(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
I think that it’s disingenuous for you to give all of this “objective” pros and cons review, while listing three times where to buy it on Amazon, with an account that accrues income to you. “I may like it; I may not like it”, while the whole time, you derive direct income from it.
Don that’s not true and here’s why
1. I make this clear in my FAQ page and affiliate disclosure page.
2. I know not everybody will agree with me so I’m giving them the opportunity to “reward” me for giving them at least the chance to read something from someone who is not trying to sell them protandim.
3.I spend a LOT of time writing these reviews – and updating them. I takes me weeks to write a review well as answer private emails from people looking for help (I get a LOT of them!).
4. Oh and by the way, this website costs me money to maintain.
Don, I’m giving away my time and insights for free to help people so I don’t feel calling me disingenuous is accurate. Believe me, if I was trying to sell people protandim, I would have wrote this review VERY differently.
Ok Im sorry I apologies. I was wrong. 🙂
Don, you’re welcome, I think 😉
I just received 2 bottles of protandim. I thought I would give it a try. I would like to get the blood tests prior, to truly evaluate my body’s response to the product. Could you advise as to which blood test would be most helpful. I plan on asking my Dr. to order them and re-run them in 90 days. Also, if my Dr. will not order, can you recommend a lab where I can get them done independently, preferably in Massachusetts. I would be more than willing to share my results.
Thank you L
Hi Lisa, well, the big test that people like to talk about is the TBAR test. If you want to get that done, great, but I’m skeptical of how effective it is at showing if protandim works or not. If you can get it, great. I’d also get a full blood test – the kind your doctor probably has ordered before – cholesterol, HDL, LDL etc.
I’d also be interested in measuring glutathione levels and SOD (superoxide dismutase) levels. I’m not sure what all these would cost or whether your insurance would cover it or not.
As for independent labs, I’d imagine that any Quest Diagnostics-type facility could do this for you but I’m not an expert on this.
Anyone else have ideas on lab tests for Lisa and/or where to get tests done at?
TBARS and SOD are never measured in routine clinical practice (glutathione rarely) and the tests are not available from typical diagnostic labs like Quest. There are a few labs that perform them but the cost would not be covered by any health insurance program.
It would be a colossal waste of money to spend out of pocket on tests that have no clinical diagnostic value. Measuring blood levels of SOD would be a wasted effort since the enzyme resides mainly in cells (either the mitochondria in the case of Mn-SOD or cytoplasm in the case of CuZn-SOD), not in the circulation.
The TBARS blood test is not an usual test in clinical practice and requires special equipment to run. The most likely place to have the equipment would be a university that does medical research. If my memory serves me, the test runs around $300 each. I also think fresh blood is needed, so it’s not the kind of test that can be mailed off to a lab. Lisa, you don’t mention your age, which will show a lesser change in TBARS if you are young and a greater change as you age; especially past age 40-45.
Like any food supplement, don’t expect to feel any difference in a short term. I’m over 70 years old and likely to see the biggest improvement in TBARS. I do not feel any different because of Protandim or any of the other vitamins, minerals or fish oils I add to my diet. But then, I’ve outlived a lot of my contemporaries, who knows if that would be the case otherwise. Also, I’m healthy and active, who’s to know what I’ve done to make that so, or did I have the right genes to overcome all the exposures I’ve had to toxic industrial chemicals and mercury and lead… I honestly have no idea.
It’s good to question any claims, always keep skepticism at hand, but then some things seem to make sense and some don’t — you need to be your own judge because at the end of it all, it’s your life.
Ronald Mc said: “The TBARS blood test is not an usual test in clinical practice and requires special equipment to run.”
That’s completely false. Why are you misinforming people about things you know nothing about? TBARS is most assuredly NOT EVER used in clinical practice. It has no recognized diagnostic value; it is not included in any diagnostic guidelines of any medical organization on the planet; and there is no healthcare payer in the world that would reimburse for it. You are quite simply dead wrong, and you should be ashamed of yourself for saying it.
It doesn’t require “special equipment” either. It simply requires a spectrophotometric device, which is standard equipment in every diagnostic lab. The reason the TBARS assay isn’t performed in clinical practice is because it has no medical value; not because labs don’t have the capability.
One other thought, Lisa. If you were to be tested for glutathione levels, you could show nice high levels on a first test because your body is fighting off an infection, and lower levels on the second test because the infection is gone. The Nrf2 enzyme is moderated within the cell to not transcript glutathione if the presence of ROS is low or non-present. So, the process of activating does not mean glutathione is necessarily transcripted. There is a whole bunch of signaling and communicating that goes on. That said, current environmental and life style conditions usually means a constant need for the body to keep up with its antioxidant production.
What is know is that the body’s ability to produce glutathione (and other important chemicals) drops off at around age 40 or so. So, a Nrf2 activatior is important to be on full standby. Age fragility is a killer. However, another element can then come into play and that is the ability to have enough cystine in one’s diet for the body to manufacture glutathione. It is not as available naturally in our diet today as it was the middle of the previous century. The possible need for supplementation of this amino acid is a whole separate discussion.
You’re in waaay over your head Ronny. That stream-of-consciousness word vomit masquerading as science-speak made no sense at all. Worse, your soap-boxing gibberish had nothing to do with Protandim.
There wasn’t a single sentence in your diatribe that wasn’t erroneous, and the closest thing you said to something with remote relevance to Protandim was this implicit claim:
Ronald said: “So, a Nrf2 activatior (sic) is important to be on full standby.”
That’s kind of an important claim to gloss over, since it’s the fundamental core of your argument in favor of Protandim. Sadly, it’s BS. There is no reputable health, scientific, or medical organization anywhere that supports such an assertion.
Pretty much everything activates NRF2, from vitamin C to zinc, toxins, pollutants, etc — literally hundreds of compounds have been shown to do it in the lab. There is no scientifically credible disease preventive strategy based on activating NRF2 through the use of dietary supplements, least of all dietary supplements hawked by unscrupulous Utah MLM hucksters.
And perhaps most importantly, LieVantage has never produced even a scintilla of evidence that Protandim activates NRF2 in humans who take the product.
ok so I didn’t notice all the research articles till I posted. And it is true that by doing my own analyzes on this product, will not prove anything to anyone else. I ran across this site researching protandim. goodbye
Any of you checked out any research documented by the government? PUBMED.GOV Here’s what I’m going to do for all of you. I have listen to personal friends testimonies, but being a bit skeptical, I will take the product for 2 months and get back to you on my progress. I do feel it will improve some of my aliments. I will comment in 60 days. Thank you.
Patricia, yes. most of the links in my review go right to PubMed.
Patricia, it is good that you are willing to give Protandim a try, but keep in mind that it is not designed to treat any particular ailments, so you may or may not actually “feel” anything. What Protandim does is enable your cells to produce more of their own anti-oxidant enzymes, and thus significantly reduce the number of free radicals which are attacking your cells (ie, it lowers Oxidative Stress).
How this will manifest itself in your situation we won’t know until you have tested it. But lowering your OS level will benefit you, just as lowering blood pressure or bad cholesterol would benefit you if they were too high (and keep in mind that far more people over 30 have high OS than have high BP or cholesterol).
Thanks Greg, I am very aware of the product and what it does. I can’t really get involved in any debate till I use this myself.
Patricia Meador said: “Any of you checked out any research documented by the government? PUBMED.GOV…”
Had you read the previous posts here prior to commenting you would have noticed that the research has been discussed extensively, and debunked thoroughly. Not sure what you mean by the research being “documented by the government”. PubMed is nothing more than a digital bookshelf akin to a library. If something gets published in any journal, it automatically appears in the PubMed database.
But the government plays no role in reviewing or vetting the studies that are listed.
“Here’s what I’m going to do for all of you. I have listen to personal friends testimonies, but being a bit skeptical, I will take the product for 2 months and get back to you on my progress. I do feel it will improve some of my aliments. I will comment in 60 days. Thank you.”
There’s nothing to prove by doing that, so please don’t do it on my account as it will be a waste of time. Controlled clinical studies are the means by which evidence of efficacy is established; not via unvetted claims from anonymous voices on the internet.
Hey, you’re an “anonymous voice on the internet”! Why should we pay any more attention to what you say than to what Patricia is going to say? She at least is willing to experiment and take the product; you are not even willing to do that!
Patricia,
I’m curious. Why would you search out this website in the first place? It clearly wasn’t to research Protandim because you obviously haven’t read anything here.You haven’t read the main article, and you haven’t read the comments.
So what brought you here?
It is curious to me also, that Patricia didn’t read the main article; at least that was my impression too.
The title of this site is “supplement Clarity” and that is why I was drawn here. I expected that the merits of something that promised so much would be more rationally discussed, both pro and con. Instead the discussion in the comments section are often more like political debate. That’s too bad actually.
Since you, LisaRob, posed the question, would you mind saying what drew you to this site? No need to answer if you don’t want to, but I do find what brings out people to any event or site to be a worthy topic.
Ronald,
This site came up when I was researching the product. I was duped into taking the product by a relative, and I was led to believe that it was invented by a reputable scientist. It wasn’t until she started making all kinds of outlandish claims about the product that I became suspicious and started to really look into it. By the time I actually found this site, I was aready convinced that Protandim was just another MLM snake oil scam.
Really, I’ve stuck with this topic for so long because A) my relative really pissed me off and has my father taking it, B) I hate seeing other people scammed, and C) the cult-like mentality surrounding this business fascinates me. I’ve dealt with people in cults before, and I am familiar with the tactics used to indoctrinate people.
According to my mothers oncology team of professors and specialists in the field this is a crock of sh!t
There is no evidence what so ever or any reason what so ever that would lead anyone to believe with a sound mind that will alleviate or cure anyone with cancer.
And before all you protandim supporters jump down my throat .. No I do not believe they are all trying to keep my mother ill so that the industry and drug companies can continue to make money out of cancer. This notion is ridiculous and if you really believe that you suffer from a mental health condition known as paranoia and I feel sorry for you!
Clearly your protandim isn’t helping your condition to think clearly. My mothers own head specialist had his aunt pass away from cancer last year and daughter 2 Yeats ago .. What he just stood back and watched his family die for the sake of the drug industry?!! I laugh so hard at this notion that I can barely breathe!
This nonsense and bamboozling readers with jargon and ridiculous websites and studies that prove nothing about protandim has really become such a comedy to me that I look forward to seeing just how much BS you can keep spinning .. Good work ..
Having a constant dig at Vogel is also getting so old.. (Sigh) his arguments actually make sense and are logical. Wonder why you can’t see that? I feel sorry for the lot of you.
I used to be a distributor and now am so ashamed I could be so easily fooled. I feel like an ass. Hee haw hee haw
I was highly skeptic of Protandim. When my 75-year-old mom bought into it, I was absolutely livid. She put a bottle in my hand and insisted I try it. Oh, I couldn’t wait to prove her wrong!!! I’ve taken the product daily for 6 weeks now, and I must say I am eating my words. And tonight I signed up as a preferred customer for auto-ship.
I don’t care about all the testing hoopla they talk about. I don’t care about the abc news report on it that they use for advertising. I’m not interested in the “make money” aspect of becoming a distributor in my itty-bitty corner of the world. All I know and care about right now is that this stuff has worked wonders for the inflammation in my body. No more aches and pains.
Another thing I noticed – – – My cat scratched my bare leg when she suddenly jumped out of my lap. I’m Type 2 diabetic and so I thought it would take a month to heal those scratches. Before a week was out, I noticed it was healing quite nicely already. There are other benefits I won’t go on and on about, but I just wanted to tell people that it’s worth a try for $40 a bottle (plus tax/shipping).
Teresa I think that’s awesome that you had such great luck. I have both Osto and RA and it did zero for me my 80 year old mother has type 2 diabetes and she had no effect after 2 years also it did nothing for her bad memory problems so apparently it doesn’t work for all. Again awesome for you!
Teresa Phillips said: “I don’t care about all the testing hoopla they talk about.”
You mean the randomized placebo-controlled double-blind clinical trial showing that Protandim did absolutely nothing? You should care.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22268125
Teresa Phillips said: “And tonight I signed up as a preferred customer for auto-ship…All I know and care about right now is that this stuff has worked wonders for the inflammation in my body. No more aches and pains…I noticed it was healing quite nicely already. There are other benefits I won’t go on and on about,”
Too bad you don’t care about U.S. law or the terms of your preferred customer agreement, which bar you from promoting the product as a therapeutic agent (i.e., as an analgesic and remedy for inflammation), as you have done here, because you have a material connection with the manufacturer.
http://supplementclarity.com/protandim-research-review-lifevantage/comment-page-7/#comment-87988
Legal issues aside, this curried snakeoil pill is not an anti-inflammatory and does not help scratches heal faster. It’s a sure bet that those “other benefits” that you chose to not “go on about” either didn’t happen or had nothing to do with taking Pretendim.
Sorry, Charlie, but Teresa is not a distributor, she receives no money from LV, and she has the right to say anything she wants about Protandim. As for Protandim’s anti-inflammatory properties, unless you have conducted and published studies showing that it does not reduce inflammation, or can point us to studies which reached that conclusion, you can not say it does not do so. Teresa is perfectly free to say what she thinks Protandim did for her, whether you like it or not.
Greg said: “Sorry, Charlie, but Teresa is not a distributor, she receives no money from LV, and she has the right to say anything she wants about Protandim. As for Protandim’s anti-inflammatory properties, unless you have conducted and published studies showing that it does not reduce inflammation, or can point us to studies which reached that conclusion, you can not say it does not do so. Teresa is perfectly free to say what she thinks Protandim did for her, whether you like it or not.”
You are apparently hard of reading so let me post it for you a little louder this time.
“Q: If I post a testimonial about a LifeVantage product that is unsubstantiated, who is liable, LifeVantage or me?
A: Both. If you have a ‘material connection’ to the manufacturer of the product ‘LifeVantage’ then you can be held liable for claims you make that are unsubstantiated. The fact that you are an Independent Distributor or a Preferred Customer of LifeVantage, receiving discounts or commissions/bonuses/incentives for using and/or selling the product, gives you a ‘material connection’ with the manufacturer.”
http://www.lifevantage.com/may-21-compliance-corner/#sthash.b4mYJEBt.dpuf
The onus is not on me to produce evidence that Protandim does not have anti-inflammatory properties; the law insists that such claims are impermissible unless the product has been FDA approved for such a purpose.That’s basic stuff Greg. There’s no excuse for your vapid excuses.
Greg, you just never get tired of being wrong, do you?
I’ve joked about it before, but I’m really starting to believe that Protandim is a reading comprehension inhibitor.
Claudia – I’m so sorry to hear you and your mother are still dealing with your health issues. Unfortunately there are no “magic bullets” known yet, but more is known about how the body is regulated by transcription genes as each year goes by.
Like a lot of people I expected to see some miracles once the human genome was finally known, but that knowledge only uncovered a new level of complexity. I have found the site, http://cisreg.cmmt.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/tfe/home.pl to be helpful in understanding this complexity. Go there are do a search on the term “Homo sapiens” to see the hundreds of transcription processes and genes that are understood at various levels. In addition, there are possibly hundreds or thousands more left to study.
Even Nrf2 activation, which is well studied, and affects some 400 or more gene sites, has still not been completely explored. However, the more we know, the more good proteins and enzymes are found to be transcripted during this process.
My wish for you and your mother is that some kind of biological discovery comes soon to help you recover your health.
Hi Teresa — I’m happy you have had such a profound positive experience with Protandim. Not everyone gets such an obvious and quick reaction to a Nrf2 activator, Having a high level of glutathione on your body at times of oxidative stress is important; even essential.
Pay no mind to Vogel or his yapping little lap dog. As a customer of a product that has given you relief, you have a first amendment right to voice your opinion and may do so without impunity. Indeed you are correct that Nrf2 activation does include an anti-inflammatory response along with many others.
I refer you too this web site, http://cisreg.cmmt.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/tfe/home.pl where you can do a search on the term “Nrf2.” This is a research site and so the information is a bit complex (Vogel it’s waaaay over your head), but I have quoted from the site below:
“The list of Nrf 2 target genes, which constitute environmental stress response, has been growing since the first transcriptional profile was published by our group in 2001 and it includes pathways for xenobiotic detoxification, antioxidants, anti-inflammatory response, DNA repair, molecular chaperones, and proteasome systems.”
So, the more we know about transcription genes, the more exciting it gets. This is very new science.
Ronaldmckenzie Said: ” I have found the site, http://cisreg.cmmt.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/tfe/home.pl to be helpful in understanding this complexity”.
Why is it that Protandim promoters send people to websites that are full of convoluted scientific jargon that nobody other than a scientist can interpret?
I am unable to find the words nrf2, sod, superoxide dismutase, catalase or glutathione on that website, how would it have the slightest relevance to Protandim?
If you are genuinely interested in learning about the Human Genome go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Genome_Project would be a better place for you to start.
If you are a scientist with a PhD on the subject of the Human Genome then I take it all back and I congratulate you on selecting one of the most difficult and complex of all the scientific fields.
Hi Terry – go to the site and enter Nrf2 into the search field. You will get several results, select the one titled NFE2L2, where you will learn that Nrf2 is an alias in the public literature for this transcription factor.
If you download the pdf you will find more information and data on this important transcription response. However, “the list of Nrf2 target genes, which constitute environmental stress response, has been growing since the first transcriptional profile was published in 2001.” This article was published in 2010, and a lot of further research has been completed and is in the process of being peer reviewed and published.
What the researchers at this site are doing is so far beyond the discussion of Protandim as promoted by LifeVantage, but the evidence coming out of research is showing more kinds of supportive life-supporting chemicals when activating this single transcription factor.
Terry, if you just stop reading when you finish the “Overview” on this report you can avoid the “convoluted scientific jargon that nobody other than a scientist can interpret,” and just appreciate the results of what any Nrf2 activator can do, Protandim or other products. As the formulator of Protandim has said, other natural botanicals besides those in Protandim have shown capable of activating the Nrf2 transcription factor. Some even showing more effects. Since there have been no PR & Pub studies on these other botanicals, Protandim is the formulation most studied and on the market.
Whether you find the studies and trials up to your satisfaction is, of course, up to you to decide. However, may I say aspirin was put on the market with far less studies or knowledge about how it functions… some have remarked that if required, aspirin would have a hard time getting on the market today. Yet, even while not knowing how it works, it is the single most beneficial drug for mild pain and discomfort.
WebMD.com lists more dangerous side effects and precautions for Aspirin while none exist for Protandim, yet I doubt you would hesitate to take Aspirin if you had a cold or flu.
With regard to your last paragraph. I am a savant and have been studying biological processes since the early ’60s when RNA was first discovered and the first papers published. I do not have a PhD. nor is such required if one has a passion for knowledge. I would not be surprised that if you set your mind to reading the paper in question, and if you did it diligently enough, that in less than a month you would fully understand it, but also have developed a whole cloud of familiarity around the subject. Perhaps I’m in error, but I find this kind of reading to be moderately hard (mainly because of the way words of a particular science profession use their jargon). When reading medical papers, there is a whole set of different ways of expressing ideas, and requires a similar shift in understanding.
The human genome is too vast to study for me, I find specific sites where researchers are focused to be much richer ore to mine. The Transcription Factor Encyclopedia is such a site. They are simultaneously coordinating the human, mouse and rat transcription factors, so research on mice and rats can be more reliably trusted to apply to humans.
But NRF2 research doesn’t necessarily mean Protandim works.
You are correct, Joe. The link between Nrf2 and Protandim was established by LifeVantage. If you don’t trust the research, then there is no link for you. I can not vouch for their research because I am leery of anything LifeVantage says because the corporate leaders have behaved unethically in the past and I have no reason to think it’s any different today.
However, I do have a much better opinion of Dr Joe McCord when he’s speaking of science. It all jibes.
So, all of the research on the effects of activating the Nrf2 enzyme points to it causing our DNA to produce a wealth of chemicals, including several kinds of natural antioxidants. The next thing to verify is whether Protandim can and does, initiate that process. I think that THERE is the hang-up. if one doesn’t accept LifeVantage’s and Dr McCord’s claims, then so be it, and I can understand the reasoning either way.
If, on the other hand, one conditionally accepts that Protandim may activate Nrf2, and brings on a profound improvement in health, then I can accept that person’s experience as true, placebo effect not withstanding.
Usually when a person or a company sets out to take advantage of people who are ill or in pain, they charge a lot more then $40 or $50 for a bottle of whatever. If you look over the internet you will find the usual cost of a “cure” runs a whole lot more, even if Dr Oz is promoting it. Even food derived multi-vitamins promoted by Dr Weil will cost you more than Protandim. The same can be said for wight loss pills. So, Protandim is remarkable affordable compared to most nutraceuticals which is projected to be US$250 billion market by 2018.
So, in essence, a LifeVantage customer can try the product for, say 90 days, and in the course of that time decide whether it is somehow improving their health or not. For some reason, after 90 days about half of those customers stay with the product. (47% is the number I’ve heard batted around) What does that tell you? Is the glass half full or half empty? I can say that for me, it is intriguing but not definitive. (incidently 47% is a much higher number then those in remission using chemo… just so you can have some perspective on that number)
Let’s look at Protandim from another angle for a moment. The herbs that constitute its makeup have been used in ayurvedic medicine for at least a couple thousand years. The claims of beneficial effects of such herbs are multifold. If we use the roots, leaves, flowers or fruit we see different beneficial claims. Some things used together enhance effects. In addition the preparation and extraction process for each herb will highly modify what botanicals are in the final product. I do not know much about how LifeVantage directs their contracted formulator to prepare and process the herbs. I do know the final materials are assayed for potency. I have no knowledge if they are also assayed for purity or for any certain types of contamination. There are many questions in my mind.
It’s too complex to say whether benefits of Protandim are true, much less whether the benefits are due to Nrf2 activation. LifeVantage has done a poor job of building trust or credibility. While sales of Protandim are up over last year in spite of a fall off in sales in Japan, the stock has not moved for a long time. This, to me, indicates most of the stock is closely held and trading is very low. I expect to hear of a jump in sales this quarter with the introduction of the skin care and energy drink lines. If the products take hold, the jump will be sustained, if not, well…
As a person over 70 years of age, I stand to gain the most from a highly activated antioxidant body, so I do take my daily Protandim, for healthy people under 40, I would expect them to not see much, if any, health improvement. For people dealing with serious illnesses or injury, the ball is in the air. Some people seem to see great improvement and some not.
The problem is, as I see it, you won’t know what you should have done for optimal health until it’s too late. I still remember watching the late show many years ago while a happy healthy 90-some year-old was boasting of how he took care of himself when he suddenly slumped in death. We need to take responsibility for our own health, but there are no guarantees. none. zero.
