 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / September 2006Question About Life Extension Foundation
What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? Them seem to have some good advise and good products. Is there a better choice for high quality supplements? Their web site is http://www.lef.org/ Thanks, Bob > What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? Them seem to have > some good advise and good products. Is there a better choice for high [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Bob Crapola, IMO. Any time I've read their writeups for condition I've done a lot of research about, they've been sloppy, inaccurate and clearly written to generate supplement sales without any attempt to assure quality of information. Do your own research on supplements, and shop price by using froogle.com or another price search engine. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > generate supplement sales without any attempt to assure quality of > information. While I have major criticisms of LEF, without providing any specific examples, the above is little more than a smear job. Many of LEF's disease and dysfunction protocols are written by physicians knowledgeable in the particular subject of the protocol and are balanced and well written. OTOH, LEF articles about supplements, while generally accurate in what they say, are definitely biased towards sales of the supplements carried by LEF, particularly by the omission of negative information about the supplement under consideration. Still overall, I consider that LEF provides as good or better information than any other supplement supplier on the Internet. With respect to quality of supplements, at least one thing that is known for LEF is that the owners and many of the employees use the LEF products themselves. > Do your own research on supplements, and shop price by using froogle.com > or another price search engine. Yes, whatever supplement supplier information you read, you should still also do your own research. Particularly you should read several sources of information always including peer-reviewed journal studies and review articles. --Paul Wakfer MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality The Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org Rational freedom by self-sovereignty & social contracting > While I have major criticisms of LEF, without providing any specific > examples, the above is little more than a smear job. Many of LEF's > disease and dysfunction protocols are written by physicians > knowledgeable in the particular subject of the protocol and are > balanced and well written. I have no dog in a fight with the LEF. What I wrote was my honest opinion based upon my having read protocols for CFS and other conditions a few years ago. I recall discussing them in ngs at the time. Further, I believe the post I replied to was probably a commercial come on, though I replied to it as if it were not. > OTOH, LEF articles about supplements, while generally accurate in what > they say, are definitely biased towards sales of the supplements [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Still overall, I consider that LEF provides as good or better > information than any other supplement supplier on the Internet. That would be your opinion. I reject it, though I feel no need to characterize it as more than your opinion, worth what it cost to read it, same as mine. Anyone with two neurons should do their own research and comparison shopping for price/quality before buying and taking any supplement. The last place they should accept such direction from is a supplement seller. Especially one who used to make GREAT noises about being trustworthy specifically because they did *not* sell supplements. > With respect to quality of supplements, at least one thing that is > known for LEF is that the owners and many of the employees use the LEF > products themselves. So what? People sloppy enough without the intellectual rigor to prepare more than ill informed, sloppy cut and paste jobs for protocols may just be dumb enough to take crappy supplements. I'm not saying they're crappy, I'm just saying that it's no guarantee of anything. >>Do your own research on supplements, and shop price by using froogle.com >>or another price search engine. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > sources of information always including peer-reviewed journal studies > and review articles. Actually, biomedical literature is *all* one should base a decision on. I don't read popular or commercial information as part of decision making about supplements. Susan snip >Actually, biomedical literature is *all* one should base a decision on. > I don't read popular or commercial information as part of decision >making about supplements. In the old days, this was true. Nowadays, many of the mainstream medical journals are little more than marketing arms for pharma. And the editors are too often terrified to lose advertising funding by tearing apart the bullshit and data spinning that passes for "medicine" or "science" churned out by pharma with the goal of selling more drugs, health be damned. George M. Carter > In the old days, this was true. Nowadays, many of the mainstream > medical journals are little more than marketing arms for pharma. And > the editors are too often terrified to lose advertising funding by > tearing apart the bullshit and data spinning that passes for > "medicine" or "science" churned out by pharma with the goal of selling > more drugs, health be damned. I agree, completely, even the journal publishers are making noises about this in recent years. The FDA and the NIH are in the pockets of big pharma. But there's literature from countries where the pressures and controls are not like those in the U.S. One also must *completely* ignore the conclusions in the peer reviewed literature, and focus on the data and methodologies exclusively, to mine useful info from study reports. Susan > While I have major criticisms of LEF, without providing any > specific examples, the above is little more than a smear job. What Wakfer isn't mentioning is that he used to work for LEF, posting spam to Usenet newsgroups, under the alias Tom Matthews. That puts his defense of LEF in a whole different light. > Paul Antonik Wakfer wrote:http://groups.google.com/group/sci.life-extension/post?hl=en&inreplyto=642c41147 6913605&reply_to=group&_done=%2Fgroup%2Fsci.life-extension%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread %2F22d6a359c08851e0%2F5ef3bafd1c9590aa%3Fhl%3Den%26 > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to work for LEF, posting spam to Usenet newsgroups, > under the alias Tom Matthews. This has been fully addressed dozens of times over the years (as Thorson knows full well from us having crossed swords many times before). The pertinent points are: 1) I was never an LEF employee, but always a fully independent consultant. 