at fighting free radicals.
Nvrbetter and others – I bought 2 months’ worth of pills after hearing from 2 or 3 different people that they were off their other meds for treatment of such things as high blood pressure, diabetes, and high cholesterol, and these were touted as some of the many positives about this ‘miracle.’
In July, my cholesterol was down (yes, down) to 281. I changed nothing about my life except for religiously taking Protandim daily. This morning I received a call about the results of my cholesterol test last week – which would be the deciding factor as to whether I would continue with Protandim. My cholesterol had climbed to 305!
While I will not be buying Protandim anymore, I want everyone to know that in the past 2 months taking it, I have received at least 6 thrilling, unrelated, unsolicited, and sincere compliments about my face: “all the stress has disappeared from your face”; “you don’t look 57”; “You look so healthy”; “your face just glows”; and the like.
Because I have not done anything different in my life (I repeat – I have only taken Protandim religiously and changed nothing else), I attribute this situation to Protandim.
Unfortunately, I can’t afford to pay $45/month for face-lifting effects if my cholesterol is unaffected or exacerbated. I believe that MLMs have their place, but my place is not in distributing, only in using things that are MY CHOICE to use.
I’m intrigued by the Greg v. Joe battle where Greg still doesn’t provide any real information, Joe patiently explains his viewpoint, and that Chris did not ever responded in writing to answer the questions. And I think that LisaRob is pretty smart!
I am happy to have found this site, and continue to be amazed at the lengths people will go to defend their own little pet causes.
faceliftgirl, thanks for writing. I think your the first here to say Protandim raised your cholesterol. Interesting about the face effects also.
I have been a distributor for 6 months now and have found this product and company to be exceptional. I have been in medical skin care for over 20 years and worked with many skin care companies who make huge claims to heal, shown research, before and after pictures, physician endorsements, etc and it all turns out to be false.
In fact, it is chemically harmful to the body. Everything is now buyer beware these days so it is good to do a little credible research and then try it for yourself for at least 90 days before judging. It is a pleasure to work with products that actually improve health as I have actually felt and seen it for myself. Everyone has their own story on how they feel as it does different things for different people in different time periods.
The compensation is a wonderful part of this company and feels no different to me than when I professionally recommend to my clients anything else I work with. Nothing wrong with this product or network marketing. This is simply set up as most every other corporation or government positioning with better opportunity to personally excel. Thank you.
I have been taking protandim for about a month now, I have researched everything mentioned on this blog. All I know is that I have never felt this good in the last ten years. I am losing weight, I have energy, I am thinking clearer. I have trusted doctors for years and have suffered with terrible side effects where some have said it could lead to DEATH!!!! and I still found myself trusting western medicine with my health. With protandim I have no side effects at all. I feel wonderful. No doctor has been able to do that for me.
AGAIN…NO DOCTOR HAS BEEN ABLE TO DO THIS FOR ME!!!! If America can prescribe these horrible drugs that can give us up to 10 different side effects just to lower your cholesterol, I think I can take a chance with Protandim. After taking this for only 15 days and doing nothing else different, my doctor told me my pressure was lower, I lost a few pounds which was very difficult for me to do since I have an injury from a car accident that makes it hard for me to work out.
Everyone asked me what I was doing different that I seemed different in a positive way. I sleep better and I am really grateful that I was introduced to this product. You know we believe in so many things that are not good for us… research how much prescription drugs kills in America and worldwide and see for yourself. All those studies taken for all the other drugs on the market is given a thumbs up because its on a commercial and the FDA approved it. Who are the real money making drug distributors.
I want to know how many of you have researched half the medicine you have taken in your life. How many case studies have you really researched. When you go to have surgery do you research all the things they inject you with, or anesthesia you have inhaled…etc…etc… we all know that answer is most likely no. So why are people so afraid of such a wonderful thing? Its almost like you want it to not be real. It doesn’t matter because the people who do reap the benefits will be much better off then the skeptics and the haters. Good Luck to everybody!!!
I’m just saying….
dear Nvrbetter, that’s exactly what I dont understand, I have been taking protandim for 2 months now and I feel so much better than before, I sleep better, my cloudy mind is clear now, my energy is at best and I have lost 8 pounds, Im not sure how my cells were and are now….but I feel better.
In this blog most of the people keep questioning and asking about human tests on a natural supplement which most other products Do Not even have any testing at all on pubmed, its not enough to read the benefits it has done to so many….also most complain about multi level sales on the product, hey, if it does good to you and you can sell it, whats wrong with that?
If your selling a product that helps others and make money, isn’t that great? To me its great to be able to sell a product that helps many peoples health. I’m not a distributor, but strongly thinking about it.