Ron, I do believe that we should take responsibliyt for health and with the exception of eating more fruits, veggies and exercising daily, we may not know if some of the things we inact, do improve our long term health and survival. That said, If I remember the research (correct me if Im wrong. I may be), protandim was only shown to upgregulate nrf2 in a test tube and mouse heart cells. Yes, there is some cross over in the genone between mice and people, but wouldn’t you also like to see this demonstrated in people?
And then, there are is the speculation that augmenting nf2r might promote cancer and reduce the effectiveness to chemotherapy : http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22810811
Ron and Joe I think after all the words, it boils down to a simple fact that there have been no reliable human studies,so far, that say anything either way. Until that is done it is no more than a bunch of spices. As you know just because it is naturally occurring in nature does not make it safe. If it is so amazing the question remains “why not”, I would think they would be falling all over themselves to get that done.
Price does not make it anything either way, it’s the price point they decided people would spend on it when they got ready to market, nothing more.
Joe, you wrote, “…we may not know if some of the things we inact, do improve our long term health and survival.”
Yes, and that’s the rub. Many years ago a man was celebrating his 100th birthday and was being interviewed by a local radio station. The interviewer asked the man if he had anything to say based on his wisdom accumulated over 100 years. The old man replied, “If I knew I was gonna live this long, I’d have taken better care of myself.”
I think the world could be divided into two camps of people, those that believe supplementation of one’s diet is essential for good health, and those who believe supplementation only make makes expensive urine. Both camps have come to their beliefs by weighing various information in different ways, and that’s fine and proper. I’m not here to convince you or anyone else to change a well-considered opinion.
My thinking when I first posted – is the site’s name is “Supplement Geek.com” which inferred to me a place where open discussion on the possibility of supplementation having value based on a rational examination of relevant data. Instead, I have found a lot of emotional arguing using twisting people’s meaning and worse. I understand some of that because some people will attach their ego tightly to their opinion. But “supplementation or not” should not rise or fall to the level of politics or religion.
Furthermore, what is known about health is constantly changing just as is our food supply. Our bodies are subjected to far more toxic contaminates from our food, air and water. The proper courses of action are not clear. One needs to do what one feels is necessary for optimal health.
Going back to your post, regarding what has been shown on various tests, I agree the tests using Protandim are not conclusive, and the tests using human trials are scanty at best. The only human tissue test that I found meaningful was the one on human vein tissue used for by-pass surgery.
As a person who has had by-pass surgery, my interest was personal. For most by-pass surgery veins, which are not designed to be exposed to highly oxygenated blood, are used to replace a section of a blocked artery. Due to this difference there is a 50% failure rate within the first ten years of this procedure.
In this test, veins withdrawn from a patient undergoing a by-pass were used. (there is usually some left over vein material from such procedures) Protandin was used to treat these veins to see if they withstood higher levels of oxygenation (similar to being in a artery environment). The tissue did show Protandim was working as expected to limit ROS damage by activating the Nrf2 response in the tissue.
To my understanding this was a very good study regarding the link between Nrf2 activation and Protandim. Additionally, this kind of study could not have been done in human subjects due to the required ethics of human trials.
Still, I can understand anyone’s reluctance at accepting this test as definitive. It needs to be repeated in more than one institute by a different team of investigators to gain statical significants.
FInally, you brought up “speculation that augmenting nf2r might promote cancer and reduce the effectiveness to chemotherapy.” This was one area of deep concern to me as well so I did look into it and while I’m still not convinced the issue is dead, it does seem to be reasonable speculation to keep alive.
The issue has two stages of concern. In the first stage, augmenting Nrf2 seems to help in effecting remission. But if the cancer returns, this time chemo and radio therapies seem to have very limited effect. The cancer has adapted to the therapies and the question is raised because the cancer cells seem to have an unregulated Nrf2 activation at this point… The general consensus among oncologists is that earlier concerns relating to Nrf2 activation were unfounded. Yet, this is all rather new territory and the wind that blows east today may blow west tomorrow.
If it were my life and dealing with cancer, I think I would opt to include Protandim in my diet through the first stages of chemo and radio therapies, but be hesitant to do so if the cancer came out of remission. This is based on my own investigations. In no way do I feel there is one good answer here.
Ronald Mc said: “Going back to your post, regarding what has been shown on various tests, I agree the tests using Protandim are not conclusive, and the tests using human trials are scanty at best.
The only well designed human study showed that the product didn’t work. This was not “scanty at best” or inconclusive or; what can be clearly concluded is that Protandim failed to do anything in humans. Even their core marketing claims are unsupportable.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22268125
Ronald Mc said: “The only human tissue test that I found meaningful was the one on human vein tissue used for by-pass surgery…”
It’s not meaningful in any way as far as you or any of your prospective customers should be concerned. Your quasi-job is that of a Protandim salesman. Studies such as these (Joddar et al 2010) have absolutely no place in your efforts to market the product. It is illegal for you to invoke this study, has you have done here, to promote or sell Protandim.
http://www.road2ten.com/files/2010%20-%20OSU%20Bypass%20Graft%20Study.pdf
Ronald Mc said: “To my understanding this was a very good study regarding the link between Nrf2 activation and Protandim.”
The study didn’t even measure NRF2 so it couldn’t possibly show a link to NRF2 activation, and it was done in a test tube so it’s not applicable to intact organisms (e.g., humans).
Ronald Mc said: “Additionally, this kind of study could not have been done in human subjects due to the required ethics of human trials.”
Why do you insist on deviating from your marketing script and making such asinine statements? What source could have possibly led you to conclude something so ridiculously off-base? If LieVantage wished to legally market their product as a therapy to enhance the viability of vein grafts in bypass procedures, they could simply file a new drug application with the FDA and begin legitimate R&D to advance the product for this indication, instead of relying on anonymous simpleton trolls on blogs to use illegal guerilla marketing tactics, as you have done here.
Ronald Mc said: “Still, I can understand anyone’s reluctance at accepting this test as definitive.”
So you’re capable of understanding why people would think that non-definitive evidence is non-definitive? You’re making some progress in recognizing the obvious.
Ronald Mc said: “It needs to be repeated in more than one institute by a different team of investigators to gain statical significants (sic).”
Again, when you deviate from your script, you demonstrate such appalling ignorance that I’m embarrassed for you. You clearly know nothing about “statistical significance” (NB: it’s not “statical significants”) or how it is achieved in a study. Please don’t pretend that you do. It’s painful to witness you shooting yourself in the foot like this.
Ronald Mc said: “FInally, you brought up “speculation that augmenting nf2r might promote cancer and reduce the effectiveness to chemotherapy… augmenting Nrf2 seems to help in effecting remission…The general consensus among oncologists is that earlier concerns relating to Nrf2 activation were unfounded. Yet, this is all rather new territory and the wind that blows east today may blow west tomorrow.”
During advanced clinical testing, all NRF2 activators studied to date (roughly 3) have demonstrated significant toxicities in human subjects. You are in position to arbitrarily dismiss this evidence. There are no statements whatsoever from any reputable oncology research or patient advocacy organizations regarding NRF2 activation and cancer, and there is no approved cancer therapy that involves NRF2 as its mechanism of action.
Ronald Mc said: “If it were my life and dealing with cancer, I think I would opt to include Protandim in my diet through the first stages of chemo and radio therapies, but be hesitant to do so if the cancer came out of remission. This is based on my own investigations. In no way do I feel there is one good answer here.”
You are not legally allowed to make such statements advocating the use of Protandim as a cancer therapy. You are a distributor. You have repeatedly violated the law and the terms of your distributor agreement. You’re incapable of exercising basic common sense. What you would do if you had cancer is incredibly irrelevant to this discussion. Grow up irresponsible man child!
Ronald Mc said: “You are correct, Joe. The link between Nrf2 and Protandim was established by LifeVantage. If you don’t trust the research, then there is no link for you.”
LieVantage did not establish the link. It was already known that curcumin and green tea activate NRF2 long before Protandim existed. The company simply piggybacked on an existing line of research. They innovated nothing. They merely reaffirmed that curcumin and green tea extracts do what they were already known to do.
http://www.protandimscams.com/protandim-and-nrf2-timeline/
Ronald Mc said: “So, all of the research on the effects of activating the Nrf2 enzyme points to it causing our DNA to produce a wealth of chemicals, including several kinds of natural antioxidants.”
The research also shows that activating NRF2 can have serious adverse consequences, and yet you continue to ignore this extremely important fact.
http://www.protandimscams.com/shawn-talbotts-pulp-fiction-of-deadly-antioxidants/
Ronald Mc said: “If, on the other hand, one conditionally accepts that Protandim may activate Nrf2, and brings on a profound improvement in health…”
Why should anyone conditionally accept this unsubstantiated claim when the company has never shown that Protandim activates NRF2 in people who take the product?
Ronald Mc said: “Usually when a person or a company sets out to take advantage of people who are ill or in pain, they charge a lot more then $40 or $50 for a bottle of whatever.”
That’s one of the weakest arguments you’ve brought to the table so far, and that’s saying a lot. Essentially what you’re saying is that Protandim isn’t a snakeoil scam, because if it was, the company would be charging more than $50 a bottle? Or are you saying that people are lucky because when they get scammed by LieVantage, it’s only $50 at a time and they could be getting scammed a whole lot worse. Dumb, dumb, dumb.
Ronald Mc said: “So, in essence, a LifeVantage customer can try the product for, say 90 days, and in the course of that time decide whether it is somehow improving their health or not. For some reason, after 90 days about half of those customers stay with the product.”
That’s a scenario you like because you it would enable you to make money by selling a bogus product to unsuspecting consumers. In the real world, and in accordance with U.S. law, the onus rests with the manufacturer to prove the value of their product BEFORE consumers pony up their money. There’s not even a faint reason to think that Protandim would have a net positive effect on health.
Ronald Mc said: “For some reason, after 90 days about half of those customers stay with the product. (47% is the number I’ve heard batted around) What does that tell you? Is the glass half full or half empty?”
According to the company, more than 90% of their customers and distributors quit within a year.
http://www.protandimscams.com/lifevantage-reveals-how-terrible-the-business-opportunity-is/
It’s obviously not a boon for health nor is it a viable business opportunity.
Ronald Mc said: “Let’s look at Protandim from another angle for a moment. The herbs that constitute its makeup have been used in ayurvedic medicine for at least a couple thousand years.”
You know nothing about Ayurvedic medicine and have no compelling evidence to support that claim; and even if you did, it’s a logical fallacy known as the argument from antiquity. You fail yet again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition
Ronald Mc said: “I do not know much about how LifeVantage directs their contracted formulator to prepare and process the herbs. I do know the final materials are assayed for potency. I have no knowledge if they are also assayed for purity or for any certain types of contamination.”
Allow me to enlighten you. Their first choice manufacturer was Chemins, and a more notorious manufacturer would be hard to imagine.
http://www.protandimscams.com/chemins-protandim/
They eventually switched to a new manufacturer (to cut costs according to the company’s SEC filings), and the result was a $6 million dollar product recall as a result of contamination with metal fragments.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protandim#Voluntary_recall
Ronald Mc said: “It’s too complex to say whether benefits of Protandim are true, much less whether the benefits are due to Nrf2 activation.”
It’s not complex at all. In any normal scenario, the onus is on the seller to provide reliable evidence of what their product does. But this isnlt even a normal scenario; it’s a situation where the marketing of the product has been beset with so many lies and so much dishonesty that there is compelling reason to never trust anything said by the company or it distributors. They have abused the public’s trust too many times for it to be overlooked.
Ronald Mc said: “As a person over 70 years of age, I stand to gain the most from a highly activated antioxidant body, so I do take my daily Protandim, for healthy people under 40, I would expect them to not see much, if any, health improvement. For people dealing with serious illnesses or injury, the ball is in the air. Some people seem to see great improvement and some not.”
You display stunning ignorance when you say things like “a highly activated antioxidant body”. There is no reason to ever thin that Protandim would result in any kind of “health improvement under any circumstance”, let alone have a therapeutic effect in people with serious illness or injury. You have no regard at all for U.S. law or basic decency when you utter these foolish misleading statements.
Ronald Mc said: “The problem is, as I see it, you won’t know what you should have done for optimal health until it’s too late.”
The problem as I and others see it is that there are legions of self-serving law-breaking dummies trying to peddle snakeoil BS to the most naïve and vulnerable members of society.
Ronald Mc said: “Terry, if you just stop reading when you finish the “Overview” on this report you can avoid the “convoluted scientific jargon that nobody other than a scientist can interpret,” and just appreciate the results of what any Nrf2 activator can do, Protandim or other products. As the formulator of Protandim has said, other natural botanicals besides those in Protandim have shown capable of activating the Nrf2 transcription factor. Some even showing more effects. Since there have been no PR & Pub studies on these other botanicals, Protandim is the formulation most studied and on the market.”
First, none of the sites you linked to qualify as “a report”. Secondly, the sites you linked to don’t even mention Protandim.
There are numerous common compounds (like vitamin C for example) that activate NRF2. It’s a mundane phenomenon. In the case of curcumin (the key ingredient in Protandim), it activates NRF2 by triggering oxidative stress. This has been demonstrated scientifically.
http://www.protandimscams.com/cheap-curcumin-in-protandim-activates-nrf2-and-stimulates-free-radical-production/
Activating NRF2 can have serious adverse consequences, a fact which you and other Protandim shills continue to completely ignore. Your indifference to this fact shows how little you care about the people you are attempting to swindle.
Lastly, there isn’t even a single crumb of evidence showing that Protandim activates NRF2 in people who take the product. Epic fail on every count.
Ronald Mc said: “Whether you find the studies and trials up to your satisfaction is, of course, up to you to decide.”
No, it’s not really. The burden of proof doesn’t rest with the consumer. U.S. law dictates the requirements for backing therapeutic claims, and LieVantage has abjectly failed to meet that burden.
Ronald Mc said: “However, may I say aspirin was put on the market with far less studies or knowledge about how it functions… some have remarked that if required, aspirin would have a hard time getting on the market today. Yet, even while not knowing how it works, it is the single most beneficial drug for mild pain and discomfort.”
Well “some people” are stupid, as you and the other Protandim shills prove on a nearly daily basis. Aspirin was marketed before the Food & Drug Act existed and before pharmaceutical science had evolved enough to conclusively demonstrate efficacy, safety, and mechanism of action. Aspirin would have no difficulty being approved today because it’s effective and has a very good risk:benefit profile and ample high-quality clinical evidence supporting its use. It’s also not the “single most beneficial drug for mild pain”; it’s actually a fairly weak analgesic; and we (but not you apparently) do in fact know a great deal about how it works.
Ronald Mc said: “WebMD.com lists more dangerous side effects and precautions for Aspirin while none exist for Protandim, yet I doubt you would hesitate to take Aspirin if you had a cold or flu.”
That’s very misleading. First, WebMD doesn’t even list Protandim; you’re comparing apples (a well established scientifically backed product) to oranges (snakeoil with no proof whatsoever of therapeutic efficacy). Secondly, Protandim has not been adequately studied for safety, so you simply cannot support the assertion that it has no side effects. Lastly, U.S. law prohibits supplement sellers from making safety claims. That’s 3 strikes Ronny.
So here ya go….
https://m.facebook.com/paul.r.myhill?fref=nf&_rdr
Paul Myhill (“inventor” of Protandim), doesn’t take Protandim anymore and doesn’t even carefully replicate it for himself or his family. Today, on his Facebook page, he posted this in a reply to Lazyman:
“As far as my new formula is concerned, let’s just say that there are now many known NRF2 activators, compared to ten years ago, and others that are assumed to be based upon their impact on the primary catalytic antioxidant enzymes and other markers. This is no big secret and is plainly discernible through a simple Google search. My new formula isn’t an advance on my old invention. Rather, it’s an entirely new composition, with a reduced set of common ingredients and the addition of others, that I believe (no pre-clinical or clinical testing to support it yet) has all the data points to show NRF2 activation, up-regulation of the antioxidant enzymes, AND provide other beneficial outcomes as bonuses. I also don’t take the latest composition in a pill form. These days, I’m more interested in functional foods/ingredients, believing that we are popping too many pills in general because we aren’t getting the required nutrition from good dietary intake. I’m not saying that all specialty supplements aren’t needed, far from it. I still stand 100% behind Protandim, but a lot has changed and is better understood during the last ten years – from an activator (up-regulator) standpoint, and from a dietary standpoint.”
I love how he “believes” things with no data to back it up….just like old times. He’s 100% behind Protandim…..yet doesn’t take it anymore. LOL.
Dr. Mary Carmen Montsko (Distributor ID# 999156) of Tampa, FL is the latest Protandim distributor to go online illegally promoting the product as a therapeutic agent. According to Google search this webpage went online within the last 24 hours. It includes the following prohibited claim:
“My wife Dr. Montsko introduced me to Protandim. As I am a bit of a skeptic I did a blood test before I started the product and a second test after taking the product for a bit over one month. The results actually shocked me as they were so good. One of the key indicators is the hs-CRP – high-sensitivity CRP. Relatively high levels of hs-CRP in otherwise healthy individuals have been found to be predictive of an increased risk of a future heart attack, stroke, sudden cardiac death, and/or peripheral arterial disease. Individuals who have hs-CRP results at the high end of the normal range have 1.5 to 4 times the risk of having a heart attack as those with hs-CRP values at the low end of the normal range. Needless to say we freaked out a bit when my first test showed the hs-CRP at 6.2 in the high end of the high risk group. After taking Protandim for a little over one month I went to a 1.7 (middle of the average range). That is an amazing result. This is a supplement that everyone should be on.”
http://www.drmontsko.com/protandim-information.html
http://www.mylifevantage.com/mdmarymontsko/products/
Complaints to the FDA can be filed confidentially online at:
http://www.fda.gov/safety/reportaproblem/ucm059315.htm
What claim is supposed to have been made here? This is just a report of the results of blood tests on someone?
Greg said: “What claim is supposed to have been made here? This is just a report of the results of blood tests on someone?”
So you’re still pretending playing this game of pretending that you don’t understand the rules and regulations. Don’t expect me to keep repeating to you in minute detail why specific claims violate U.S. law and the terms of the LieVantage distributor contract. You’ve been spoon-fed both the FDA’s regulations and industry guidance on prohibited claims as well as the company’s compliance policies and procedures that bar the use of claims such as the ones made on Montsko’s website.
If you truly don’t understand then you’re simply too dense to bother wasting time on with further elaboration. However, it’s hard to believe anyone could be that dense, so the logical conclusion is that you’re purposely feigning ignorance just to waste our time. That time would be better spent filing complaints directly with the FDA than playing silly games with someone who sticks their fingers in their ears and pretends to be deaf..
http://www.fda.gov/safety/reportaproblem/ucm059315.htm
Unless you are practicing lawyer who specializes in this area of the law, don’t try lecturing anyone else about it. With your record of twisting what others say, and attributing to them the worst of motives (ie, being very judgemental), I frankly don’t trust a word you write, and I certainly don’t waste my time reading your boring missives. I do not recognize your authority here.
Greg said: “Unless you are practicing lawyer who specializes in this area of the law, don’t try lecturing anyone else about it.”
That’s one of your more boneheaded premises. Setting aside the FDA regulations for the time being, which, incidentally, are unambiguous with regard to the type of health claims that we’ve been discussing here, the company’s guidance documents (your contract, policies & procedures, and compliance FAQs) clearly describe such claims as prohibited, and you certainly don’t need a law degree to understand them or to see that those prohibitions are being routinely violated by Protandim distributors.
You’re simply turning a blind eye to that fact and trying to sweep it under the rug with a nonsensical argument.
Greg said: “With your record of twisting what others say, and attributing to them the worst of motives (ie, being very judgemental), I frankly don’t trust a word you write, and I certainly don’t waste my time reading your boring missives. I do not recognize your authority here.”
First of all, I have twisted nothing. I have presented facts and clear cut logical arguments which you have been completely unable to refute. People tend to take a very dim view of predators who try to rip-off sick people by selling them fake (snakeoil) medicine, so you shouldn’t be surprised that your actions, and those of your entire organization, are being judged and condemned.
The underlying motive for making these prohibited claims is a simple one – profit – at the expense of the vulnerable people that they are illegally attempting to exploit.
If you don’t read my posts, as you claim, then why is that you keep issuing these feeble replies? How can you reply to something you didn’t read? Obviously you are reading what I have written, but sadly none of it, no matter how straightforward, is sinking in. It’s like talking to a cinder block.
A better idea than devoting all you attention to talking about me would be to focus your comments on the product and the company. Be relevant for a change and stop trying to derail the discussion with BS and mudslinging that have nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Greg — just ignore Vogel, he’s just a gadfly. He will take anything you say, deliberately turn it into what he wished you meant and then attack you personally over his fantasy. Think of him as an entertaining background buzz on this board.
Although I do appreciate him bringing good information to our attention. He’s on a little crusade, a la Don Quixote, and doesn’t realize that medical doctors can go off schedule if they want or that the FDA is not interested in what an Australian may have on their web site. He’ll probably get sued for harassment by someone and go back to picking his belly button lint.
Ronald McD said: “Greg — just ignore Vogel, he’s just a gadfly. He will take anything you say, deliberately turn it into what he wished you meant and then attack you personally over his fantasy. Think of him as an entertaining background buzz on this board….He’s on a little crusade, a la Don Quixote…He’ll probably get sued for harassment by someone and go back to picking his belly button lint.”
Ron, you and Greg and Don (assuming you’re not all the same person) should go start your own blog called “Things I Hate About Vogel” because you obviously have no intention of staying on topic. You’re really lowering the quality of the dialog, But perhaps that’s your intention — to post so much fluff that you can bury the facts amid the noise and exhaust the reader’s patience.
Thanks for sharing that great link!
Vogel,
I am sorry you feel that we are “illegally promoting” a product. I can assure you that this is not the case. I wrote the testimonial that you referred to in your post. When I was made aware of this product I was as skeptical as you were. I did my research, like you, and I also felt there were not enough in vivo studies.
But my wife reviewed the research and consulted with other physicians on the research that has been done and told me that the product does reduce Oxidative Stress. I was still skeptical, and as you can imagine I took a bit of a verbal beating from her, the phrase “oh, so you spent 8 years in medical school came up quite a bit”. So I told her I would start taking the product, but wanted to take a blood test first so I could see the results. The results were very good ,as you saw on the site. So now I am a believer.
That being said I understand you sentiment. There are many people out there that misrepresent products knowing darn well they do not work. My wife and I are not these types of people. We both believe in this product. We would not sell it if we did not. I did add the following to the end of my testimonial “It’s not a magic bullet but I believe the benefits are for real”. I added this not because I thought I was doing anything illegal but because you made me realize that some people may jump to the conclusion that this is a fix all product.
I also wanted to share the link to our “about oxidative stress” page as I believe it has some good information on it. I am sure you are up on this but others may find it helpful.
http://www.drmontsko.com/about-oxidative-stress.html
John my sister and her husband are true believers too and Christians I might add. That does not make this product do anything that’s claimed. I too read the studies and was not at all impressed given the main guy on the board, and go to resident doctor for Protandium, was involved in all the main studies.
In other studies some of the original members were also involved in the studies. Did that not raise a red flag for you wife??????
Don’t feel too sad John. Vogel has an agenda to not just disagree with people who see Protandim as a possibly effective product, but to distort anything they may say and rail against his newly created strawman.
I found your wife’s site and your blood test results very interesting reading. Best of health to you.
Ronald Mc said: “Don’t feel too sad John. Vogel has an agenda to not just disagree with people who see Protandim as a possibly effective product, but to distort anything they may say and rail against his newly created strawman.”
(1) I don’t have an agenda. (2) I have distorted nothing nor have I created a strawman; quite the contrary — I have used facts to lay waste to your pathetic threadbare arguments time and time again. You’ve offered no rebuttals because your position is indefensible; and now you instead resort to lobbing insults from the sidelines. Go back to sucking your pacifier junior and come back with your A-game next time, if you dare.
John Montsko said: “Vogel, I am sorry you feel that we are ‘illegally promoting’ a product. I can assure you that this is not the case.”
You should be sorry that you are providing false assurances. Allow me to assure you that the posting of those claims was in fact quite illegal according to the US Food & Drug Act and DSHEA. It also violated the terms of your distributor agreement and violated FTC regulations against the use of product testimonials that describe atypical and unsubstantiated results.
John Montsko said: “I wrote the testimonial that you referred to in your post. When I was made aware of this product I was as skeptical as you were. I did my research, like you, and I also felt there were not enough in vivo studies.”
I can assure you were not skeptical “like me” and that didn’t do your research “like me” (because unlike you, I actually understand the research), and that I have never said that there aren’t enough in vivo (animal) studies; what the company is lacking is clinical evidence to support the therapeutic claims that you, the company, and its distributors have routinely made, in violation of U.S. law.
John Montsko said: “But my wife reviewed the research and consulted with other physicians on the research that has been done and told me that the product does reduce Oxidative Stress.”
If that’s the case, then your wife isn’t very adept at analyzing research. There is only one clinical study (from 2006) showing that the product reduces oxidative stress (i.e., TBARS). It was a poorly-designed, highly-flawed, company-generated study, and the results were contradicted by a second better-designed clinical study which showed that the product had no effect whatsoever on oxidative stress.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22268125
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16413416
John Montsko said: “That being said I understand you sentiment.”
My “sentiment”, or more accurately “expectation”, which you clearly don’t understand, is that those who are affiliated with the LifeVantage organization shouldn’t be misleading consumers and breaking the law by implying that the product can reduce the risk of heart disease.
John Montsko said: “There are many people out there that misrepresent products knowing darn well they do not work. My wife and I are not these types of people. We both believe in this product.”
Well, in fact you are exactly the “type of people” who misrepresent products. “Belief” has no place in the conversation. Believing that the law doesn’t apply to you doesn’t exonerate you from violating the law.
John Montsko said: “I also wanted to share the link to our “about oxidative stress” page as I believe it has some good information on it. I am sure you are up on this but others may find it helpful.”
http://www.drmontsko.com/about-oxidative-stress.html
So you actually had the nerve to post this link to your distributor page, adding insult to injury. I did not find the information “good”; it was like something a high-schooler would write. BTW, this content too is illegal because you link numerous disease states with oxidative stress and offer up Protandim as the solution to reduce oxidative stress. It seems that you clowns burn your compliance manuals on Day 1 of becoming a distributor.
Vogle I am sorry you are such an angry person who feels that he needs to try and belittle and insult other people who do not share your views. A productive debate does not need to be so negative.
In regards to your comment:
“I can assure you were not skeptical “like me” and that didn’t do your research “like me” (because unlike you, I actually understand the research), and that I have never said that there aren’t enough in vivo (animal) studies; what the company is lacking is clinical evidence to support the therapeutic claims that you, the company, and its distributors have routinely made, in violation of U.S. law.”
Response:
When I referenced “In Vivo” (taking place in a living organism) I was referring to studies in the human body vs in vitro (test tube studies). There are many animal studies and a few good human in vitro human studies on protandim but not as many in vivo human studies, so I took a blood test to see how the product would work in my body.
Here are some links to protandim human “in vitro” studies that have been done:
Phytochemical activation of Nrf2 protects human coronary artery endothelial cells against an oxidative challenge
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22685617
The Chemopreventive Effects of Protandim: Modulation of p53 Mitochondrial Translocation and Apoptosis during Skin Carcinogenesis
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0011902
Protandim attenuates intimal hyperplasia in human saphenous veins cultured ex vivo via a catalase-dependent pathway
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891584910014139
In regards to you comment:
“There is only one clinical study (from 2006) showing that the product reduces oxidative stress (i.e., TBARS). It was a poorly-designed, highly-flawed, company-generated study, and the results were contradicted by a second better-designed clinical study which showed that the product had no effect whatsoever on oxidative stress.
Response:
The study you refer to as “better-designed clinical study” was a strange study. In Joe’s above review he writes “Personally, I don’t know how relevant this study is to whether Protandim works or not. I mentioned it because it was a human study.”
In regards to you comment on the page I posted about oxidative stress:
“I did not find the information “good”; it was like something a high-schooler would write. “
Response:
I am going to take this as a complement. The page was actually written to explain oxidative stress in very basic terms, making the information accessible everyone.
John Montsko said: “Vogle I am sorry you are such an angry person who feels that he needs to try and belittle and insult other people who do not share your views. A productive debate does not need to be so negative.”
I’m sorry that you can’t even spell my name and that you had to preface your non-rebuttal with an ad hominem logical fallacy instead of accepting responsibility for your illegal and misleading marketing claims. I’m also sorry that some combination of greed, desperation, and ignorance led you to become a participant in a deceptive and destructive snakeoil pyramid scheme.
There has been little “productive debate” coming from the Protandim shills and much misinformation. It’s not a question of “sharing my view”; it’s a matter of accepting objective facts as just that.
John Montsko said: “When I referenced “In Vivo” (taking place in a living organism) I was referring to studies in the human body vs in vitro (test tube studies).”
With respect to biomedical research, “in vivo” is generally understood to refer to studies in intact animals. Studies in humans are referred to as “clinical studies”, or simply “human studies”. However, your lack of knowledge about research nomenclature is a minor issue; the major issue is that your claims about Protandim were illegal, misleading, and in violation of the company’s (notoriously unenforced) compliance policy.
John Montsko said: “There are many animal studies and a few good human in vitro human studies on protandim but not as many in vivo human studies, so I took a blood test to see how the product would work in my body. Here are some links to protandim human “in vitro” studies that have been done.”
What was that scattershot word salad supposed to mean? First, there are a mere 2 human studies: a poorly designed one from 2006, and a a more recent better designed study that showed the product was ineffective in lowering oxidative stress. Second, taking a blood test isn’t a legitimate study, and your conveying the results of that test, real of fictitious, is not a scientifically acceptable or legal method for marketing Protandim. Additionally, before-and-after blood tests would tell us nothing about cause and effect, even if we were to take a spectacular leap of faith and trust that you conveyed the results accurately and ruled out confounding factors. Second, why would you make this non sequitor about in vitro studies and then provide links to two of them, which everyone here already knows about, and not even try to make a point about what we’re supposed to presume based on those studies? How ridiculous.
John Montsko said: “The study you refer to as “better-designed clinical study” was a strange study. In Joe’s above review he writes “Personally, I don’t know how relevant this study is to whether Protandim works or not. I mentioned it because it was a human study.”
No offense to Joe, but I ’m more than capable of understanding every nuance of the study and have proven my competence with a detailed analysis. You can’t say the same, and anything that you could try to claim say is “strange” about this study has already been addressed in my analyses. The study, far better in design than the original highly-flawed company-funded clinical study on Protandim, showed that the product did absolutely nothing (and at twice the normal dose). I thoroughly debunked Greg’s feeble attempt at whitewashing the study; maybe you’d like to at least make an attempt to justify your accusation that it’s strange or irrelevant.
John Montsko said: “In regards to you comment on the page I posted about oxidative stress: I am going to take this as a complement. The page was actually written to explain oxidative stress in very basic terms, making the information accessible everyone.”
Really? You want to give yourself a pat on the back for posting that infantile diagram while failing to take any responsibility whatsoever for the fact that you are illegally and misleadingly marketing Protandim as a medicinal agent? There should be a special term in the DSM-V to describe the sociopathic delusions of Protandim distributors.
bottom line is that the company’s stock is still tanking worth 1/3 of original price from a couple of years ago and unless there is some breakthrough study or some big pharma purchases the patent the company will continue to hemorrhage until it’s bankrupt “again”…….
Lifevantage is a profitable company, and is nowhere near bankruptcy. In fact, it has been taking steps recently to reduce its debt.
you must not look at their stock or read the press releases, they have 10,000 fewer distributors this year over last, their next marketing is aimed at young kids who if you haven’t noticed are living at home with mom and dad and have a very high unemployment rate and they are the target group?????? that said, their line of energy drinks might go some where.
Greg said: “Lifevantage is a profitable company, and is nowhere near bankruptcy. In fact, it has been taking steps recently to reduce its debt.”
What Claudia said, and you inexplicably ignored, is that the stock has lost roughly two-thirds of its value since about 2 years ago (50% in the last year alone). The company is contracting; revenue growth has stalled, distributors are turning over rapidly, and the preferred customer pool is shrinking. They are making last ditch efforts to keep the company afloat – ill conceived initiatives like stock buybacks, launching a canine version of Protandim, and, most recently, diving into the already overcrowded MLM energy drink market – but you can consider those measures to be death spasms.
It’s a miracle that the company lasted this long, given its ignominious history and the fact that the flagship product doesn’t do anything.
Here’s yet another example of a distributor illegally promoting Protandim as a therapeutic agent.
“Protandim is for Everyone from People who Workout and Do Fitness and Health, to People Living with Diabetes, Cancer, Alzheimer’s, Asthma, Ms, and so Much More! ALZHEIMER’S AND PROTANDIM!!: Experts suggest that as many as 5.1 MILLION Americans may have Alzheimer’s Disease. I have Seen reports that 1 in 6 Americans will have it!! 3 out of the 5 Ingredients in Protandim are know to Stop or help Prevent Alzheimer’s. Oxidative Stress in our bodies is the Leading Cause of Alzheimer’s. Protandim Reduces Oxidative Stress by at least 40% in just 30 Days!! Become a Preferred Customer and Order Protandim Today”
http://kbwprotandimdistributor.tumblr.com/
The site links to the LifeVantage sales page for Shannon (aka Shane) F. Stone (DBA: Vintage Collectibles; ID# 1009880) from Dallas/Corinth, TX.
http://www.mylifevantage.com/debtfreelife/products/
http://www.buzzfile.com/business/Vintage-Collectibles-940-498-2548
http://www.advancedbackgroundchecks.com/d/shannon-stone/380627178
He also appears to be pyramid scheming outright by trying to sell distributorships for $630.
http://www.golfclubsreview.org/golf/Life-Vantage-Independent-Distributor-Of-Protandim_281348976985.html
Complaints to the FDA should be filed online at:
http://www.fda.gov/safety/reportaproblem/ucm059315.htm
Someone please help me. The link doesn’t work and I’ve tried googling and can’t find this article but I’m very interested given my mother’s breast cancer. Does anyone know where I can find the full article and studies done, please?
I just navigated to the article again and here’s the link:
http://www.americanhealthcarefoundation.org/breast%2Dcancer%2Dmd/GSH.cfm
Here is the link to the whole breast cancer page:
http://www.americanhealthcarefoundation.org/breast%2Dcancer%2Dmd/
As I mentioned earlier, it’s not an easy site to navigate. I wish your mother the very best success with her treatment. My wife is a long term survivor of breast cancer and I know how scary it can be to deal with. Having spoken with several breast cancer survivors I can tell you that having a high glutathione level made all the difference in tolerating the side effects of chemo and radio treatments. The article also mentions this aspect.
In the likely event of surgery for her breast cancer, according to a elderly medical doctor I know, who used Protandim up to two weeks before his surgery and immediately after; his recovery was remarkable to both him and his surgeon. I affirm the same good results for your mother.
Ronald McD said: “In the likely event of surgery for her breast cancer, according to a elderly medical doctor I know, who used Protandim up to two weeks before his surgery and immediately after; his recovery was remarkable to both him and his surgeon. I affirm the same good results for your mother.”
You’re violating U.S. law yet again by making yet another implicit therapeutic claim. It is painfully obvious that distributors have absolutely no respect for the law and will continue trying to bilk sick people until the authorities shut the company down.
Aloha I am a distributor with LifeVantage and I can assure you that we are trained and told plainly NOT to make any claims other than to direct people to the studies which have been published.
We do not sell drugs , we are not approved by the FDA, we Do hear many things and most of them are good. Many relate to the studies and some are not covered in the studies.
Melly if you contact me I can send you a link to the companies studies in our library…I also have my own story which you might be interested in…
Ronald while you are sharing a story which is inspiring please remember if you ARE a distributor that we are not to make any promises and allow the other person to do their own research and have their own experience.
Vogel..are you sure that Ronald is a distributor..you are certainly right that he should not make a therapeutic claim although he may share his story should Melly want to hear it…making it clear that it is just that…his story.
Vogel my experience of the product and the company is positive. They are transparent, on the Nazdaq, the CEO was given an award for his work this year as the top CEO by the direct sellers commission and appointed to the board. That is big considering the company is a relatively new company at 10yrs old. with only 5 yrs in direct selling. You have every right to believe in the medical system you want to and the paradyme of working by the hour or becoming an owner/operator…
I have done both of those things and now at 60yrs of age I can tell you that statistics show 95% of Americans do NOT retire at 65 and what we are doing with this company is in my humble opinion a very good thing. We make something that APPEARS to help a lot of people, we offer a business plan where we WORK TOGETHER and the harder you work FOR YOUR TEAM the better you do….not for the CEO but for your self and your. Come to a convention Vogel…the dreams are good ones…not superficial but inspiring, building homes for the less fortunate, orphanages, our company listens…
I don’t think anyone is going to put us out of business because we are clear, we are open, we are honest and we want to help a system that is not designed to help the little people…this company is for everyone, even you. If you want you can find me on fb under alohamanao .
Melly just contact me or the company and you can be directed to the study. It is certainly worth a look in my opinion.
Don’t waste your time appealing to Vogel (whoever he really is), because he has some personal beef with Lifevantage, and no amount of facts will change his mind. The emotion of hatred, not reason, controls his “thinking”. It will not be long before he replies to your post by twisting what you wrote in the most negative way possible, and accusing you of wicked motives and criminal intent.
Greg B said: “Don’t waste your time appealing to Vogel (whoever he really is) because he has some personal beef with Lifevantage.”
Not personal at al. My disgust with DeathVantage stems from having analyzed the company carefully and assimilating the evidence showing that they are lying scumbags out to deceive and exploit consumers.
“…and no amount of facts will change his mind.”
My conclusions are based on facts, which is readily apparent to anyone who reviews my posts. You can’t get a fact straight to save your life.
“The emotion of hatred, not reason, controls his ‘thinking’.”
Really? I’m here discussing facts about the company; you’re the one who’s making it personal and venting hatred. Smarten up schmuck!
All Lifevantage research can easily be found here:
http://bigbluecalendar.mhsoftware.com/custom/en/studies.htm
Note that Lifevantage did not conduct the peer reviewed studies. Dr. McCord’s name is mentioned on many because the company gives product to the companies and universities who study the supplement. Any contributor must be mentioned in these studies. It was not up to Lifevantage to prove or disprove any outcome the studies were looking for.
The green light has been given to Lifevantage to state that Protandim lowers oxidative stress an average of 40% in 30 days. The outcome of this is unique to the individual taking Protandim.
In response to Vogel: The law states that, because it does not need FDA approval, Protandim cannot make claims to cure disease. The above statement does not mention curing breast cancer. It makes the claim of a remarkable recovery. This is completely within the bounds of the law.
reneewparker, that website only shows the studies. Can you show me a website from a distributor who did what I did – explain what the studies mean?
Who gave LV the “green light” to say protandim lowers oxidative stress?
Are you a protandim distributor? just curious because you are saying the same thing Ive heard others say (eg LV does not conduct peer review studies). Why don’t they do studies? I dont buy the argument that they dont want to seem biased.
I think the reason LV has not been conducting studies of Protandim itself recently is because it has been concentrating on developing other products–Canine Health, True Science, and Axio. It has also been working on developing substitute formulas for those countries that won’t allow the regular Protandim formula to be sold there. Studies of Protandim by entities other than LV continue to be performed, but LV thinks that what has been done so far is sufficient to justify the production and marketing of the product.
Also, did anyone catch our Chief Science Officer (Dr Talbot), and one of our leading distributors (Trish Albertson) on the TV show The Balancing Act? Here is a link: http://www.thebalancingact.com/story/5311/reducing_the_signs_of_aging_by_using_antioxidants_the_right_way
Greg, don’t be too impressed with the Balancing Act. Odds are the people paid for the segment. I looked into the Balancing act during my review of Skinny Fiber which has also been featured on that TV show. Here is the link: http://supplementclarity.com/skinny-fiber-weight-loss-review/
I called the Balancing Act and spoke to a producer. That person told me that what they do are called “Branded Entertainment Segments” which is basically an infomercial.
Greg says:
“I think the reason LV has not been conducting studies of Protandim itself recently is because it has been concentrating on developing other products–Canine Health, True Science, and Axio. It has also been working on developing substitute formulas for those countries that won’t allow the regular Protandim formula to be sold there. Studies of Protandim by entities other than LV continue to be performed, but LV thinks that what has been done so far is sufficient to justify the production and marketing of the product.”
Those are really poor reasons, Greg, especially if they think Protandim is as amazing as they claim. PubMed says that rodent and test tube studies are NOT sufficient to determine what works in a human. Lifevantage claims to be a science based company, and that science is at the root of all they do. It sets them apart from other companies, yadda yadda yadda……
I think Lifevantage knows their product does absolutely nothing and THAT is what stops them from doing relevant research. It’s really the only thing that makes sense. It’s also the reason they need to start peddling other products.
By the way, my Dad was hospitalized this week and the doctor took him off of Protandim. He said some of the ingredients interfere with the medications he is on.
Sorry to hear about your father. I hope he gets better. Yes, there may be times when Protandim is contra-indicated. But does that not indicate that it actually works as advertised? If it didn’t do anything, then it wouldn’t matter if your dad was taking it or not! What in Protandim does the doctor think might interfere with the treatment? Since the actual amounts of the ingredients in Protandim is rather small, I wonder if the doctor is being overly cautious?
Greg said: “Yes, there may be times when Protandim is contra-indicated.”
Thanks for sharing your input not-a-doctor Greg. What times would those be exactly? You don’t have a clue do you? LifeVantage’s most recent FAQ on Protandim is very vague and ambiguous with respect to contraindications. The FAQ states the following:
Q: Are there situations where Protandim is not recommended?
A: You should consult your physician before taking Protandim if you are pregnant, nursing, on immunosuppressive therapy, or taking prescription drugs.
Q: Does Protandim interfere with any prescription drugs?
A: We do not know of any interference between Protandim and prescription drugs. However, we recommend you check with your physician before taking Protandim if you are taking prescription drugs.
http://www.lvnmedia.com/faqs
Notice 2 key points here: (1) they don’t know if it interferes with any prescription drugs; (2) they defer completely to the advice of one’s physician.
What’s really disturbing is that, apparently, the company used to mention more specific contraindications in their FAQ, as indicated by these two distributor sites from 2012 which contain the same boilerplate statements regarding contraindications in cancer patients:
Q: Are there any times for which Protandim is contraindicated?
A: Yes, during chemotherapy or after an organ transplant. Protandim is not recommended during chemotherapy or radiation therapy for cancer. Why not? Because chemotherapy and radiation therapy are designed to kill (cancer) cells by causing oxidative stress. After cancer chemotherapy and radiation therapy, Protandim is then strongly recommended because the rest of the body then needs to repair itself and recover.
http://lifereengineer.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/protandim-frequently-asked-questions-clinical-studies/
http://www.geneactivatornrf2.org/lifevantage-protandim-faq-part-2/#.VDqg6fnF-So
Here you can see that the company not only acknowledged contraindications but also made the grievous sin of recommending Protandim for post-chemo recovery, which is illegal and presumably the reason why they pulled the statement from the latest FAQ. Now however, they are intentionally leaving consumers in the dark about possible contraindications and interference with cancer therapy.
Greg said: “But does that not indicate that it actually works as advertised?”
No clearly it does not; unless of course they are marketing this as a supplement designed to undermine cancer therapy.
Greg said: “What in Protandim does the doctor think might interfere with the treatment? Since the actual amounts of the ingredients in Protandim is rather small, I wonder if the doctor is being overly cautious?”
That’s a dickish thing to say. You prefaced your comment by acknowledging that there are times when the product is contraindicated (although you didn’t specify what those times were), and the company’s FAQ says that consumers should defer to their doctor’s advice about using the product, and yet now you’re implying that Lisa’s doctor’s advice is wrong and that the amounts of ingredients in Protandim are too low to do anything. Pick a side Greg; make a point clearly and unambiguously, and make sure it’s consistent with what the company says. As it stands your comment is an epic fail on every count.
@Greg,
No, it does not mean Protandim is working as advertised. I wasn’t there, but the doctor told the nurse that the ingredients interfere with some of the medications he is on. It had nothing to do with whether reducing oxidative stress was good or bad for his condition (he is not a cancer patient). I don’t know which ingredients were of concern, unfortunately.
Hi Joe, sorry for the long pause! Somehow I missed your reply. By its very nature, a peer-reviewed study must be conducted by “peer” research groups. It’s not that LV doesn’t want to appear biased, any research solely conducted by them would naturally be seen as slanted and unreliable. And, 8-10 years ago, when a number of these studies began, LV was not doing well financially. The company was small and had little money for more of its own research.
While the ABC Prime-time report in 2005 boosted initial sales, (GNC and chain pharmacies) there was no marketing budget. People forgot about it and sales attested to that. Remember, this product was conceived in a lab, not a corporate board room.
By 2009 LV was in the red $4million and looking for a buyer, and as I understand it, that’s when someone suggested the company go the direct sales route. The idea ruffled some feathers, but according to their Earnings Statement, (find it anywhere, the company is publicly traded,) they did $208 million last year -just 4 years after changing to the direct sales model.
The distributors who are MDs do what you did in explaining the studies. I guess the lay person relies on the body of evidence of both research and human experience. The FDA allows the company to say that Protandim lowers oxidative stress because of the results of the first clinical trial.
Joe, I did not believe Protandim would work when somebody shared it with me as a possible way to stem the tide of my husband’s early-onset Alzheimers disease 18 months ago.(He is 55 years old.). I bought some to shut the “believer” up. Now, my husband is back at work in education and school sports. Does he still have ALZ?
I’m sure he does. Is his life greatly improved beyond the help the pharmaceutical therapies offered? Without a doubt. My job currently does not allow me, but if I could, (and I think I’ve found a loophole), I’d be all over this.
As a side note, locate the compensation plan video on youtube. It’s like nothing I’ve seen. That “believer” I mentioned was able to quit her job in about a year. I know a lot about it because I tried to stop that “believer”, ( a close friend), from getting hurt by an MLM scam. I was wrong.
Renee
Renee, really glad your husband is doing better and back to work. I can only say that I would not feel LV was biased if they published human trials on protandim. I would welcome it.
Reneewparker said: “By its very nature, a peer-reviewed study must be conducted by “peer” research groups.”
Sound of hand smacking forehead…
“Peer review” refers to who the research is reviewed by prior to acceptance/rejection for publication by a particular journal, not who conducts the research. Why do you Protandimites insist on lecturing people about subjects like this when you lack even a rudimentary understanding of the topic? The squawking of a misinformed parrot helps no one.
Reneewparker said: “It’s not that LV doesn’t want to appear biased, any research solely conducted by them would naturally be seen as slanted and unreliable.”
Yes exactly. LifeVantage was directly involved in all of the research and that’s one of the reasons why it’s viewed as slanted and unreliable; that and the fact that the work was incredibly shoddy and grossly misrepresented by the company.
Reneewparker said: “And, 8-10 years ago, when a number of these studies began, LV was not doing well financially. The company was small and had little money for more of its own research.”
That’s straight-up BS! All except for one of the Protandim studies was published in 2009 or later (roughly 5 years ago or less). Only one study was done prior to that (2006) and it was a human trial funded by the company (so apparently they were capable of funding human research in 2006 but not now). Since then, they have backed away from human research altogether and content themselves instead with a stream of worthless (and inexpensive) animal and test tube studies that are inherently incapable of supporting any of the company’s marketing claims. Impresses the rubes who don’t know any better though.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=protandim
Reneewparker said: “While the ABC Prime-time report in 2005 boosted initial sales, (GNC and chain pharmacies) there was no marketing budget.”
BS again. The ABC spot aired because LifeVantage hired a PR firm to secure product placement; this fact is public record. They obviously had a marketing budget.
http://www.ogilvypr.com/en/press/ogilvy-public-relations-worldwidedenver-wins-nutraceuticals-account
Reneewparker said: “Remember, this product was conceived in a lab, not a corporate board room.”
BS yet again. The product was hastily conceived in a matter of a month or so by non-scientists Paul Myhill and Bill Driscoll (probably while sitting on the couch; certainly not in a lab) as a last-minute replacement when their deal to market the originally-planned peptide version of Protandim from Ceremedix fell through. This too is public record; Myhill admitted it directly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protandim#Product_history
Reneewparker said: “By 2009 LV was in the red $4million and looking for a buyer, and as I understand it, that’s when someone suggested the company go the direct sales route.”
Yes, precisely. There was no interest in this stupid worthless product when it was sold via retail channels, and the perpetrators recognized that the only way they could profit from it was to sell it via a pyramid scheme. So in 2008 they hired that maggot David Brown (read up on his shady background with the Metabolife scam) to turn the show into an MLM/snakeoil medicine show.
http://investor.lifevantage.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=619000
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metabolife#History
Reneewparker said: “The distributors who are MDs do what you did in explaining the studies.”
You mean that these con artists, who should have a conscience and know better, are enriching themselves by trying to misrepresent the studies to unsuspecting victims. Yes, I know all about this deplorable practice; it has been well documented.
http://www.protandimscams.com/
BTW, how many MD distributors do they have? I would imagine that it’s only a couple and that they’re all retired hacks, Name them all please and we can verify.
Reneewparker said: “I guess the lay person relies on the body of evidence of both research and human experience.”
You mean the organization attempts to deceive the layperson by drowning them with that shoddy arcane misleading research, and then goes a step further by referring to vague unreliable testimonials that attempt to portray the product as doing something that it couldn’t conceivably do and has never been even remotely demonstrated in any of the research.
Reneewparker said: “The FDA allows the company to say that Protandim lowers oxidative stress because of the results of the first clinical trial.”
The FDA does not allow it and they never reviewed any research on Protandim. U.S. law (DSHEA) simply allows supplement companies to make whatever claims they want without pre-approval or research review. Companies only get busted after the fact when enough people complain.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietary_Supplement_Health_and_Education_Act_of_1994
Reneewparker said: “Joe, I did not believe Protandim would work when somebody shared it with me as a possible way to stem the tide of my husband’s early-onset Alzheimers disease 18 months ago.”
Right, this is exact what I’m talking about. No research ever showed even the faintest indication that Protandim can help with Alzheimers; there’s no rationale why it would; and it’s illegal to make such claims — yet some distributor obviously lied to you and violated the law by promoting it as a therapeutic agent.
Reneewparker said: “As a side note, locate the compensation plan video on youtube. It’s like nothing I’ve seen. That “believer” I mentioned was able to quit her job in about a year. I know a lot about it because I tried to stop that “believer”, ( a close friend), from getting hurt by an MLM scam. I was wrong.”
You weren’t wrong. The vast majority (approx 95% or more) of participants in this scam will lose money or at best make well below minimum wage after expenses. The company’s income disclosure statement proves it. The miniscule handful that do make money (and not all that much) do so by lying to consumers about the effects of the product (e.g., saying that it can alleviate Alzheimers) and misrepresenting the odds of financial success.
http://www.lifevantage.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/LifeVantage-Earnings-Claim-Statement-V.04.pdf
Perhaps you didn’t notice that the company is already unraveling. Most of their senior execs left to start a new MLM scam.
https://www.facebook.com/paul.r.myhill/photos/a.10150718627484754.421171.165526949753/10152878504564754/?type=1&permPage=1
I don’t know why people like Renee take it upon themselves to lecture people about the product/company when it’s so obvious that they are groping in the dark. Is it because of an inflated sense of self-importance a la the Dunning Kruger effect?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Or is it just straight-up dishonesty – bending over backwards to deceive people so that the dim hope of making money from this snakeoil pyramid scheme won’t fade away completely?
As usual, Vogel is spot-on and very thorough (LOL, “…that maggot David Brown..”)
I just have a little tidbit to add from Paul Myhill’s Facebook page which backs up the statement about Protandim not being invented in a lab:
“Paul Myhill
September 8, 2014 ·
This week, we’re listing the house where Protandim was invented. Anybody interested?”
There are several gems on his Facebook, like info on the new MLM he is starting up (with former LifeVantage head honchos who jumped ship). There was also the statement about how he doesn’t take Protandim anymore, which I’ve already pointed out in the comments here. Really, if the guy who “invented” it doesn’t take it anymore, doesn’t that speak volumes?
It fascinates me that distributors are still willing to tow the company line when there is so much evidence that this is just a ridiculous scam.
That’s a nail in the coffin isn’t it Lisa? Myhill admits that he concocted Protandim at his tract house in the burbs of Denver.
His admission that he no longer takes/believes in Protandim is reminiscent of the inventor of Monavie (Ralph Carson) eventually admitting that Monavie’s MLM scam juice was nothing more than expensive flavored water and didn’t actually do anything. After enjoying considerable success at the peak of its hype, Monavie is now dying in a manner similar to Protandim. Key distributors/executives bailed for greener pastures (new MLMs), and now the company can’t even pay off its debts.
Kinda makes you wonder what kind of MLM crap people like Greg will be hawking after Protandim finally bites the dust.
The company claims that they have 67,000 active distributors. They define an “active distributor” as a distributor who placed an order for products or promotional materials during the most recent three-month period. The LifeVantage income disclosure statement shows that only 38.2% of active distributors received any commissions at all (including those that received average monthly commissions as low as 10 cents). In other words of their 67,000 active distributors 61.8% (41,406) received no commissions at all and were misleadingly excluded from the company’s earnings statement entirely. We don’t even know how many “inactive distributors” they have.
The 38.2% that received commissions corresponds to 25,594 out of 67,000 active distributors. Of those, roughly 128 received commissions corresponding to an average annual salary above the poverty line; the remainder earned below $2,251.42 per month.
Let’s repeat that again: out of 67,000 active distributors, a mere 128 people (0.19%) earned more than poverty level wages. The top payouts (i.e., $90,428.85 per month) went to a mere 2 or 3 people in that group of 128.
Of the active distributors that did received a commission payment, 50% (4873 people) made only $121 per month on average, and another 30.7% (3002 people) received $267 per month. At these payout levels, it would be expected that there would be a zero net gain or a net loss after expenses. The same applies to the 41,406 active distributors that did qualify for commissions – they would have incurred a substantial net loss after expenses – and to the unknown number of distributors that were deemed to be “inactive” because they didn’t place an order in the preceding 3 month period and were therefore excluded altogether from the IDS analysis..
So there you have it. LifeVantage’s so-called “business opportunity” condemns 99.8% of active distributors to either lose money, break even, or in the best case scenario, live in poverty – all so that a mere 128 people can make more than poverty level wages, and 2 or 3 distributors can get very wealthy. Meanwhile the executives of the company all earned 6-figure salaries and Joe McCord walked away with millions. Add to this the losses by inactive distributors and the financial devastation that would have been incurred by people who got hoodwinked into investing in LifeVantage stock when it was at its peak of about $3.46 per share in late 2012, only to see it tumble down to the current share price of $1.24 – a massive 64% loss.
Renee your story is wonderful however, my sister who is a distributor, gave it to both my parents the last two years of my dad’s life, my mom is still alive. No effect on heart issues, no effect on blood sugar, and absolutely nothing on Az. So yours is a good story.
Reneewparker said “Dr. McCord’s name is mentioned on many because the company gives product to the companies and universities who study the supplement. Any contributor must be mentioned in these studies.”
That’s false, and that particular lie has been thoroughly debunked already. Supplying a product for a study would not warrant authorship; it would simply be mentioned in the acknowledgements section, if at all. According to the ICJME guidelines (which virtually all journals of any repute ascribe to), those listed as authors must have made: “Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND final approval of the version to be published; AND agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.” http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
Furthermore, at least one of the studies specifically states that McCord wrote the manuscript.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668769/
Additionally, in another study, all of the principal authors (McCord, Nelson, and Myhill) were LifeVantage employees, and it is evident that the company executed and funded the study.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16413416
It’s clear that McCord (and by extension LieVantage) had significant involvement in the studies, so maybe you’ll reconsider spreading your lie again in the future.
Reneewparker said “The green light has been given to Lifevantage to state that Protandim lowers oxidative stress an average of 40% in 30 days.”
False again. As a condition of DSHEA (look it up), supplement claims are not approved by any regulatory agency.
Reneewparker said “In response to Vogel: The law states that, because it does not need FDA approval, Protandim cannot make claims to cure disease. The above statement does not mention curing breast cancer. It makes the claim of a remarkable recovery. This is completely within the bounds of the law.”
Wow, is that ever wrong. Is this your first day as a Protandim distributor? Did you even bother to read the company’s compliance documents (probably not no one else does either). You cannot legally make any claims that even remotely imply that Protandim can alleviate of prevent any medical condition or disease symptom. It’s bad enough that you don’t already know this (or maybe you do) but it’s an affront that you would take to the internet to bellow such blatantly false information.
Reneewparker says:
“Note that Lifevantage did not conduct the peer reviewed studies. Dr. McCord’s name is mentioned on many because the company gives product to the companies and universities who study the supplement.”
Not true. McCord is listed as an author. This has been addressed in the comments before. If McCord merely supplied product, it would be mentioned as an acknowledgement at the end of the paper. Authorship is reserved for scientists who have substantially contributed to the design, execution, and/or analysis of the research.
————————————
http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
“2. Who Is an Author?
The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:
-Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
-Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
-Final approval of the version to be published; AND
-Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.
All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged—see Section II.A.3 below. These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. The criteria are not intended for use as a means to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion #s 2 or 3. Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.”
——————————————-
Renee says:
“The green light has been given to Lifevantage to state that Protandim lowers oxidative stress an average of 40% in 30 days. The outcome of this is unique to the individual taking Protandim.”
LOL. Who gave the green light?
Renee says:
“In response to Vogel: The law states that, because it does not need FDA approval, Protandim cannot make claims to cure disease. The above statement does not mention curing breast cancer. It makes the claim of a remarkable recovery. This is completely within the bounds of the law.”
More accurately, Protandim can not get FDA approval because it has not been scientifically proven to do squat. As for the “remarkable recovery,” Vogel pointed out it is an implicit therapeutic claim, which is illegal.
Yikes. Glad I came upon this while doing some research about Life Vantage. Today I was invited to a meeting and learned about this “wonderful” business opportunity, but now I am afraid of losing my soul! I was told about lots of scientific studies but no one ever said there were only two human trials (one with negative results).
Sharon, who are you going to believe, the MDs and PhDs who say Protandim works as claimed, or some blogger and his anonymous supporters? ALL products of this sort go through studies involving animals and test tubes, because such studies tell us more about said products.
If they weren’t relevant they wouldn’t be performed. As for the human study that was supposedly negative, note that it involved subjects who had a serious medical condition (so that any possible change affected by Protandim would take longer to show up), and that it only lasted seven days (none of the subjects could stay sober any longer than that, which was a necessary condition for the test), which isn’t long enough to justify saying Protandim doesn’t work for anyone after 30 days or longer.
Even Joe himself says that this study should be discounted. Note also that all of the other studies showed positive results.
Greg, when I said the study should be discounted, I said that because, 1. I think we can all agree it was a dumb study in that it looked at alcoholics, and because of that, is not inline with the marketing of protandim and 2. I was really trying to be nice, trying to give distributors a pass if you will on that particular study.
You yourself have said that LV does not do the research itself but rather allows Protandim to be defined by research done by others (which I believe is foolish by the way if that is true). If we do toss out that study, then we are left with only 1 human study on Protandim.
About the research done so far you said “If they weren’t relevant they wouldn’t be performed.” I think you’ll agree that the alcoholics study – which I discount – isn’t relevant to how Protandim is marketed.
In my opinion, we I believe LV should say “yes we support research on Protandim and these are the studies we are going to perform and publish.” I think you deserve this Greg because I know you believe in the product.
If LV conducted its own research on Protandim it would be questioned as biased. When independent research is done that possible accusation is eliminated. If LV paid others to do research it would be accused of buying favorable results. When the independent researchers fund their studies themselves, or with disinterested third-party money, that possible accusation is eliminated. Now you yourself may not make such accusations, but can you doubt for a minute Vogel, LisaRob, Lazyman, and other Protandim-haters would?
Greg, would it be worse to be accused of being biased or to be accused of not believing in your own product by supporting research? If I were LV, I’d rather be called biased and support well done research. If it’s well done research (human, placebo controlled, double blinded, etc), naysayers would have lass ammo to attack the product, true?
It’s not that LV has been doing nothing, research-wise. Have you examined the True Science skin care products? Next month LV will release a line of high-quality energy drinks.
Greg, is there any evidence – published studies – that the energy drinks are better than any other energy drink on the market? Same with the skin cream?
Don’t you find it funny they invest time in skin cream and energy drinks instead of pumping money and time in to protandim itself?
Sharon my advice is to try Protandim and hold off on any “business opportunity” …at least until you can form your own opinion.
You’ll find a few naysayers ..like this and the lazy man. There are thousands of people worldwide that take Protandim and recommend it to family and friends. That, to me, speaks volumes about this supplement’s legitimacy.
Don, bloodletting was practiced for about 2,000 years…..does that speak volumes to its legitimacy
Greg says:
“When the independent researchers fund their studies themselves, or with disinterested third-party money, that possible accusation is eliminated.”
As we’ve shown, most of the studies are connected to LV anyway. There doesn’t seem to be much interest in even doing the most basic research on the product from independant researchers. No one has even bothered to try and confirm the results of the one human study to show if Protandim lowers oxidative stress. That speaks volumes.
Also, Greg is incorrect to say that all other studies (rat/test tube) have been positive. A study (which did not have McCord as one of the researchers) showed a negative outcome for a study done on DMD.
http://m.fasebj.org/content/23/10/3325.full
Ironically, the same researcher from the above study, Brian Tseng, was on a DMD study with McCord which LV used to refer to as the “Harvard Study”. The study was not done at Harvard, but Mr. Tseng was affiliated with Harvard. Funny how when a study has a positive outcome, LV sings the praises, and promotes it as a “Harvard Study”, but when the same researcher does a followup study without McCord and the outcome is negative, it is ignored. Isn’t it a Harvard Study too? 🙂
Hi Don – Good advice there. Vogel is just a very angry guy… Such vitreous speech is the result of feeling inadequate with himself. His usual strategy is to misrepresent whatever you say and then attack that with his limited vocabulary. The more reasoned the comments, the nastier he gets.
Anonymity gives his the bravado he lacks in real life, so he enjoys stomping on people’s comments and ideas. There is an upside to his raging on this site in that his dog or cat suffers less as a result. So, it’s all good.
This brings me to my coming here; A recent article by the American HealthCare Foundation by Dr. J. Gutman, MD, published 21 August 2014, agrees with claims that the body needs supplementation to maintain a high level of glutathione for protection from disease. To drive the point home, breast cancer was the disease central to this article. Here are a few quotes:
“To make matters worse, most anti-cancer therapies place an enormous burden on the body and may deplete whatever natural defenses remain.”
“Elevated glutathione replenishes antioxidant defenses, contributes to synthesis and repair of DNA and helps detoxify numerous carcinogens and mutagens.”
“Breast Cancer sufferers must place themselves in the best possible medical hands, but must also
take care of their nutrition.”
“Low blood levels of antioxidants are a clear risk factor for development of breast cancer.”
While Dr. Gutman does not refer to Protandim by name, he is very clear that transcription of glutathione by the body’s DNA is essential to overcoming terrible illnesses. The article includes a graph sourced to the Cellular Health Foundation detailing how the DNA’s ability to transcript glutathione decreases with age, speeds up at the age 40, so that “almost half of the baby boomers are deficient in this (glutathione) molecule,”
The article goes on to detail what nutrition is needed by the body to make glutathione. One protein that the liver can make but is now hard to find in food is cysteine. He writes, “For 25 years hospital ER’s have been injecting N-acetyl-cysteine (NAC), a synthetic form of cysteine, to quickly raise the GSH (glutathione) levels of a patient to temporarily boost the immune system.”
The more I do research on every aspect of the body’s ability to protect itself from stress and injury returns to a few important processes involving our DNA’s response and transcription of a handful of chemicals and antioxidants.
As a point of healthy nutrition, from the information in cited article, that by age 20 it would be important to start on a Nrf2 activator, and very important by age 40. If a person’s family history shows any history of diseases associated with oxidative stress, I would think it all the more prudent to consider the addition of Protandim to one’s daily diet as early as possible.
A link to the above article:
http://www.americanhealthcarefoundation.org/breast-‐cancer-‐md/GSH.cfm
Ronald, What is the American HealthCare Foundation? When I looked up the website, they didn’t actually say who they are or what they do. Their website lists the address 2020 Pennsylvania Ave NW Building 924 Washington, DC 20006 although when I looked up their website, I saw a PO Box in Hollywood Florida.
The link you provided did not work when I checked.
Hi Joe — Here’s their home page: http://americanhealthcarefoundation.org/
The American HealthCare Foundation is a not-for-profit educational and research organization. We have no commercial interest with pharmaceutical organizations. We bring you what we believe to be useful, timely and impartial information about specific medical conditions.
We seek an active partnership with the medical community via research grants, and other methods.
Through educational programs to both physicians and patients, we play an important role in making the difference… because it’s your healthcare.
I don’t know why that link didn’t work for you. Their site isn’t the easiest to navigate,
Ronald, thanks for that. Can you give me some specific idea of research they do? I’d like to take a look at it.
I noticed that as I clicked through the different pages, each page has a Privacy/Terms page. On that page, different websites are listed. For example, on the “gout” page, the Terms/Privacy page lists a website called “Kidney-MD.org” and on the “lose weight” page, the Privacy/Terms page lists “Lose-Weight-MD.org” What is up with that? If this is the American HealthCare Foundation, why are these other websites being listed?
Hi Joe —
From what I understand, the American HealthCare Foundation funds research more then actually doing the research. I suggest contacting them and getting clarity on this point. While they are not at odds with the pharmaceutical industry, they do work to assist people who wish to be active in nutritionally supplementing the prescribed drugs in cooperation with their doctors and surgeons. I suspect they support research that supplies answers to along those lines.
Apparently there is a growing segment of the population that want to be actively involved in their recovery process in any ways possible. And there are more and more medical doctors who are not opposed to patients being actively involved in their own recovery and overall health.
Amongst physicians this was once thought of as being “non-compliant” however now days it is more welcome by the medical community. Personally I think it’s wise and prudent for a patient to question a doctor about side effects, alternative procedures, etc. and be an active participant in health decisions that affect them.
I can not answer your question, which is a good one, regarding the organizational structure of their web site. Again, I suggest taking it to them to clarify. I just got done slogging through the FDA web site this evening and finally ended up sending an email to the site administrator for help in finding information I was searching for and knew was on the site.
I’m afraid I have not been of much help with your questions, but I rather go-to-the-source myself and encourage you to get first-hand answers as well.
And already the LieVantage organization is using this fluff article from Americanhealthcarefoundation.org to illegally market Protandim for the treatment/prevention of breast cancer. This example was posted by Jamie Shepherd (ID# 1051483), a distributor in Australia.
https://www.facebook.com/protandimjamieshepherd/posts/696175583788362
http://www.mylifevantage.com/jamieshepherd/products/
Shameful. Looks like we’ll have to file some more FDA complaints today.
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/ReportaProblem/ucm059315.htm
Ronald McD said: “Hi Don – Good advice there. Vogel is just a very angry guy… Such vitreous speech is the result of feeling inadequate with himself. His usual strategy is to misrepresent whatever you say and then attack that with his limited vocabulary. The more reasoned the comments, the nastier he gets.”
The word you were looking for is “vitriolic”, not “vitreous”. Needless to say, you look like incredibly foolish when make such a basic mistake while trying to impugn my vocabulary.
Joe’s comments violated U.S. law and the terms of his distributor agreement. I called him out for it and it was perfectly reasonable to do so. You’re simply avoiding the critical issues and instead participating in a tag-team flame war with your fellow distributor trolls Greg B and Don. None of you have put any verifiable facts about Protandim on the table and you all seem incapable of making reasonable arguments. The disgraceful show you’re putting on here confirms everyone’s worst impressions about the LieVantage organization, and it will galvanize people’s to bring you all to justice by continuing to file complaints with the appropriate government agencies. That you would put yourselves above the law like this demonstrates your lack of character and integrity and underscores the need for regulatory action.
OMG! You make us out to be Barack Obama! Geez Vogel back off with the hate rhetoric! The ONLY law broken on this WordPress blog is by you and that’s the law of decency.
If you really want to do society a big favor then please go for a long walk of a short pier.
Don said: OMG! You make us out to be Barack Obama! Geez Vogel back off with the hate rhetoric! The ONLY law broken on this WordPress blog is by you and that’s the law of decency.”
It’s typically dishonest of you to make such a comment even though I’ve never once mentioned Obama’s name (or anything remotely partisan politically), so how about you leave your petty political barbs out of the discussion in the future.
Your posts here violated both U.S. law and the terms of your distributorship; both of these facts are unequivocal. It doesn’t surprise me in the least that you don’t have the gumption to admit or to reveal your distributor ID as you are required to do under the terms of your contract.
Don said: “If you really want to do society a big favor then please go for a long walk of a short pier.”
Aside from the sheer vapidity of your previous replies, begging me to commit suicide is about the best way to demonstrate that you have nothing worthwhile to add to this discussion.
Here’s another distributor violating U.S. law by using the Americanhealthcarefoundation.org article to promote Protandim as a therapeutic agent (for the treatment of fibromyalgia):
“If you are one of the millions who suffer from Fibromyalgia, you need to read this article and consider hyper-activating your own bodies defenses with Protandim. http://www.americanhealthcarefoundation.org/fibromyalgia-md/RoleOfOxidativeStress.cfm “
https://www.facebook.com/nitadrlnfourlife/posts/1506756812873203
The distributor in question is Anita A. Williams (ID# 769757) from Tampa, FL.
http://www.mylifevantage.com/anitaawilliams/shop
And by all means don’t take anything Vogel says as fact. He has a hidden agenda and he’s purely just a mean spirited creature.
Don, I dont know about that; Vogel has been backing up his claims with evidence. Let’s all not attack each other personally just because we dont agree with what they say. We may have different opinions but I feel letting anger and insults take over, detracts from the issues people are interested in.
So then why does he attack anyone that states that he or she feels better when taking Protandim? He threatens everyone that has a positive experience.
Don well to be honest I thought you sounded like a distributor myself and would have appreciated it if you stated that when you told of your experiences. I’m not discounting what you say but people should understand your association so they can best weigh what you said.
Joe my experience is 100% legitimate and my heart condition began in 2006. I had my first pacemaker on December 21st of 2006.
I wouldn’t begin to say I’m healed just that I feel so much better. My dog is doing so much better. I never made claims that anything cured me or her.
Vogel has some underlying issues and, in my opinion, this discounts his “turd lobbing” jargon. Turd lobbing meaning that he throws up a bunch of crap and wants people to chase it.
Don, I’ll take your word that everything happened as you said. I just wished you identified yourself up front as a distributor.
Don says: “Vogel has some underlying issues and, in my opinion, this discounts his “turd lobbing” jargon. Turd lobbing meaning that he throws up a bunch of crap and wants people to chase it.”
Vogel isn’t the one lobbing turds. He backs up everything he says, and you can’t dismiss facts just because you don’t like his attitude. Well, you can, but it is foolish to do so.
Lifevantage throws out a bunch of rat and test tube studies to fool people who have no idea how to interpret them. The distributors somehow think they are scientists and medical advisors after their brainwashing sessions. It’s ridiculous.
Lisa,
As of yet I haven’t encounter anyone that misleads about the product. I’m certain that it’s perfectly acceptable to express one’s personal experience with Protandim. I’ve yet to see any negative comments from people that actually use it on a daily basis.
Is Vogel in the medical field, a nutritionist or a doctor? What qualifies him to express such negativity to anyone that has a different view on Life Advantage? He presents himself as someone that just isn’t happy with life period.
Don read the comments and you may so find some.
au contraire, mon frere.
I have posted in the past that I took protandim for 6 months. After about the fifth month it was time for my annual physical. The only blood difference was an elevated cholesterol level.
Doc told me to come back in three months for another blood test. (Two months off the protandim) Cholesterol levels returned to normal.
Incidentally, during the six months I felt nothing. I have offered to share the results.
Like yourself, I have also run into a few people that claimed protandim made the “feel great”. ALL were distributors!! Please, no coffee invitations.:)
Hehe …..
Phil unlike Vogel you have class! If I ever invite you for coffee it’s not because you made a personal attack on me but rather because you’re a decent person.
I wish you the best.
Greg said: “As for the human study that was supposedly negative, note that it involved subjects who had a serious medical condition (so that any possible change affected by Protandim would take longer to show up)…”
First, it wasn’t “supposedly negative”; it was unequivocally negative. Protandim had no significant effect on oxidative stress (TBARS) or any other parameter. Secondly, the study participants did not have “a serious medical condition” per se; they were abstinent individuals with a history of moderate alcohol use disorders (an AUDIT score of 8 or more) but aside from that, the study’s inclusion criteria specified that they were otherwise healthy subjects with no serious medical conditions.
http://ajplung.physiology.org/content/302/7/L688
Both of these facts have been explained to you already as recently as July 23, and yet you are still lying about them.
http://supplementclarity.com/protandim-research-review-lifevantage/comment-page-7/#comment-87262
Lastly, there is no reason whatsoever to conclude that “any possible change affected by Protandim would take longer”. The authors of the study didn’t say it and LifeVantage never said it, at least not publicly (but may have told such a lie behind closed doors). It makes no sense whatsoever and appears to be a complete fabrication intended to whitewash the finding that Protandim had no effect.
Greg said: “…and that it only lasted seven days (none of the subjects could stay sober any longer than that, which was a necessary condition for the test), which isn’t long enough to justify saying Protandim doesn’t work for anyone after 30 days or longer.”
First, the study said nothing about the subjects not being able to stay sober. This again appears to be a fabrication on your part. It in fact refers to them as abstinent and none of them experienced withdrawal symptoms, which indicates that they did not have severe alcohol use disorders.
Secondly, according to Joe McCord’s first clinical study, the effect of Protandim on TBARS is near maximal at 7-10 days. This was stated explicitly in the study; I also pointed this out to you in my July 23 post, and yet, again, you are still clinging to the same debunked lie. The authors of the study, which included Joe McCord, chose a 7-day time frame because it was reasonable to do so.
Greg said: “Sharon, who are you going to believe, the MDs and PhDs who say Protandim works as claimed, or some blogger and his anonymous supporters?”
First of all, many of the authors on the Protandim studies weren’t PhDs or MDs; in many cases they were students without advanced degrees. This too has been pointed out to you already, so your comment is highly disingenuous.
Secondly, the MDs and PhDs who authored the only well designed clinical study on Protandim to date – the one you’re trying to dismiss – showed that Protandim didn’t work as claimed; it didn’t do anything.
So yes Sharon, who are you going to believe: the docs who published this study or Greg the dishonest shill – the very same type of “anonymous blogger/supporter” that he’s implying you should ignore?
Notice the flaw in Greg’s argument. On the one hand, he implies that we should blindly trust the authors of every Protandim study, because they had MD and PhD degrees (even though many of them didn’t) and assume that the results validate the product, but he takes the opposite position in this particular case, when the authors concluded that Protandim has no significant effect; now suddenly we shouldn’t listen to the authors but instead to Greg.
Greg said: “ALL products of this sort go through studies involving animals and test tubes, because such studies tell us more about said products.”
Again, the study we’re talking about showed that Protandim did nothing. That study tells us a lot about “said product”, much to your chagrin.
Don said:”I can only tell you from my personal experience (and that of my 16 year-old female basenji – with an aggressive brain tumor) that Protandim is changing our lives! My heart is (was?) FUBAR and I was scheduled for a new, and improved, pacemaker (CRT) with a defibrillator. This was scheduled for today. I, and my dog, began taking Protandim on August 24, 2014. After only 7 days I felt like I had a new heart! My dog, who I give phenobarbital to prevent seizures, is like a 1 year old puppy! In a month I’ll have an echo on my heart to see if my “ejection fraction” has improved since Protandim.”
It would be downright silly to believe that Protandim can repair a damaged heart or prevent a Basenji’s seizures. There’s simply no plausible scientific mechanism whereby that could happen. It’s downright laughable.
Don said: “I’ll publish here my human, and canine, findings. Screw the “other” studies – I’m the only one that is important to ME!”
Why bother? If it’s only important to you, why not keep it to yourself?
Can you not realize that vague anonymous claims alleging implausible miraculous effects of Protandim do not help to dispel the impression that the product is MLM snakeoil BS — it only reinforces the negative conclusions.
I would remind you that Don is speaking strictly for himself. Lifevantage makes no claims vis-a-vis Protandim being able to heal defective hearts, or cure brain tumors.
Until tests are done we have no way of knowing if Protandim has actually done anything to help Don and his dog (though i personally doubt if it could have had such effect in such a short time).
All we have is one man’s opinion. None of the rest of us are in any position to either agree with him, or disagree. But if the two of them are feeling better, great, no matter what the cause.
Greg said: “I would remind you that Don is speaking strictly for himself. Lifevantage makes no claims vis-a-vis Protandim being able to heal defective hearts, or cure brain tumors.”
Why would you remind us of something you have no insight into? Don failed to mention whether or not he’s a distributor, and the overwhelmingly obvious conclusion is that he is. Therefore, according to the law, he is not speaking for himself. And in fact, executives of the company have made or tacitly endorsed claims about Protandim treating heart disease (i.e. David Brown) and cancer (Kirby Zenger) – you’ve already been presented with the video evidence so there’s no excuse for you to offer up such a deceptive denial.
http://www.protandimscams.com/kirby-zenger-lifevantage-coo-illegally-claims-protandim-is-a-cancer-drug-and-a-whole-lot-more/
http://www.protandimscams.com/lifevantage-president-encourages-distributors-to-break-fda-and-ftc-laws/
Greg said: “Until tests are done we have no way of knowing if Protandim has actually done anything to help Don and his dog (though i personally doubt if it could have had such effect in such a short time).”
The only tests that matter would be clinical trials to evaluate the product for the treatment of heart disease and brain tumors, but we all know that will never happen because the notion that Protandim can prevent, treat, or cure anything is complete fantasy. Don’s claim that taking Protandim for a week repaired his defective heart and alleviated his dog’s brain tumor is complete BS – so much so that it’s beyond offensive.
Greg said: “All we have is one man’s opinion. None of the rest of us are in any position to either agree with him, or disagree. But if the two of them are feeling better, great, no matter what the cause.”
I beg to differ. Anyone with brain and a conscience is in a position to call BS on an obviously ridiculous claim. We have no way of knowing that they are feeling great (and in fact the story seems like a complete fabrication) so don’t be too quick to pop the champagne.
I made no such a claim of any thing being “cured”. The only thing I related is that I and my dog are much improved with regards to the way I, and the way she feels (before and then after Protandim).
I read your blog, and other such for profit blogs, and my thought was that Protandim was a “scam”. You, and some lazy guy, had persuaded me away from taking Protandim. But I decided that I have nothing to lose except a few dollars (I was already spending hundreds on prescriptions and supplements).
My father died at the age of 70 from the condition that is killing me. I’m 59 and if there’s even just a slight chance that this supplement will improve my life then I’ll gladly spend $480 a year for Protandim!
So Vogel please do the world a big favor and leave the “human studies” to the people like me that actually take this supplement. You surely can make more money from honest work than what you get from the suckers that read and click through your blog.
One last thing before I go puke from reading Vaguely’s nonsense; I’m more than happy to share my medical records with any licensed physician that is seriously wanting to help his or her patients. Good, bad or ugly with regards to Protandim!
Claudia asked: “Don, are you a distributor?”
Don replied: “…I’m a distributor.”
Glad we got that formality out of the way and confirmed what was already obvious. Don’s status as a distributor raises several serious issues:
(1) Don violated the terms of his distributor contract by not initially revealing that he’s a distributor;
(2) Don violated the terms of his contract by making therapeutic claims; and
(3) Don violated U.S. law by making prohibited therapeutic claims.
Don said: “The only thing I related is that I and my dog are much improved with regards to the way I, and the way she feels (before and then after Protandim).”
We know exactly what you said. I’ll reiterate — your therapeutic claims about heart disease and brain tumors are in violation of both U.S. law and the terms of your distributor contract.
Don said: “I read your blog…”
No you didn’t. I don’t have a blog.
Don said: “if there’s even just a slight chance that this supplement will improve my life then I’ll gladly spend $480 a year for Protandim!”
There isn’t even a slight chance, but if you want to burn $480 a year, be my guest. Let natural selection take its course.
Don said: “So Vogel please do the world a big favor and leave the “human studies” to the people like me that actually take this supplement.”
You obviously don’t have a clue what a human study is. The company makes a point of emphasizing that their product is backed by science, not by anonymous lawbreakers who tell tall tales on blogs.
Don said: “I’m more than happy to share my medical records with any licensed physician that is seriously wanting to help his or her patients.”
You posted your BS claims here, not on the blog of a licensed physician, so if you have anything remotely resembling evidence then you should put up or shut up.
A review of your medical records wouldn’t tell us anything at all about cause and effect though, and the fact that you’re a distributor who recklessly violates the law and the terms of the company’s contract shows that you should not be trusted under any circumstances.
If you want to stand by your absurd claims then take responsibility for what you posted – provide your name and distributor ID# like you’re supposed to. We can then take those claims to the company’s compliance department and/or to the FDA and let the chips fall where they may. You’ll cower from that challenge though, right Don?
For being so incredibly dishonest and shirking your responsibilities, you just earned the company 3 new FDA complaints against your fellow distributors who are making similarly illegal claims. This BS has to stop now.
Not in Vogue,
You know nothing and you threaten harm to anyone that disagrees with your insanity. Someday …when you can get that pin head of yours out from behind that CRT, we’ll meet for coffee. Until then your just another IBM …Idiot Behind Monitor.
Don said: “Vague…Not in Vogue…”
Oh I get it – you’re trying to be humorous by calling me those names instead of Vogel!
Don, you couldn’t even be funny by accident. That was so witless it made me feel a touch sorry for you. Poor man-child.
Don said: “You know nothing and you threaten harm to anyone that disagrees with your insanity.”
Au contraire; I know a lot – I’ve proven it over and over again — and I’ve never threatened to harm anyone; quite the opposite in fact. I’ve behaved in an entirely sound manner by doing my civic duty and acting to protect the public interest by reporting illegal supplement advertising to the appropriate government regulatory agency. You apparently don’t like that because you’re part of the scam.
What’s insane Don, is for you to come here, as an anonymous first-time participant, and post some BS about Protandim being a remedy (in a mere 7 days no less) for heart disease and brain tumors. What were you thinking when you posted that? That everyone would be awestruck and run to sign-up as a Protandim distributor? In what universe would people accept at face value such an astonishingly ridiculous claim, from an anonymous source, without a stitch of evidence, and amid the backdrop of the hundreds of other barefaced lies about the product told by various members of the MLM organization? To do so would violate commonsense and the warnings of every consumer protection agency in the country.
Despite the fact that my position is perfectly reasonable and easily defensible, you’ve replied by calling me insane and an idiot; you’ve made feeble attempts at wordplay with my name; and now you’re completely avoiding the topic at hand, posting nothing of substance, and just being peeing in the punch bowl. I can handle the incivility, but the lack of substance and relevancy is an unforgivable faux pas.
Don said: “Someday …when you can get that pin head of yours out from behind that CRT, we’ll meet for coffee. Until then your just another IBM …Idiot Behind Monitor.”
I see you’ve come unhinged and completely abandoned the façade of being just a random satisfied customer with a miracle testimony – the wolf in sheep’s clothing is just another ill-tempered troll. How about going forward you drop the BS — no more digressing about Lazy blogs, Amazon, calling me an idiot/insane, etc.
What exactly was that invitation to meet for coffee supposed to be? Could it have been a veiled threat that you weren’t quite able to articulate because you feel frustrated and impotent? You obviously weren’t being sincere because you didn’t provide any means for me to take you up on your offer.
And just out of curiosity, who still uses a CRT monitor? You’d think a successful Protandim mogul like Don could afford to step into the 21st century and part with a few hundred bucks for an LCD monitor. Luddite!
Vog, you have shown us now quite clearly how you operate. You accuse Don of violating his distributor agreement based on a partial, taken out of context, quote. Don’s full sentence was “If a distributor is some[one] that purchased a large quantity and then gives [it], at no charge, to friends and family then I’m a distributor.” I.e., he buys Protandim and gives it away. he does not sell it. But all you saw was “…I’m a distributor”, and from that jumped to the false conclusion that he is a formal, contracted distributor with LV. and accused him of violating said contract.
So you either can’t read, or are a deliberate liar.
It’s really simple Greg. When someone asks you point blank whether you’re a distributor for LieVantage, there are only two legitimate answers: (1) Yes or (2) No. It’s not a very challenging game
When asked that simple question, Don gave a mealymouthed answer but ultimately said “I am a distributor.”
The very fact that he’s been here for only a day and he’s already mudslinging about blog sites shows that he’s had an agenda since day 1. Predictably shifty, just like everyone else associated with this traveling snakeoil medicine show.
And what’s you’re excuse Greg? You’ve already admitted that you;re a distributor, and your conduct here has violated the terms of your distributor agreement many times over. That alone makes you disreputable, aside from the fact that you post nonsense and false statements, and without ever owning up to it when you’re proven to be wrong — time and time again.
I can only tell you from my personal experience (and that of my 16 year-old female basenji – with an aggressive brain tumor) that Protandim is changing our lives! My heart is (was?) FUBAR and I was scheduled for a new, and improved, pacemaker (CRT) with a defibrillator. This was scheduled for today. I, and my dog, began taking Protandim on August 24, 2014. After only 7 days I felt like I had a new heart! My dog, who I give phenobarbital to prevent seizures, is like a 1 year old puppy! In a month I’ll have an echo on my heart to see if my “ejection fraction” has improved since Protandim.
I’ll publish here my human, and canine, findings. Screw the “other” studies – I’m the only one that is important to ME!
Don are you a distributor?
Vaguely,
If a distributor is some that purchased a large quantity and then gives, at no charge, to friends and family then I’m a distributor.
I see that you make your money by redirecting the public to purchase from your Amazon store. So you peddle snake oil by spreading your “opinions” about any product you don’t sell.
This marketing technique is from the seventies and is immoral if not illegal!
Don
I see that you make your money by redirecting the public to purchase from your Amazon store. So you peddle snake oil by spreading your “opinions” about any product you don’t sell.
whoops Dan I don’t sell on Amazon I think you have the thread intermixed, I was just curious.
@joe..I appreciate your honesty and research. Many major pharmaceutical companies are not our friends and most people dont have the propertime to research or just have high hopes..but question in your opinion what would you recommend with our soil/food being so depleted of nutrients the best alternatives to use supplement wise based on your research? Thanx
Gilan, For those who are concerned with the depletion of sols, I recommend buying locally and even patterning up wiht a local farmer. That way you will know where you are getting your food from. Its interesting you mention this because the supplement “Shakeology” has come under fire from Consumerlab.com for containing lead. They felt this might be due to where some of the ingredients were grown. See my Shakeology review for more info
Considering the importance of what Paul Myhill posted on his Facebook page yesterday, I thought I should post it again so it doesn’t get overlooked way back there in the comments.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10152601070969754&id=165526949753
Here is the whole post (he was responding to LazyMan, who called him out on promoting Protandim as a treatment for ALS):
“Paul Myhill: Well understood, Brian. However, I am not currently a board member, officer, employee, contractor, agent, distributor, vendor, or even a shareholder, of LifeVantage. I receive no royalties for my invention, nor any other type of compensation. I don’t even receive any free product from the company anymore. I instead mix up a variation of it for myself and my family. In short, neither me, my family, nor any entities owned by any of us, get even a penny from LifeVantage from the sale of Protandim or its product line extensions. So, I can really say whatever the heck I want without breaking any rules. As far as sharing the info is concerned, I could have indeed worded that better. You’re good at tripping me up on my poor choice of words. The distributors who contacted me wished to share it with other distributors directly, which seems to be supported by the lack of Facebook “shares” of the post. I do realize that I should have asked them to post their names and cities in a separate post. Regardless, I’m clearly on record that I think the FDA and FTC restrictions (and required disease disclaimer) are a complete farce, perpetuated by Big Pharma and Big Food. If given the choice to pander to lobbyists and their puppet organizations, or to help alleviate the suffering of others, I choose the latter. I think people know my heart.”
The part where he says, “I don’t even receive any free product from the company anymore. I instead mix up a variation of it for myself and my family.” is very relevant to this discussion.
What he is saying here, is that Protandim is such a horrible value that even HE doesn’t buy it, AND, there isn’t any reason that you can’t make up your own blend. This is coming from the guy who “invented” the stuff, and along with the company, claimed for years that you have to take their patented blend to reap the benefits from the “synergistic formula”.
There ya go.
Thank you for doing your due diligence LisaRob. You seem to find all kinds of informational gems all over the internet that I find useful in my study of the whole topic of oxidative stress.
If I may, I’d like to expand on your interpretation of what Paul Myhill said; re. your last paragraph.
While it seems like $1.50 is a huge markup for about 35 cents worth of ingredients, it is really not even close to what big pharma marks up their drugs. Furthermore, Paul Myhill has the knowledge to “roll his own” when it comes to making up his own formulation, aka Protandim. So, for Mr. Myhill, I doubt you have really caught “what he was saying”.
But, let’s suppose you and I can read his mind… what he is also saying is that he, Paul Myhill, sees the health value of the Protandim formulation, and spends time and money to supply it to himself and his family.
I would like to do as he does and make my own. I lack the scales to measure out the amounts and the equipment to mix and encapsulate the results, as well as the skills to handle the various powders, so I buy it from LifeVantage to get the same benefits Mr. Myhill sees that are available.
When one looks over the plethora of research that shows oxidative stress is a contributor to so many diseases, it seems odd to me that big pharma has not developed any number of drugs to address this known precursor to terrible diseases. I’m sure they are hard at work, as such a drug should sell as broadly as aspirin and make a fortune.
I’m not sure why that hasn’t happened yet?
Anyway, back to the “horrible value” you perceive in the price of Protandim at $50 per monthly supply. Do you realize that price is less than some good quality multivitamins? Even those purchased at Walmart is priced in that range. It’s less than a bottle of berry juice full of antioxidants. When I look over the prices of supplements of various kinds, Protandim does not jump out as either on the high side or low side.
Then, of course, I am drawn to consider Paul Myhill. He is not profiting by the sale of Protandim and has no vested interest in the rise or fall of LifeVantage, but he does see enough health value in the product to regularly get out his equipment and make his own…and for his family as well.
What does he know about the effectiveness of the formulation that you do not, LisaRob?
Thank you again for the wonderful research you are doing and for bringing this to my attention.
Ron, the question remains if it so awesome why no human studies and for that matter why hasn’t “big pharma” done research on this product or taken the ingredients and made an over the counter product?
No one has any proof that Paul actually makes his own protandium, just his word. This guy is not a doctor or a research scientist he’s just a guy who knows how to market and he made 10’s of millions from his sale of stock……the fact that he doesn’t even receive any free product makes me raise my eyebrows, obviously his agreement with protandium has something to do with this.
Ronald Mc said: “While it seems like $1.50 is a huge markup for about 35 cents worth of ingredients, it is really not even close to what big pharma marks up their drugs.”
That’s entirely misleading. First, the cost to the company for the ingredients in Protandim is not 35 cents per pill; it’s probably closer to a few pennies if that. Second, when you make an assertion about Pharma markup, or anything else for that matter, you need to put evidence on the table. Pharma markups mainly reflect R&D costs, which are extraordinary. LieVantage’s R&D costs are negligible and their markup reflects the cost of keeping a pyramid scheme afloat, with the bulk of the profits going disproportionately to a handful of people (e.g. paying off the kingpins, the millions that McCord reaped, etc.). Lastly, unlike Protandim, Pharma products actually do something (i.e., treat diseases). It’s like comparing a car to a cinder block; yes, the cinder block is cheaper but good luck getting around town on one.
Lazyman showed an easy way to make a knockoff version that cost roughly 35 cents per pill, but that was for a quantity 3-times greater relative to Protandim. That means the cost differential is about one fifteenth (i.e., about a dime per pill instead of $1.50).
http://www.lazymanandmoney.com/lifevantage-protandim-scam/
Ronald Mc said: “But, let’s suppose you and I can read his mind… what he is also saying is that he, Paul Myhill, sees the health value of the Protandim formulation, and spends time and money to supply it to himself and his family.“
I have no interest in attempting to read Myhill’s mind and I don’t think that he seriously believes that Protandim has health value; but regardless, he’s an idiot with no relevant qualifications so why would it matter either way?
Ronald Mc said: “I would like to do as he does and make my own. I lack the scales to measure out the amounts and the equipment to mix and encapsulate the results, as well as the skills to handle the various powders, so I buy it from LieVantage to get the same benefits Mr. Myhill sees that are available.”
You can buy a digital scale at WalMart for less than $20, and they deliver too, so your lack of a scale is hardly the insurmountable problem you make it out to be. There’s also no need to “encapsulate” the product because Protandim isn’t encapsulated, it’s a pressed pill. You could simply mix it in with your food or a drink. But if you lack the “skills” needed to mix a few grams of powder together, then you must be so severely impaired physically or mentally that you must also be incapable of putting the pill in your mouth. For someone so lacking in basic motor skills, it’s a miracle that you even managed to pound out that response on your keyboard.
Bear in mind that the premise behind Protandim, as laughable as it may be, is that it must be taken for life. So if you magnify the cost differential by the number of days you have left to live, you’ll see that the cost savings would be enormous (well over $1.25 per day) and well worth whatever minimal amount of inconvenience it may cause you to mix some powder in your kitchen.
Aside from all that, there’s yet another fundamental flaw in your premise, which is that Protandim is available on E-Bay for substantially less than LieVantage’s best wholesale price. That means one can both save money and avoid supporting a corrupt and immoral pyramid scheme all at the same time. A no brainer – perfect for you Ronny!
Ronald Mc said: “When one looks over the plethora of research that shows oxidative stress is a contributor to so many diseases, it seems odd to me that big pharma has not developed any number of drugs to address this known precursor to terrible diseases. I’m sure they are hard at work, as such a drug should sell as broadly as aspirin and make a fortune. I’m not sure why that hasn’t happened yet?“
Did the thought dawn on you that no such drugs have been launched because they proved during the early phases of the R&D process to be ineffective in combating diseases? That’s the reality, so stop holding your breath. You seem so clueless about virtually everything that it’s a mystery as to why you would even bother pondering the inner workings of Pharma.It’s like a toddler trying to ponder calculus
Ronald Mc said: “Anyway, back to the “horrible value” you perceive in the price of Protandim at $50 per monthly supply. Do you realize that price is less than some good quality multivitamins? Even those purchased at Walmart is priced in that range.”
Um, except that’s false. It’s annoying that you pull these thoughts out of your arse without bothering to check if they’re valid. There is not a single brand of multivitamin at WalMart that sells for even close to the insanely high price of Protandim. In fact, there are some brands that are selling there for less than $4 for a 100 tablets (i.e. a cost of 4 cents per day). So you owe us an apology for being misleading, whether it’s because you were just careless in fact checking or straight up lying.
http://www.walmart.com/search/search-ng.do?ic=16_0&Find=Find&search_query=MULTIVITAMIN&Find=Find&search_constraint=0
$50 per day isn’t even a good value for name-brand Protandim, considering that you can get it for much less on E-Bay. Oh, and don’t come back spouting some lie about how the Protandim on E-Bay might be counterfeit because we all know that’s BS. It’s simply unsold product that distributors got saddled with trying to maintain bonus qualifications.
Ronald Mc said: “It’s less than a bottle of berry juice full of antioxidants.”
Hahahaha! Which berry juice? The only berry juice that sells for $50 a bottle is the expensive flavored water crap that Utah snakeoil MLMs (like Monavie) sell. That’s not the kind of benchmark comparator that makes Protandim look good; quite the opposite. And in fact, it’s remarkable that the cost of almost all MLM flagship products (e.g., Monavie, Juice Plus, Jusuru, Xango, Protandim, etc.) works out to be in the range of about $1.50 a day. It’s as though MLMs know exactly how much they can leverage out of suckers on a daily basis and they set their prices accordingly. Slow bleed is the name of that game.
Ronald Mc said: “Then, of course, I am drawn to consider Paul Myhill. He is not profiting by the sale of Protandim and has no vested interest in the rise or fall of LifeVantage, but he does see enough health value in the product to regularly get out his equipment and make his own…and for his family as well.”
Where is the evidence that Myhill has no vested interest? LieVantage paid him (via Myhill’s charity, from which he draws a salary) hush money not that long ago, and they might still be paying him. Before they paid him he was accusing the company of fraud and saying that they should be reported to the SEC and FTC. And who gives a damn what Myhill think about health value? He has no qualifications. You may as well be taking health advice form a shoe salesman or a bus driver.
http://www.protandimscams.com/lifevantage-bribes-paul-myhill-to-hide-the-truth-about-protandim
http://www.protandimscams.com/paul-myhill-lifevantages-communications-are-downright-false-and-misleading-perpetuate-an-ongoing-fraud/
Ronald Mc said: “What does he know about the effectiveness of the formulation that you do not, LisaRob?”
Absolutely nothing, clearly.
A note to all those on this blog who are threatening to sic the FDA on Lifevantage because of alleged disease-treatment claims. First of all, it is not the FDA that regulates advertising of supplements anyway, it is the FTC [Federal Trade Commission]. That you don’t even know that basic fact shows how hollow the threat is.
In addition, I went to the FDA website, and there is not a single warning letter from the FDA to Lifevantage. Protandim has been on the market for about nine years now, so if it was a worthless, or dangerous, product, would not the FDA’s attention have been brought to it by now?
That the FDA has not needed to take any action vis-a-vis Lifevantage speaks to the integrity of both the company and its products. I also went to the FTC website and did a search for LIfevantage, and nothing came up, so that agency has not seen a need to call out LV for any false advertising. That also says a lot.
(I am eager to see how Vogel spins this. He must be a political operative, the way he twists everything said by those who disagree with him.)
Greg
Greg said: “A note to all those on this blog who are threatening to sic the FDA on Lifevantage because of alleged disease-treatment claims. First of all, it is not the FDA that regulates advertising of supplements anyway, it is the FTC [Federal Trade Commission]. That you don’t even know that basic fact shows how hollow the threat is.”
It’s bad enough that you don’t know the jurisdictional roles of the FDA and FTC and how they differ, but it really is offensively hypocritical that you would accuse others of being ignorant when it’s painfully obvious that you’re dead wrong. Marketing supplements as drugs (i.e., claiming that can cure, prevent or mitigate diseases) is illegal and falls under the jurisdiction of the FDA.
http://www.fda.gov/Food/Dietarysupplements/default.htm
Be that as it may, if it will bring you any measure of comfort, we’ll start filing complaints with both agencies simultaneously.
http://www.fda.gov/safety/reportaproblem/ucm059315.htm
https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/
Greg said: “In addition, I went to the FDA website, and there is not a single warning letter from the FDA to Lifevantage. Protandim has been on the market for about nine years now, so if it was a worthless, or dangerous, product, would not the FDA’s attention have been brought to it by now?”
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. There is no evidence that the FDA has not received complaints or taken action, and you wouldn’t know one way or the other. You’re not a company insider; you’re just a peon (or a really incompetent internet reputation management specialist), so you’re not privy to any information the company may have regarding regulatory actions.
Furthermore, every company that was ever censured by the FDA could have made the same argument you’re making – i.e., we’re still here therefore we must be legal – right up until they day they got censured. But that’s a stupid premise. It could just be a matter of time before the organization gets taken to the mat for all the illegal activity; the wheels of justice often move painfully slowly. Your argument is akin to you stealing a little old ladies purse and then turning around and saying that it didn’t happen simply because you didn’t get arrested for it (yet).
There’s no question that the organization has engaged in systemic abuse of federal regulations. We’ve all seen the evidence; it’s overwhelming and inarguable
Any other clueless arguments to make Greg or are you done for the day?
Yes, let’s report to both agencies. Here are two more submissions:
Doc Martin:
http://www.docmartin.us/2013/05/ms-treatments-discussed-in-effort-to.html
Debbie Rich:
http://healthisalifestyle.wordpress.com/category/supplements/
LisaRob said: Yes, let’s report to both agencies. Here are two more submissions:
Doc Martin:
http://www.docmartin.us/2013/05/ms-treatments-discussed-in-effort-to.html
Debbie Rich:
http://healthisalifestyle.wordpress.com/category/supplements/
The latter website is operated by Debora L Rich (distributor ID# 659670), a self-described holistic health practitioner” from the Spokane, WA area.
http://www.mylifevantage.com/gylb/products/
Her credentials (a certificate from the scammy Institute for Integrative Nutrition) are utterly laughable.
http://www.linkedin.com/in/debrichhc
http://www.credentialwatch.org/reports/iin.shtml
Her contact info is listed here and should be included (along with the distributor ID# and distributor website link) in complaints filed with the FDA/FTC.
http://healthisalifestyle.wordpress.com/about/
“Doc” Martin, as he calls himself, is Larry G. Martin a distributor from (ID# 217033) from the Portland, OR area, who claims to have a doctoral degree in audiology.
http://www.mylifevantage.com/larrymartin/shop
In your FDA complaint, I’d certainly include this egregiously illegal claim that Martin made on his website:
“I tell everyone I know who may have any autoimmune related diseases, to get on this product if for only the fact that it will reduce their free radicals by 40%. You may just find it can do a lot more than that (read my post about my autoimmune disease). Give the product six months to a year, at $40.00 a bottle, it is less than $500.00 a year for better health. I am convinced as more studies are completed that this is going to be recognized as a leader in oxidative stress Nrf2 products on the market.
If you or someone you know has arthritis, autoimmune disease, cancer, diabetes or heart disease, please have them take this product and see if by chance they see some benefit. I believe you will be pleased.”
http://www.docmartin.us/2013/05/bold-is-beautiful-dr.html
…as well as his contact info:
https://plus.google.com/101270074305536919979/about?gl=us&hl=en
Another good quote on Doc Martin’s site:
At the very top of the page:
“MS Treatments and Protandim”
Then, further down the page after discussing Tecfidera (BG12), he makes this statement about Protandim:
“Below is a study funded by grants issued by Biogen Idec.
Protandim has been recognized as a NRF2 synergizer, promoting the up regulation of our autoimmune defenses, this study conducted by an independent research group and funded by the pharmaceutical company of the newest drug that was reviewed by this study. The results (see highlighted) suggests Protandim (an over the counter supplement) actually out performed even the most recently released MS medications.”
Clearly, it is a violation for him to compare Protandim to a drug approved for treating MS, and outrageous for him to say Protandim out performed a MS medication. He doesn’t point out that Tecfiera works in pathways other than just activating Nrf2, which was all the test tube study looked at. No human studies, of course, were done using Protandim on MS patients.
If you would read more carefully, you would see that the study merely says that Protandim is better at activating Nrf2 than BG12. It does not say, nor does Dr Marvin say, that Protandim is a better treatment for MS. We make no claims for Protandim as a MS treatment, for there is no evidence that it is.
You are misreading what Dr Marvin has written. When it comes to activating Nrf2, there is nothing now known that is superior to Protandim, including highly expensive prescription drugs.
Greg, I know exactly what the study said, and I even pointed it out in my post (that the study only looked at Nrf2 activation).
Greg says:
“It does not say, nor does Dr Martin (not Marvin, BTW) say, that Protandim is a better treatment for MS. We make no claims for Protandim as a MS treatment, for there is no evidence that it is.”
Greg, I spoon fed you the quote where HE says:
“The results (see highlighted) suggests Protandim (an over the counter supplement) actually out performed even the most recently released MS medications.”
That is not a quote from the study. Doc Martin wrote that.
At any rate, as a distributor, he can not even imply that Protandim can treat a disease. For him to even have the name of a disease on his website (which advertises Protandim) constitutes a violation of the laws governing the advertising of supplements.
Greg said: “You are misreading what Dr Marvin has written.”
Again, when confronted with evidence, you dismiss it; this time as “misreading”. The issue isn’t how we are reading; it’s what Doc Marvin wrote that’s the problem. No need for worrying yourself about it though. We’ll leave it to the FDA to decide the appropriate course of action.
You say there is no evidence that the FDA has not taken action against LV. First off, there is no such thing as evidence of non-action, except for a statement by those expected to take action that they have not done so.
The FDA is no in the habit of saying against whom they have not acted, so such “evidence” can not be expected.
Secondly, have you any evidence at all that the FDA has taken any action against LV? If the FDA has, why has said action not been made public?
Go ahead and file complaints; when they are proven to be groundless, you will likely face legal action from LV. Are you willing to take that risk?
Greg said: “You say there is no evidence that the FDA has not taken action against LV. First off, there is no such thing as evidence of non-action, except for a statement by those expected to take action that they have not done so.”
Still pursuing this losing argument I see. This is what you said originally:
“In addition, I went to the FDA website, and there is not a single warning letter from the FDA to Lifevantage. Protandim has been on the market for about nine years now, so if it was a worthless, or dangerous, product, would not the FDA’s attention have been brought to it by now?”
What I’m saying is that the fact that you couldn’t find an FDA warning letter online is not evidence that Protandim has not been brought to “the FDAs attention”. It was you who cited absence of evidence as evidence of absence. If you want to know whether Protandim has been brought to the FDAs attention, you’d probably have to file a FOIA request, which you are welcome to do if you’re that curious about this particular point.
It doesn’t matter to me; what does matter is that there are many examples of Protandim marketing claims that are in clear violation of the law and merit reporting to the FDA.
Greg said: “The FDA is no in the habit of saying against whom they have not acted, so such “evidence” can not be expected. “
You’re trying to argue the point that the company hasn’t been brought to the attention of the FDA; what I’m saying, simply, is that you have no evidence of that. I’m not trying to argue the opposite point – i.e., that they have in fact garnered the FDAs attention. I’m just saying that you don’t know one way or the other so why even bring up such a threadbare argument unless it’s to mislead people? I know it’s complicated for you to follow basic logic Greg, but see if can get that straight in your head going forward.
Greg: “Secondly, have you any evidence at all that the FDA has taken any action against LV? If the FDA has, why has said action not been made public?”
No I don’t have any such evidence, and as I pointed already, you’re deceptively trying to shift the onus on me to defend something I never said, and you’re doing it simply because you can’t defend the argument you were trying to make. That’s known as a strawman fallacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Additionally, if the FDA were conducting an investigation of LifeVantage, it would remain confidential until it had been concluded. That’s the SOP.
Greg said: “Go ahead and file complaints; when they are proven to be groundless, you will likely face legal action from LV. Are you willing to take that risk?”
There is no risk whatsoever. Zero. Nada. Zilch.
You’ve tried every weak arse tactic in the book to mislead and intimidate people but that really crosses the line. There is no consequence under any circumstances for filing reports with the FDA because the complainant who files remains anonymous the entire time; not even a FOIA request would reveal the information.
More importantly, there’s nothing that one would be liable for, criminally or civilly, for filing a complaint with the FDA, regardless of whether or not the complaint was deemed to be actionable. You’re simply trying to dissuade people from filing complaints by making them think that they can face legal action as a consequence. Just for that, I think the rest of us should double our efforts to file reports. The more you try to block justice, the worse it will come back to bite you on the arse.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
If you make false reports to the FDA, or to any agency, and those reports result in damage to LV, you could be sued in civil court.
Greg lied: “If you make false reports to the FDA, or to any agency, and those reports result in damage to LV, you could be sued in civil court.”
Greg is doubling down and making one last dishonest attempt at intimidation in a failed bid to prevent people from filing reports against the LieVantage organization for illegally marketing Protandim as a drug. He’s full of beans.
First, no one here is talking about filing a “false report”; we’re talking about filing legitimate complaints based on any of the hundreds of examples of illegal marketing. Secondly, it is solely at the discretion of the FDA to determine whether or not a complaint is valid; if they were to deem a complaint as non-actionable, then they would simply ignore it and no one outside the FDA would ever know that the complaint was filed. If on the other hand they were to determine that the complaint was legitimate, they would take whatever action they deemed appropriate. In either case, the complainant’s identity would remain confidential.
Furthermore, it would be impossible for a so-called “false report” to result in damage to LieVantage because if a complaint was deemed by the FDA to be baseless, they would simply ignore it and LieVantage would be none the wiser.
Rest assured that there is no scenario whereby LieVantage could sue someone in civil court for filing a complaint with the FDA. Greg’s pathetic attempt to thwart justice is yet another example of the unethical conduct of the organization he represents. Because he has chosen this reprehensible tactic to prevent people from doing their civic duty, we should all redouble our efforts to see that justice is served.
Don’t worry, Greg. Clearly, these are not false reports. These are distributors making illegal disease claims, and you know it.
No doubt there have been some distributors who, primarily out of ignorance and misunderstanding, have said things beyond what they were taught. When were these things said? Years ago? Are these distributors still making unwarranted claims? Are they even still with LV? Have you brought them to the attention of LV’s compliance department, so that appropriate action can be taken?
To attack an entire company because a few of its representatives (who are independent distributors, not employees) have spoken out of turn, is unjust, especially when the company frequently tells distributors that they can not say such things.
Do you hold all companies with which you do business to such a standard? LV itself has never made any disease-treatment claims, and teaches its distributors to likewise not do so. What more do you think the company ought to be doing?
Greg said: “No doubt there have been some distributors who, primarily out of ignorance and misunderstanding, have said things beyond what they were taught.”
No, they’re saying exactly what they were taught. I’ve seen enough evidence from videos of training events to be confident of that. You’ve even been presented with video evidence of company executives being complicit in the illegal marketing, so you have no excuse for trying to trivialize these reprehensible acts. And frankly, I don’t give a damn whether ignorance or misunderstanding is involved because it’s not a reasonable excuse for illegal acts that endanger the health and welfare of the public.
Greg said: “When were these things said? Years ago? Are these distributors still making unwarranted claims?”
Go answer your own questions and don’t waste our time with such irrelevant details. If a claim is still alive on the internet, then it doesn’t matter when it was posted – the damage is still being done.
Greg said: “Are they even still with LV?”
Well yes obviously. I’ve been posting distributor ID#s and live links to their sales pages so how can you even ask such a stupid misleading question.
Greg said: “Have you brought them to the attention of LV’s compliance department, so that appropriate action can be taken?”
It is LieVantage’s responsibility to police the claims that their distributors (and executives) make about the product. Given that we are able to easily find a plethora of illegal claims on the internet, then it should be just as easy for the company’s compliance department to do the same, and yet the claims are still there and the distributors have faced no repercussions for their actions. Clearly, the company’s compliance department is failing to do their job and, therefore, the next logical step is to bypass them completely and go straight to the FDA. It’s time to stop playing whack a mole and instead slay the beast by cutting off its head.
Greg said: “To attack an entire company because a few of its representatives (who are independent distributors, not employees) have spoken out of turn, is unjust, especially when the company frequently tells distributors that they can not say such things.”
What’s unjust is trying to sell fake medicine to sick people, but I don’t hear you lamenting that; your only concern is for yourself, and your sympathy for the company is misplaced. My concern is for the company’s victims exclusively. To call it an “attack” on the company shows how clueless you are. It is a long overdue call for justice.
Furthermore, you’re still trying to trivialize a very serious issue (illegal marketing) by calling it “speaking out of turn”. That you would do so illustrates how serious and entrenched this problem is and that it won’t get resolved unless the authorities are alerted and pushed to take corrective measures. In addition, it’s not just a “few representatives” that are the problem – it is endemic throughout the organization from top to bottom — and the distributors are not independent of the company when it comes to liability. It’s the company’s problem and they have not only failed to correct it, it was they who opened Pandora’s Box in the first place by unleashing this scam on the public. If they can’t control the monster they created, then they don’t deserve to be allowed to continue operating their business.
Greg said: “Do you hold all companies with which you do business to such a standard?”
Another stupid irrelevant question. I don’t do business with companies that illegally market snakeoil, so your question is moot. But in theory, yes, I expect all companies to not illegally market worthless products as medicine.
Greg said: “LV itself has never made any disease-treatment claims, and teaches its distributors to likewise not do so. What more do you think the company ought to be doing?”
“LV” as you call it is not a person. The company’s executives have made disease treatment claims; the top ranked distributors have made disease treatment claims; the peons have made disease treatment claims; the training events are rife with disease treatment claims. The entire product story is predicated on misleading/illegal claims. There’s virtually not a single product claim that holds up to scrutiny. The inescapable conclusion is that their underlying intention is to deceive people.
What do I expect the company to do? I expect them to keep doing exactly what they’ve been doing all along – tacitly encouraging illegal marketing while pretending that they don’t. That’s why the problem exists today, and that’s why the only solution is to solicit the authorities to take action.
Vogel:
“the training events are rife with disease treatment claims. The entire product story is predicated on misleading/illegal claims.”
that’s true of the training and recruiting meeting I went to, it was full of stories that implied protandium cured or led to a cure for all sorts of things, lots of stories then he went on to say the magic words “we or fill in the blank will be doing studies soon”.
That is exactly what they do. They also had a sharing moment where a couple of distributors told us more wonderous stories of people being cured, that they knew personally.
Please excuse me if I am wrong, but it seems that Greg suffers from a cognitive disorder. It’s a shame that protandim doesn’t seem to be helping his condition.
Two (well, three really…) more submissions:
Dr. Daryl Hales and Dr. Nathan Hales :
http://www.haleschiropractic.com/protandim–true-science.html
“LSU’s peer reviewed/published study said that Protandim breaks the link in Melanoma skin cancer.”
______________________________________________
Let’s not forget Timothy J. Glover, ID#216769
His website is chock full of illegal claims:
http://thebodyandsoullifeline.com/physical-wellness/protandim/protandim-pets/
LisaRob said: “Let’s not forget Timothy J. Glover, ID#216769
His website is chock full of illegal claims:
http://thebodyandsoullifeline.com/physical-wellness/protandim/protandim-pets/
Oh man! Glover’s website is an abomination. Here’s his contact information. Make sure to include it in your FDA/FTC complaints.
http://findthechurch.com/congregation.php?ftcID=taylorSETX http://www.mylifevantage.com/tjglover/products/
The site for Hales Chiropractic is registered to Daryl E. Hales and links to Protandim sales pages for Cindy Hales (Cindy Hales ID# 452634) and Dr. Nathan Hales (ID# 434281).
http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/results.jsp?domain=haleschiropractic.com
http://www.mylifevantage.com/cindyhales/products/
http://www.mylifevantage.com/nathanhales/products/
Greg said: “A note to all those on this blog who are threatening to sic the FDA on Lifevantage because of alleged disease-treatment claims. First of all, it is not the FDA that regulates ADVERTISING of supplements anyway, it is the FTC [Federal Trade Commission]. That you don’t even know that basic fact shows how hollow the threat is.”
From LieVantage’s SEC Form 10-K:
“The formulation, manufacturing, packaging, labeling, and ADVERTISING of Protandim® and our personal care line of products are subject to regulation by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”).”
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/849146/000119312511258536/d225491d10k.htm
Can it be any clearer Greg?
You can add your latest comment to the long list of doltish statements for which you must atone.
Seems you’re just trying to mislead people into not reporting to the FDA all of these violations that we’ve been documenting. Your transparent tactic, a weapon in the conman’s arsenal, is known as sowing fear, uncertainly, and doubt (FUD).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt
Isn’t the hole you’ve dug for yourself deep enough already? There’s nothing in your bag of mediocre tricks that isn’t laughably obvious.
Good work guys. So are you really submitting these to the FDA ? What happens from here? Just curious as I’m not in the states.
Melly, I doubt they are. I think they are just mentioning distributors who are making claims that are technically not allowed here in the states.
Joe, you doubted wrong.
Really well I stand corrected then.
Does anyone know anything about Shawn Talbot and his studies on deadly antioxidants and how it’s better to encourage natural production of them rather than ‘taking them’ ? I was just wondering if someone knew something about this as I was sent information on it.
Melly asked: “Does anyone know anything about Shawn Talbot and his studies on deadly antioxidants and how it’s better to encourage natural production of them rather than ‘taking them’ ? I was just wondering if someone knew something about this as I was sent information on it.”
Funnily enough, yes.
http://www.protandimscams.com/shawn-talbotts-pulp-fiction-of-deadly-antioxidants/
Hey joe moderate this, I can’t find any supps that you actually recommend. It seems a lot of other people are noticing this as well. Well there has to be some, I mean you admit you get commission for positive reviews and that’s how you “afford” to run this site. You know what I think based on your facebook, website, blog and supplementclarity.com? YOU are a hatchet man for the FDA. Big surprise.
Bilderberg, So because you do not agree with me and can’t debate my conclusions, you attack me for what you think I am? I didn’t attack you when you posted your very un-scientific testimonial about what you said protandim did and I did not restrict you from saying it either.
So why do you feel the need to attack me?
I did not admit I get paid for positive reviews. You’ve already proven that I don’t because you, yourself, just said you cant find anything that I “recommend.”
I try not to “recommend” supplements because what I may use may be inappropriate for others. But more than that, it takes away from what my site is about – the scientific review of dietary supplements. If I said “this works” then that would just be a testimonial from somebody you dont personally know. That’s why I prefer to review the science – both positive and negative – and let you make your own decision since you know you better than I do.
Seems to me that, Joe , Scott, Vogel, Claudia etc etc assume anybody who takes protandim and sees a difference “must be a distributor” by that logic I could deduce that you all work for cellgevity and this is one big smear coming from lifevantage’s competition.
I don’t take protandim but I was given a canine bottle for my dog and it has worked wonders. Oh My brother and sister take it and are in their young 20’s and both have found it works wonders. My brother in fact suffers from asthma, our great grandmother died from hers, and he has told us of significant improvement. I see it with my own eyes.
I dont take or endorse the stuff, nor do I care. they were given sample bottles and they are happy with it and so is my dog. She has never had such energy. She is getting older and its like she is in her prime again.
Snake oil? I doubt it, then again I only eat clean so I dont need such supps to feel good. I eat for nutrition and immunity alone and feel like superman everyday.
My point is that none of you/most, nor the author, have taken the stuff or tested it yourselves yet you are smearing it to the point of having a bashing session together. Who are you even arguing with at this point, Greg, one guy? So you see how your unbiased, albeit, uninformed, baseless assumptions are pure conjecture and speculation.
This leads anyone who visits this website to believe that you have just as much underlying motives as a distributor would for lifevantage. In other words, FAIL.
One last thing, I noticed that your other anti aging reviews have comments ranging in amounts of about 3-15-30-50 the most being 140 something and 600 something.
Yet protandim has more than double that in the comments section. Are the distributors really working that hard? Or are you working that hard to bash it along with your cohorts? I mean if a product works wouldnt they let it speak for itself? It has with people I know who take it, mainly my bro and sis and few friends. Like I said I have nothing to do with it. I do know that you get commission from your positive reviews, does this mean that you get more commission when you smear a competitor? Only you know and I have not seen enough “proof” to think other wise. You know where I’m going with that I think.
Bilderberg I don’t think I ever bashed protandim but rather pointed out the issues with the research. If you think protandim has a lot of comments see my review of plexus slim.
Bildeberg Blud Spilleth said: “Seems to me that, Joe , Scott, Vogel, Claudia etc etc assume anybody who takes protandim and sees a difference “must be a distributor” by that logic I could deduce that you all work for cellgevity and this is one big smear coming from lifevantage’s competition.”
Making it personal I see. That’s offense #1 — the ad hominem attack fallacy.
If someone comes here of all places (a site dedicated to analysis and critique) to post an implausible story along with boilerplate taken straight from a Protandim brochure, and then get’s indignant when challenged, it’s pretty reasonable to assume that they are a distributor. But either way it doesn’t matter. I simply pay no heed to any comment that involves unsupportable implausible claims; nor should you or anyone else. Failure to exercise sufficient skepticism and caution makes one a prime candidate for a Darwin award. Your argument is akin to criticizing people for saying that that kids shouldn’t accept candy from strange men in panel vans.
I’ve never even heard of Cellgevity until you just mentioned it. Why would you make such a stupid assumption that I work for them? It’s probably BS along the lines of what LieVantage sells. Hope that dispels your paranoia Bildeberg Blud Spilleth (nice name choice BTW, ye of the Alex Jones conspiracy theory lunatic fringe).
Could it be possible to best your already many other “bests”. Yes! I think this one is a winner! Sorry to Greg. I will carry the smile for hours. Thank you.
Joe-
you couldn’t possibly be more fair. Always nuetral; just asking for scientific data.
Thanks Phil.
I have myself wondered why some on this blog have been so eager to attack a product they refuse to try, and for which they can produce almost no evidence that it does not work, while ignoring all the scientific evidence favoring it.
Greg said: “I have myself wondered why some on this blog have been so eager to attack a product they refuse to try, and for which they can produce almost no evidence that it does not work, while ignoring all the scientific evidence favoring it.”
If you’re still wondering at this point, after having been spoon-fed the facts for the past several months, then it’s either because you have blinders on or are cognitively impaired.
The product has been criticized because it is being deceptively and illegally marketed as a treatment/cure for diseases. You know that; we all know that; stop ignoring the elephant in the room and own it – you’re promoting a snakeoil scam.
Bilderberg Blud Spilleth (offensively violent username aside) was accusing everyone here of working for some other supplement MLM called Cellgevity. That’s just foolish, desperate, and exceedingly dishonest. It’s painfully obvious that he had no basis for making such an accusation, and you have none for defending it.
Vogel wrote: The product has been criticized because it is being deceptively and illegally marketed as a treatment/cure for diseases.
Can you produce a single piece of literature, or a single audio, or a single video, produced by LifeVantage, which says that Protandim is a treatment or cure for any disease? I have seen none.
Greg said: “Can you produce a single piece of literature, or a single audio, or a single video, produced by LifeVantage, which says that Protandim is a treatment or cure for any disease? I have seen none.”
Why limit the scrutiny merely to materials “produced by LifeVantage”? Their legal culpability extends to how the product is marketed by individual distributors, not merely how the company represents the product in its official materials (which bear no resemblance to how the product is actually marketed at meetings out in the field). Any again, why limit scrutiny merely to explicit claims that “Protandim is a treatment or cure for any disease”? The law states that you cannot even imply that Protandim has medicinal properties. I’d ask why you try to re-frame the questions so deceptively Greg, but we already know the answer to that question.
As for the company being directly involved in illegal marketing of Protandim, why yes, there is even concrete evidence of that:
http://www.protandimscams.com/lifevantage-president-encourages-distributors-to-break-fda-and-ftc-laws/
http://www.protandimscams.com/kirby-zenger-lifevantage-coo-illegally-claims-protandim-is-a-cancer-drug-and-a-whole-lot-more/
http://www.protandimscams.com/mccord-illegally-claims-that-protandim-could-prevent-canceralzheimersbaldness-in-5280-magazine/
But if you want to start going the process of chronicling all of the individual distributors who are illegally marketing Protandim, we are going to be busy for a long, long time because there are literally hundreds of examples. I think it would be a very enlightening exercise to benefit the curious reader, but an utter embarrassment for you.
In other words, you have no actual examples of Lifevantage making disease-treatment claims in its published literature. Rumors about what distributors may have said, or (more likely) been misunderstood to have said, don’t count; LV can not be held liable for any such statements if it has previously, and in its training material, told distributors that they can not make such claims. There have been a few distributors who have disciplined for speaking beyond what they are justified in saying.
Your links from an anti-Protandim website have about as much worth as reports on the GOP put out by the Democrat Party (that is, none at all). Have you ever personally heard a distributor make a disease-treatment claim about Protandim? Who? When/ Where? What did they say when you challenged them on it? Do you have recordings of any such unwarranted statements?
Greg, your desperation is palpable.
You say:
“Your links from an anti-Protandim website have about as much worth as reports on the GOP put out by the Democrat Party (that is, none at all). Have you ever personally heard a distributor make a disease-treatment claim about Protandim? Who? When/ Where? ”
So actual video footage of Kirby Zenger making illegal claims is invalid just because it is posted on a website you don’t like? LOL. Nice try.
We have all heard/seen illegal claims from distributors, because really, that’s all they (you) have to hawk this silly pill. I have argued that even their most basic claim of Protandim being an Nrf2 activator isn’t properly substantiated (not according to my own standards, but those of the FDA). You know all of this already, and you have surely seen/heard disease related claims from distributors. Shoot, it’s hard to find examples of distributors who do NOT make illegal claims! I have an email inbox full of them, which is how I was duped into buying the product two years ago.
What did they say when I challenged them on it? Absolute denial of facts, adherence to the company line, anger, verbal attacks on my character and intelligence, etc. It was ugly.
Greg said: “In other words, you have no actual examples of Lifevantage making disease-treatment claims in its published literature.”
As usual Greg, your premise is false and your motives transparent. The straw-man argument you’re trying to peddle is that the only claims the company is liable for are those contained in their official printed materials; but that’s not even close to being true so either you’re being purposely deceptive or you’re just woefully ignorant.
The company is in fact responsible for all product marketing claims regardless of whether they are in print, video, or uttered verbally; and the company is fully liable for claims that individual distributors make. The company even explicitly acknowledges this:
“Q: If I post a testimonial about a LifeVantage product that is unsubstantiated, who is liable, LifeVantage or me?
A: Both. If you have a ‘material connection’ to the manufacturer of the product ‘LifeVantage’ then you can be held liable for claims you make that are unsubstantiated. The fact that you are an Independent Distributor or a Preferred Customer of LifeVantage, receiving discounts or commissions/bonuses/incentives for using and/or selling the product, gives you a ‘material connection’ with the manufacturer.”
http://www.lifevantage.com/may-21-compliance-corner/#sthash.b4mYJEBt.dpuf
Greg said: “Rumors about what distributors may have said, or (more likely) been misunderstood to have said, don’t count;”
I agree, but that’s another straw-man argument because I have never once discussed any “rumors”. Why would I when there are so many concrete examples?
Greg said: “LV can not be held liable for any such statements if it has previously, and in its training material, told distributors that they can not make such claims.”
Well, you’re just dead wrong, as the statement from LieVantage’s compliance department proves. It’s about time you started thanking me for spoon-feeding you all this information that you either don’t know, misinterpreted, or simply ignored. But I won’t hold my breath; my guess is that you’re as much of an ingrate as you are an incorrigible con artist.
Greg said: “There have been a few distributors who have disciplined for speaking beyond what they are justified in saying.”
Oh really? Evidence? Names? Dates? Put up or shut up. Don’t be a rumor monger. The company in fact does virtually nothing to police or punish offenders and we all know it.
Greg said: “Your links from an anti-Protandim website have about as much worth as reports on the GOP put out by the Democrat Party (that is, none at all).”
The site I linked to has independent reputable sources that back up everything that’s written. Your attempt to discount facts with your partisan mudslinging BS is exactly what I’d expect from someone so intellectually impotent.
Greg said: “Have you ever personally heard a distributor make a disease-treatment claim about Protandim?”
Yes, idiot, obviously. I’ve “personally” heard it on countless YouTube videos and I’ve “personally” read it on countless distributor websites. I’ve documented well over a hundred examples and posted them on Lazyman’s site. Like I said before, let’s go through the exercise of documenting a few more examples every day, and at the end of each day, we can all forward a batch of complaint letters to the FDA using their online reporting system so that they can be made fully aware of the fraud that’s being perpetrated. If you truly objected to illegal marketing, you’d participate in ratting out the offenders, since they pose a grave threat to the company’s viability. We both know that you’ll slink away from such a challenge.
AHA!!!! I got it!! I’ve figured it out!!!
Vogel is also Greg!!! “Greg” could not possibly be that sleazy; could not possibly be that much of a masochist. Vogel you sly devil. You invented the “Greg” character for the benefit of poor rubes like me, so we would not get sucked in to the LV scam.
Well played Vogel.
But…please don’t stop… this is better than any UFC beatdown ever witnessed.
Out of curiosity, who, other than professional Protandim-bashers like yourself, has made complaints about Protandim? If LV was so terrible, would not the FDA have already shut us down? We’ve been in business for about a decade now. That is plenty of time for the government to have investigated us and taken action, was such necessary.
If LV was just a scam-running company, with products that did not work as claimed, why did we get our stock listed on NASDAQ? They don’t allow just anyone to list there; a company has to meet standards of legitimacy, stability, competency, etc. LV did so, and that fact alone trumps all the negative comments you, Lazydude, and all your other bash-buddies have to say about this.
If that is not enough, why did Real Salt Lake of the MLS agree to put our logo on their uniforms, if we were just a scam company trying to steal people’s money with worthless products?
Are you smarter and wiser than the management of the team, who would be very careful to not risk the team’s reputation in so public a way?
Yes, some people have given testimonies that went beyond what they technically should have said, but does that mean they were lying? Many people have experienced better health, and/or improved athletic performance since beginning their Protandim regimen. Perhaps they can’t “prove” that Protandim is responsible, but if the only thing they have done differently is take Protandim, that is strong circumstantial evidence.
Can you “prove” that the aspirin you took the other day to get rid of your headache actually did so? No, yet that doesn’t prevent you from saying that it did.
I will ask again, why are you so anti-Protandim and anti-Lifevantage? How are you being harmed by our products, or by what we are doing? What is your motivation for this hatred?
Greg said: “Out of curiosity, who, other than professional Protandim-bashers like yourself, has made complaints about Protandim?”
I’m getting a little sick of your weak-ass accusations Greg. There’s no such thing as a “professional Protandim basher”, and I certainly don’t get paid even a nickel to rip apart your idiotic error-ridden threadbare comments. There isn’t even a plausible scenario whereby someone would have an interest in paying a third party to bash Protandim, nor would payment be necessary given that so many people are willing to do it for free as their civic duty. But if you can think of anyone who is giving away money for what I’m gladly doing for free, please give me their contact info.
Greg B said: “If LV was so terrible, would not the FDA have already shut us down? We’ve been in business for about a decade now. That is plenty of time for the government to have investigated us and taken action, was such necessary.”
Claiming that LieVantage’s mere existence is evidence of its legitimacy is one of your stupider arguments Greg. The company may have been in existence for about a decade but it has only been an MLM since 2008 (when the company was severely in the red), and that’s precisely when the illegal therapeutic claims started becoming rampant. I don’t know what actions the government may have taken against LieVantage, as such information about ongoing investigations is not released to the public. But over the last couple of years, the company has launched a couple of major compliance overhauls and it seems highly unlikely that these measures were taken in the absence of external pressure. My guess is that the FDA has already been breathing down the company‘s neck already and that this was the reason for the compliance initiatives. Can you definitively say that consumers have not filed complaints with the FDA or that the company has not been contacted by the FDA about marketing compliance issues? No, of course you can’t.
I would venture to guess that every crooked snakeoil/MLM outfit, prior to being censured by the FDA, went around shouting from the rooftops that they’re legitimate because they haven’t yet been censured by the FDA – just like you did here Greg. Bear in mind that the wheels of justice sometimes turn very slowly. LieVantage’s demise is merely a matter of time. And when they do get hammered by the FDA, where will you be Greg? Here apologizing? I think not. You’ll simply slink away never to be heard from again, and then you’ll join some other crooked snakeoil MLM operation and try all over again to scam people.
Greg said: “If LV was just a scam-running company, with products that did not work as claimed, why did we get our stock listed on NASDAQ? They don’t allow just anyone to list there; a company has to meet standards of legitimacy, stability, competency, etc. LV did so, and that fact alone trumps all the negative comments you, Lazydude, and all your other bash-buddies have to say about this.”
Why don’t you simply go read the criteria that NASDAQ uses to judge a stock’s eligibility for listing on the exchange and then get back to us. What you’ll learn is that the criteria have absolutely nothing to do with product legitimacy. In other words, you’re using another straw man argument. That you would say that a NASDAQ listing trumps any and all criticism from other sources shows that your brain isn’t firing on all cylinders. It’s a painfully illogical argument.
Greg said: “If that is not enough, why did Real Salt Lake of the MLS agree to put our logo on their uniforms, if we were just a scam company trying to steal people’s money with worthless products?”
The same reason Donny Osmond and Montel Williams were willing to violate FTC regulations – because they were paid under a contract dummy! No one in Utah gives a damn about policing crooked snakeoil MLMs – Utah is their safe haven. You think LieVantage could have pulled that off in New York or California? Not a chance. The more relevant question to ask is why did LieVantage spend all that money to put their logo on the jersey’s of a third-rate soccer team from Utah. The answer is so that shills like you could ask the misleading question that you asked.
Greg said: “Are you smarter and wiser than the management of the team, who would be very careful to not risk the team’s reputation in so public a way?
I’m not sure; I would venture to guess that I am a lot smarter, but so what? What does that have to do with anything we’ve been talking about? I’ve consistently put facts on the table and made logical arguments.
Greg said: “Yes, some people have given testimonies that went beyond what they technically should have said, but does that mean they were lying?”
Well yes, probably most of them were lying, but it’s hard to even venture to guess because none of the testimonials have been properly documented or vetted; however, it doesn’t matter either way. The issue is not whether they believe that their illegal marketing claims are true, it only matters that they are illegal.
Greg said: “Many people have experienced better health, and/or improved athletic performance since beginning their Protandim regimen. Perhaps they can’t “prove” that Protandim is responsible, but if the only thing they have done differently is take Protandim, that is strong circumstantial evidence.”
And in the absence of proof, we must call BS! Where is this circumstantial evidence you speak of? Are you referring to anonymous trolls and barefaced liars like you who barrage blogs like this with fanciful tales about how Protandim made cancer vanish or made crippled dogs run again? That’s not evidence of legitimacy; it’s further evidence of illegitimacy.
Greg said: “Can you “prove” that the aspirin you took the other day to get rid of your headache actually did so? No, yet that doesn’t prevent you from saying that it did.”
Are you asking whether there is overwhelming clinical evidence that aspirin can relieve headaches? The answer is yes. But that has nothing to do with Protandim, and there is no comparable evidence supporting the latter. If I took an aspirin and my headache went away, I wouldn’t necessarily attribute it to the aspirin; I’d just be glad my headache subsided.
Greg said: “I will ask again, why are you so anti-Protandim and anti-Lifevantage? How are you being harmed by our products, or by what we are doing? What is your motivation for this hatred?”
Again? When did you ask this question previously? It’s an off topic question that as no relevance to the factual discussion about Protandim because a fact remains a fact regardless of who the messenger is that delivers it or why they do so. I’ll indulge the question just this once. What ‘you’, collectively, are doing is breaking the law; a law which exist to protect the public against predatory companies that would tell barefaced lies in an attempt to convince the most vulnerable members of society that they should part with what little money they have to pursue a doomed business opportunity and to believe that a costly inert placebo can cure or mitigate their diseases. In other words, you are dishonest thieves of the lowest order – people who try steal Grandma’s medicine money by telling her that Protandim is the only thing she needs to overcome her maladies.
Do I hate what you’re doing? Yes, without a grain of doubt. Anyone with a conscience would feel the same.
I have heard my sister and brother in law make some amazing comments on the miracle drug Protandium they are up fairly high on the food chain there at LV……
That you call Protandim a “drug” when it is not (it is an herbal supplement) shows that you don’t even understand what it is. Are your sister and her husband distributors? What level have they reached? And what exactly did they say? Are you sure you heard them correctly?
Greg the distributors are desperate at making such claims. I told my local ones I wasn’t keen due to my mums vulnerable situation with cancer. Next thing I know I’ve been offered to Skype with cancer patients in ‘other states’ who claim the protandim was the cure..
Appalling really.. I have plenty of evidence on all this as well.
Greg knows full well that the product is routinely being illegally marketed as a therapeutic agent. He’s just feigning ignorance and trying to whitewash.
What does your mother having cancer have to do with whether or not you take Protandim? As for those distributors you mentioned, they were out of line to be suggesting that Protandim is a treatment for cancer. They were not being compliant when they did so. Best wishes for your mother’s recovery.
Greg said: “What does your mother having cancer have to do with whether or not you take Protandim?”
You’re completely missing Melly’s point, which was that as soon as she said her mother had cancer, she got besieged by Protandimites claiming that Protandim could cure her. They see cancer patients as perfect targets for their snakeoil scam. They’re like vultures
Greg said: “As for those distributors you mentioned, they were out of line to be suggesting that Protandim is a treatment for cancer. They were not being compliant when they did so.”
Thanks for stating the obvious Greg. You don’t miss a thing do you? Problem is that “not being compliant” as you call it (i.e., illegally promoting Protandim as a therapeutic agent) is rampant in the organization from top to bottom. And when confronted with this reality, all you do is shake your head solemnly, barely feigning concern, and say tsk-tsk, they shouldn’t be doing that.
No @#$%!!! That’s precisely the point. They shouldn’t and yet they do, routinely.
Vog, how would you know that “not being compliant” as you call it (i.e., illegally promoting Protandim as a therapeutic agent) is rampant in the organization from top to bottom.”? We have several thousand distributors. Have you spoken with all of them? Have you attended thousands of meetings? Can you show us a single piece of literature produced by LV that makes disease-treatment claims? You really have no idea, and are just making baseless accusations. Yes, there have been some distributors whose enthusiasm has outrun their good sense, but most of us have not done so.
Greg said: “Yes, there have been some distributors whose enthusiasm has outrun their good sense.”
When a distributor says or in any way implies that Protandim can alleviate cancer (or any other disease for that matter), as they are wont to do, it goes well beyond simply being overly enthusiastic. You are simply tone deaf and unwilling to call it what it really is — deceitful, illegal, exploitative, potentially injurious, etc. Worse, you trivialize the problem. You have even ignored evidence of the company’s own executives being complicit in the deceptive/illegal marketing of Protandim
Greg said: “Vog, how would you know that “not being compliant” as you call it (i.e., illegally promoting Protandim as a therapeutic agent) is rampant in the organization from top to bottom.”?”
Let’s not play this game where you pretend pretend that the evidence doesn’t exist, even after it’s been rubbed in your nose. It has worn thin. We can start posting daily the evidence and the names of dozens of distributors who are “non-compliant”. Would you like that Greg? Let’s do it. Since we all know that neither you nor the company will do a damn thing about it, I’ll make sure that every “non-compliant” distributor identified will also get reported to the FDA at the same time. Are you up for the challenge?
http://www.fda.gov/safety/reportaproblem/ucm059315.htm
the FDA, when certifying supplements, only looks to see if the ingredients are what they say they are if so they are certified. That’s all they do about dietary supplements. My sister said the FDA has endorsed Protandium, huh???? They certify that those five ingredients are in it, that is not endorsing but she’s repeating this from somewhere……
I’ll play. Check this one out:
http://www.bensonderm.com/dermatology-clinic/why-protandim.html
Thanks Lisa for being the first contestant to play “Bust a Protandim Distributor”!
The site you linked to, belonging to a dermatologist by the name of Robert W. Benson (Ponchatoula, LA), contains the following claim:
“Protandim is totally natural yet stronger than a FDA-approved drug for multiple sclerosis. That FDA-approved drug costs $50,000 per year; Protandim costs $40 per month.”
Bob wins an FDA complaint and Lisa makes it to the lightning round.
http://www.fda.gov/safety/reportaproblem/ucm059315.htm
Isn’t this fun Greg? Your turn next.
Here is another game entry:
http://www.protandimize.info/medical-information/
Wait….I have another one. Yoj migh recognize this name….Paul Myhill….this is his Facebook post today:
“I’ve been asked by a few LifeVantage (Protandim) distributors to re-post just the following section of my ALS post so they can share it. I know that most distributors are on one of my other pages, but anybody wishes to add themselves to the comments as a purchasing source for Protandim, please simply list your city and state. Thanks!
MY THOUGHTS AND INVOLVEMENT WITH ALS:
ALS is a horrendous disease that rightly deserves the added attention and funding that it is now receiving. Current theories link a.) free radicals / oxidative stress / inflammation and related mitochondrial damage, gene damage and premature apotosis (programmed cell death); and b.) glutamate metabolism / toxicity as key causes for the neurodegenerative process of ALS, regardless of whether an inheritance factor is involved or not.
As far as the group “a” listed above, I devoted a significant part of my life trying to understand these factors and sub-factors. I created a product that specifically targets these issues. That product now exceeds $200 million in annual revenues in its various forms. In ALS, free radicals amass to highly-toxic levels, causing significant oxidative stress and inflammation, mitochondrial / gene damage and premature cell death. In the inherited form of ALS, sufferers have a mutated gene for Superoxide Dismutase (SOD), one of the body’s most potent defenders against such free radical damage. The product I invented is one of the world’s best known enhancers of SOD, proven by many peer-reviewed scientific studies.
As far as “b” listed above, glutamate metabolism and toxicity are something that I have also taken an interest in – in relation to oxidative stress, the nutrition density of foods (or lack thereof), and the corruption of our food production/packaging systems with chemical additives that destroy health. Most of you will know glutamate as the “G,” constituting 90% of MSG. Glutamate is also raised by the artificial sweetener, Aspartame. MSG, Aspartame, and countless other unnecessary corruptions to our food supply, cause a greater influx of glutamate, resulting – once again – in excessive oxidative stress and cellular damage. Furthermore, oxidative stress can damage the cellular transport mechanisms for glutamate, even reversing them, by impacting a coenzyme that is instrumental in cell signaling (cells talking to each other). Cell signaling is a big part of the product I previously invented.
For those of you interested in the corruption of our food supply, please join the new Facebook Page, “Food is Killing Us,” at https://www.facebook.com/foodiskillingus.
Over the years I have received, and continue to receive, MANY emails from people suffering from ALS and other neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s, stating what a great help Protandim has been to them. The product I created, and other forms that I have since developed, are front-line tools in the battle against such diseases.”
Please note he is posting this for Protandim distributors so “they can share it.”
http://www.truelife-solutions.com/?page_id=206
This goes along with my earlier game entry today. The first link didn’t have the distributor’s name.
I like how she starts out with this ridiculous statement:
“Protandim has over 300 Medical endorsed studies including the American heat association as it helps the body absorb scar tissue. To find out more information on Protandim, see medical reports, research documents and more, please click on this Protandimize.info link.You may purchase a bottle to try… Being a cellular repair product just ONE is taken every day…no more! This is a 30 day bottle of Protandim.”
LisaRob said; “http://www.truelife-solutions.com/?page_id=206
This goes along with my earlier game entry today. The first link didn’t have the distributor’s name.
I like how she starts out with this ridiculous statement…’
Well done Lisa! You’re kicking Greg’s ass in this contest. The distributor’s name is Sheila Z Stirling (distributor ID#137757).
http://www.mylifevantage.com/drstirling/default.aspx
There’s virtually nothing on her webpage that’s consistent with the company’s toothless compliance policies. She’s illegally promoting Protandim as an anti-inflammatory and anti-fibrotic agent and claiming that it provides “promise of protections from many kinds of age-related health conditions.” There was also this doltish statement on one of her other websites:
“Diseases are named according to where the cells don’t work (location), who discovered it (they want credit for it), and how it effects that part of the body – so ask yourself this key question: Does it really matter what the disease is called? You may want to think about this for a minute – if all of your cells are healthy, are you healthy or sick? This is why we have such a positive attitude towards Protandim – it works with the life process of the cells.”
http://www.protandimize.info/medical-information/
She’s just the kind of fringe/quacky/new-agey bubblehead that I would expect to be a Protandim shill. She calls herself “Doctor” and ‘Reverend” and claims to have a PhD, but her LinkedIn resume provides no details on where she got that alleged PhD or what field it’s in, so I suspect that at best, it’s some kind of mail-order diploma-mill certificate in holistic-quantum-something-or-other.
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/sheila-z-stirling-ph-d/7/585/92a
Her other activities, aside from hawking snakeoil, include offering her services as a “wellness coach” (using something hoaky called the “Vibrant Life Protocol’; aka buying Protandim) in alternative medicine, and she officiates budget weddings in Vegas.
http://www.truelife-solutions.com/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5zYIVeEcHw
The video that really helps understand Sheila best is this unintentionally hysterical interview with some creepy new-age guru, in which she describes how she got head trauma from a car accident (17:30 and 18:350. After hearing that, everything else made perfect sense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9wAFP3LTQs
She’s earned herself an FDA complaint.
http://www.fda.gov/safety/reportaproblem/ucm059315.htm
Today I submit: RJBand Associates
LifeVantageIndependent Distributor
http://reversingdiabetesmiracle.com
Good find Lisa! You’re on a tear. Keep it up.
The purchasing link at the end of the article leads to the generic Protandim sales site of Rodney Barnhart, a distributor (ID# 140995) based in Ohio. Let’s all make sure to post those details when filing our complaints with the FDA.
http://www.fda.gov/safety/reportaproblem/ucm059315.htm
It appears that Rod’s real job (i.e. when he’s not out breaking the law by promoting Protandim as a treatment for diabetes) is running a windshield repair business. Great qualifications for dispensing medical advice eh?
http://www.fyple.com/company/rods-windshield-repair-qassmas/
It’s like shooting fish in a barrel, really. Just Google “Protandim (insert disease)” and you come up with distributor websites making claims about that particular disease. Also, “Protandim BG12” works well since distributors love to compare their curry pill with the MS drug.
Did you see my post with Paul Myhill’s Facebook entry?
Yes, I’ve noticed that too Lisa. Google Protandim and the name of just about any disease and there’ll be an example of a dirty Protandim hustler trying to illegally flog the product as medicine. It’s disgusting.
And yes, thanks for that Myhill post. It’s important news. I’ve followed his exploits closely for quite some time now. He’s quite the piece of work — a dishonest, whiny, emotionally unstable man-child.
http://www.protandimscams.com/lifevantage-bribes-paul-myhill-to-hide-the-truth-about-protandim/#comment-45788
What’s wrong?
Rod’s window repair, protandim shills, airplane manufacture, and storm door company.
what’s the problem
I just looked at Dr Benson’s site, and while his wording could use some tightening (it should say that the 40% reduction is an average, and that the LSU skin cancer study was on mice, not humans, and it should not say that Protandim was developed over decades of research [Dr McCord researched free radicals and OS for many years, but didn’t research Protandim until Mr Myhill brought his formula to him]), I see nothing wrong with this.
What problems did you see?
Greg said: “I just looked at Dr Benson’s site, and while his wording could use some tightening (it should say that the 40% reduction is an average, and that the LSU skin cancer study was on mice, not humans, and it should not say that Protandim was developed over decades of research [Dr McCord researched free radicals and OS for many years, but didn’t research Protandim until Mr Myhill brought his formula to him]), I see nothing wrong with this. What problems did you see?”
That’s the problem in a nutshell Greg; you’re oblivious. The statement that I spoon-fed you (and which you ignored in your reply) was
“Protandim is totally natural yet stronger than a FDA-approved drug for multiple sclerosis”
If you can’t find anything wrong with the statement then you simply don’t know anything at all about the regulations or what an illegal promotional claim looks like, despite the fact that it’s even spelled out for you in your distributor handbook. I can’t seriously believe you could be that ignorant, so we’ll have to assume it’s just more gaming on your part. It wasn’t even a good effort on your part conman.
Do we have to start giving you a remedial course in the FDA regulations next (so that you can ignore it all) and if we do, what’s our reward, beyond making you look even more foolish?
I see your point. It should read that Protandim is more powerful at activating Nrf2 than the expensive drug (as the study showed). But the way it is worded now seems to imply that Protandim is more powerful at treating MS. Since there is no evidence of that what is written is problematic.
Greg said: “I see your point. It should read that Protandim is more powerful at activating Nrf2 than the expensive drug (as the study showed). But the way it is worded now seems to imply that Protandim is more powerful at treating MS. Since there is no evidence of that what is written is problematic.”
You know these illegal claims are rampant and yet you deny, try to whitewash, and downplay their significance. Even when we spoon-feed you this stuff, which you should know already, you still don’t get it. It’s like we’re trying to teach a special needs child.
MS claims aside, you as a distributor are not even allowed to say: “Protandim is more powerful at activating Nrf2 than the expensive drug.” This shows why the company is such a bloody farce. They publish toothless compliance documents for distributors like To Say or Not to Say, as window dressing, and the net result is that no one reads them and no one abides by them; and when the distributors get outted for violations, nothing happens.
http://info.lifevantage.com/pdf/en/ToSayOrNotToSay.pdf
This Benson schmuck is an MD too. If he’s immoral and stupid enough to market Protandim as an MS drug, despite having good reason to be risk averse, then you can only imagine what the peons are saying (and we have enough examples to know that they are in fact routinely violating the law).
Notice that Greg expresses not an ounce of concern for the possibility that MS patients were sold Protandim under false and misleading pretenses.
Sure am glad we’ve got the FDA and FTC as recourse. They may not always get the job done quickly but at least its a better alternative to lawlessness.
I just had a quick second look at Benson’s site and noticed another misleading and illegal claim:
“The name of this supplement is Protandim, and its cost is about $40 per month. Physicians across the country are beginning to offer this compound, which reacts with no medications, in order to help prevent illness and aging at the most basic cellular level.”
Obvious to everyone here, a distributor cannot claim that Protandim prevents illness. That’s two strikes against Benson. He’s either a complete idiot or and immoral huckster. His patients might want to punch him in the throat after reading all of this.
Greg says: “I see your point. It should read that Protandim is more powerful at activating Nrf2 than the expensive drug (as the study showed). But the way it is worded now seems to imply that Protandim is more powerful at treating MS. Since there is no evidence of that what is written is problematic.”
No. The whole thing is problematic. You can NOT imply that Protandim can cure, treat or prevent ANY disease, and by comparing it to a drug which treats a diesease, you are implying that Protandim can treat a disease…no matter how you word it.
Even listing the studies like he did on the site is against the law because it implies that Protandim can cure, treat or prevent the diseases being studied.
LisaRob said: “Even listing the studies like he did on the site is against the law because it implies that Protandim can cure, treat or prevent the diseases being studied.”
You’re right, as usual, and in fact LieVantage even admits to this in their compliance documents (which obviously no one affiliated with the company reads, understands or abides by):
“You cannot use claims that are beyond structure/function in the promotion or advertising of Protandim even if a study appears to support that claim. For example, a recent study discusses how the right chamber of the heart becomes severely stressed under the condition of pulmonary artery hypertension. The arteries going from the heart to the lungs also narrow, creating much resistance. In the study, Protandim almost completely prevented damage to the right heart. Although the information is accurate, the claims go beyond structure/function, and we cannot use these claims when promoting Protandim because Protandim is a dietary supplement and not a drug.
An independent distributor can mention, however, Protandim is the subject of multiple studies and refer potential customers to bigbluecalendar.com or pubmed.gov to view those studies in their entirety.
An independent distributor may also provide a printout of an entire study to potential customers. The content of these studies must not be part of the presentation/promotion of Protandim. It is very important that you provide the studies in their entirety. It is inappropriate to provide an abstract or summary of any study.”
https://www.hisadvocates.org/g/affiliates-marketers-producers-for-compensation/fileSendAction/fcType/5/fcOid/327527224083767344/fodoid/327527224083767342/to_say_or_not_to_say.pdf
This is why I never say to anyone “If you are suffering from such-and-such ailment, taking Protandim will help you.” I stress the Oxidative Stress reducing, and age-slowing properties of Protandim, because they are the only things for which we have some scientific backing. Regretfully, not all distributors have been as careful about this as they should have.
Greg B said: “This is why I never say to anyone ‘If you are suffering from such-and-such ailment, taking Protandim will help you.’ I stress the Oxidative Stress reducing, and age-slowing properties of Protandim, because they are the only things for which we have some scientific backing. Regretfully, not all distributors have been as careful about this as they should have.”
Oh suuurrrre you dont! The reason your claim rings hollow (i.e. that you’re the only one in this gang of a-holes who’s not illegally marketing the product) is that you’ve already proven yourself to be utterly ignorant of and/or indifferent to both the company’s official polices (which are toothless window dressing) or the FDA regulations regarding on marketing claims. On this site alone, we’ve witnessed you applauding distributors when they make illegal marketing claims.
BTW, it’s not “regrettable” it’s %$#@ illegal!!! And breaking the law has consequences.
I’ve posted this before, but it’s buried back in the comments by now. It’s worth repeating:
“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.”
Seriously, Greg?
What part of that page is actually IN compliance?
Distributors can not say, or even IMPLY that Protandim can cure, treat, or prevent a disease.
In light of that, If you can’t see any problems with that page and think the wording just needs some “tightening”……I really don’t know what to say. I guess it shouldn’t surprise me.
I dunno, Greg….even the researchers are calling it a drug…..and guess what? McCord is on this study:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22268125
“We randomized 30 otherwise healthy AUD subjects to receive directly observed inpatient oral therapy with either Protandim (1,350 mg/day) or placebo. Subjects underwent bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and blood sampling before study drug administration and after 7 days of therapy; all AUD subjects completed the study protocol without adverse events.”
Oops. They try to market it as a medical breakthrough….and they slipped up here and called it a drug.
What’s the difference between a supplement and a drug? Supplements are just unproven drugs.
Joe,
if you are not a pawn of the FDA then publish this reply. I believe that whether protandim is authentic or not is irrelevant. Do you really believe the FDA or the government or big Pharma will EVER allow a publication and release of information of a cure for ANYTHING?
Do you not find it extremely odd in our day of technology and the BILLIONS $$$ that are being collected through charities and government grants, that in your or anybody’s lifetime, not ONE single cure has ever been found for ANY disease? Why? Because they will not allow it. Do you ever hear of the president out because of the flu or common cold or anything else but for a physical or a gunshot wound? There are cures out there but they will be kept silent.
All you neysayer’s and Big Gov lovers, take a cander at this documentary. “Hoxsey: When Healing Becomes a Crime”.
Does this have anything to do with protandim? It has everything to do with the extremely few that decide to climb out of the sinking sandbox and find out there is really another playground out there. Life is precious.
Do you know that the chiropractic profession is basically a NON-pharmicutical profession? Chiropractors are in the business of helping people naturally without drugs. How about this:
The American Medical Association was found guilty of “conspiracy” to destroy the chiropractic profession in August, 1987. WAKE UP – The American Medical Association ! ! !
I’m sorry to bust your big blue government bubble but wait till you find the news that you only have months to live because of cancer. All you have to look forward to is a worthless few months of existence and poor quality of life as you are pumped full of chemotherapy with a follow up treat of weeks of radiation as a little ‘thank you’ from big Pharma for all you worship as you are admitted to hospice. Sure the .01% can show signs of no cancer. That’s just enough to keep the hope alive.
No more than “if I just put one more dollar for one more lottery ticket, I might just be free of being a productive member of society”. All it takes is one spark of hope to feed KING GOV full of power and wealth.
Wake up puppets! You will NEVER – EVER see any studies of a cure for anything so stop asking. I guarantee you that if your closest family member ate ashes from a burned up sweet gum tree and was instantly healed of their deadly, non-curable cancer, should you get the same disease, you will be eating sweet gum tree ashes for breakfast, lunch, and dinner as you scream, F— the studies!
Brian said: “if you are not a pawn of the FDA then publish this reply. I believe that whether protandim is authentic or not is irrelevant. Do you really believe the FDA or the government or big Pharma will EVER allow a publication and release of information of a cure for ANYTHING?”
The “authenticity” of Protandim is the only subject that matters here. You know what’s not relevant? Your diatribe about the FDA and Big Pharma. It seems that without red herrings and ad hominem attacks, you Protandimites would have absolutely nothing to talk about.
Wow, Brian….you’re really buying into conspiracy theories, aren’t you? So are you saying that if studies were done on Protandim to prove it is the medical breakthrough they claim it to be, that the studies would not see the light of day? LOL.
Yeahhh….modern medicine never cures anything……except:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/big-placebo-says-medicine-never-cures-anything/
“To hear them tell it, American medicine cures nothing. It simply manages disease and suppresses symptoms. It is a measure of the astounding success of the American medical system that anyone could seriously contemplate such nonsense. American medicine cures so much disease, involving so many people, so reliably and so often that everyone takes it for granted.
Evidently American Medicine doesn’t cure anything except … tuberculosis, pneumonia, bacterial meningitis, gonorrhea, any bacterial illness you care to name. American medicine routinely cures previously deadly conditions like appendicitis, ectopic pregnancies and obstetric hemorrhage. Better yet, it can completely prevent many viral and bacterial scourges through vaccination. It’s not a coincidence that American lifespan has increased from 48 years to 77.7 years in slightly more than a century. Much of what routinely killed Americans is now routinely cured.
In fact, cure is so routine that these illnesses rarely enter American consciousness. No one worries about dying from tertiary syphilis, diphtheria or rheumatic heart disease. Those diseases are routinely prevented or cured in their early stages.
And “disease management” is hardly a deficiency, either. Some diseases cannot yet be cured. Until the day that a cure is discovered, we manage those diseases. Juvenile (type I) diabetes was uniformly fatal until the discovery of insulin. Insulin doesn’t cure diabetics; it merely allows them to live an addition 50 years or more. Instead of dying in childhood, type I diabetics routinely live to have and enjoy grandchildren. Such “disease management” is worthy of praise, not the contempt that Big Placebo attempts to heap on it.”
Vogel — Up to your usual slimy trick: Totally mis-read someone you disagree with and then attack your own twisted premise… Yup, works every time.
ronaldmckenzie said: “Vogel — Up to your usual slimy trick: Totally mis-read someone you disagree with and then attack your own twisted premise… Yup, works every time.”
Since you provided not a single example, I’d ask you to explain what you meant by that except I don’t really care to learn any more about your aberrant thought processes. Take a nap or something.
I find it interesting that none of you from ether side have brought up that LifeVantage has not solicited any of these tests or others that are currently being preformed.
John, I’m not convinced that’s true since Dr McCords name appears on a lot of the studies. Even if what you say is true, Where are all the studies that LifeVantage -itself -does?
John said:
“I find it interesting that none of you from ether side have brought up that LifeVantage has not solicited any of these tests or others that are currently being preformed.”
That simply isn’t true. Below I’ve pasted part of McCord’s employment agreement, and a quote from Doug Robinson talking about their scientific advisory board. After reading it, ask yourself if this is consistent with what you’ve been told:
http://sec.edgar-online.com/lifevantage-corp/10-k-annual-report/2011/09/28/section43.aspx
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT shall be effective as of April 1, 2011 (the “Effective Date”). It is between LifeVantage Corporation (“LifeVantage or the Company”) and Dr. Joe McCord (“Dr. McCord”).
Position Summary
The Chief Scientific Officer will oversee the scientific efforts of the company, head the Scientific Advisory Board, and present scientific information at corporate events.
Essential Duties and Responsibilities include the following. Other duties may be assigned.
1.Conduct and oversee company sponsored research, bioassays, raw materials evaluation and quality control work in an appropriately equipped laboratory.
2.Encourage, support, and recruit independent academicians to investigate Protandim in scientific studies, providing laboratory assay support, scientific advice, and assistance in writing grant applications and manuscripts, and serving on those grants as consultant or co-investigator where appropriate.
————————————————————–
CEO Doug Robinson discussing their fiscal fourth quarter 2013 results:
“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?part=single