2) I was constantly critical of LEF, even as moderator of their own website forums which I created and moderated from 1997 until resigning in Jan 2002. 3) Everything that I posted to Usenet newsgroups was useful and helpful information backed by peer-reviewed journal sources, almost always in response to a request for information. > That puts his defense of LEF in a whole different > light. But the complete information I have now (once again) supplied shows that I kept as much objectivity as is possible for a human then and I still retain it :-) --Paul Wakfer MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality The Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org Rational freedom by self-sovereignty & social contracting > But the complete information I have now (once again) supplied shows > that I kept as much objectivity as is possible for a human then and I > still retain it :-) ROFL! Nuh, uh. I recall having this discussion with "Tom Matthews" who had to admit, IIRC, that the CFS protocol, at least, was lousy, and others were, too. Still shillin' for a livin'? Susan > that I kept as much objectivity as is possible for a human then and I > still retain it :-) but you still lost one of your testicles LIES and a retraction tell ALL one needs to know about Mark Thorson. [now watch for other flood of lies]. >> While I have major criticisms of LEF, without providing any >> specific examples, the above is little more than a smear job. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > That puts his defense of LEF in a whole different > light. > LIES and a retraction tell ALL one needs to know about Mark Thorson. What did I say which is a lie? Even Wakfer didn't accuse me of that. You constantly accuse people of lying, but you never back up your accusations with proof. Here is what proof looks like: To see Jan's ORIGINAL POSTING, go here: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20040310000815.25804.00001173%40mb-m01.aol.com Jan wrote: > >From: Mark Thorson nos...@sonic.net > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > You can't YOU JUST LIED AGAIN!!!!!!! ----- example quotes of Jan accusing people of being paid shills ----- Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030415173745.18794.00000646%40mb-fn.aol.com Any time alt. health is mentioned the personal trashing starts. Mostly comes from paid shill Mark Probert. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030412210802.08778.00000680%40mb-fw.aol.com Internet bully Mark Probert who is a paid shill and lives off his wife. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030410170838.14245.00000347%40mb-ct.aol.com As for Mark, he is a paid shill and lives off his wife. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030325123827.25124.00000246%40mb-mn.aol.com As long as Mark is here, the paid shill will call names when in fact he is the one who is a bigot. Speaking of his own people. Mark is so predictable. BEWARE!! Mark Thorson makes libellous statements and then retracts same when faced with law suits.Being a slow learner he will always do this until he converts to Falun Dafa. Rod. >> LIES and a retraction tell ALL one needs to know about Mark Thorson. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Here is what proof looks like: <snip repeated> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.folklore.herbs/browse_frm/thread/4a07b17e5dc8 21b8?scoring=d&q=Mark+Thorson++Cell+Tech+1995& http://tinyurl.com/b5ymz Quoting from The ORIGINAL post by Mark Thorson. On Saturday, I took two capsules. They made me sort of jittery, but not enough to be sure I wasn't experiencing placebo effect. On Sunday, I took six capsules. Again, I felt sort of jittery, but I couldn't absolutely be sure that wasn't placebo effect. Note that this is more than Cell Tech recommends for new users. They recommend one each of Alpha Sun and Omega Sun for new users, increasing gradually over a few weeks. Because they didn't give me diarrea, I took another six Monday morning before going in to work. That made me very wired, an unmistakable drug-like effect. The closest thing I could compare it to would be like drinking six cups of strong coffee. I found the effect not at all pleasant. It was like the bad effects of coffee without any of the good effects. I'm not sure I'll take any more of the algae. If I do, it will certainly be a lower dose, not more than two capsules daily, as recommended by Cell Tech. I felt so badly at work that I left and took the rest of the day off. http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/browse_frm/thread/6d5de87 7d7305371/e396617bdd2960b5?lnk=st&q=nospam@sonic.net+anecdote&rnum=8#e396617bdd2 960b5 http://tinyurl.com/7wstp Quoting from the ORIGINAL from Mark Thorson Showing he is a HYPOCRITE. The case against amalgams is based on anecdotes and lies, not science. http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/browse_frm/thread/c6ad74b 20f14b756/8f57138d90ea9fe2?lnk=st&q=nospam@sonic.net+anecdote&rnum=5#8f57138d90e a9fe2 http://tinyurl.com/8sjoa Quoting from the ORIGINAL from Mark Thorson Show more proof of his double standards. Tim Campbell wrote: > Sorry gentlemen, I shd have been more clear...In this quote, > Cowden was making the more generalized point that at a > certain point in the progressive accumulation of evidence > anecdote becomes data. That's a famous principle (they call it a "law") of dialectical materialism (i.e. Marxism). It's called the "passing of quantity into quality". At some point when you have enough quantity, it becomes transformed into a quality of its own. It's just a pronouncement, with no particular standing as a valid argument. A thousand reports of flying saucers does not mean flying saucers exist http://groups.google.com/group/alt.folklore.herbs/browse_frm/thread/4a07b17e5dc8 21b8?scoring=d&q=Mark+Thorson++Cell+Tech+1995& http://tinyurl.com/b5ymz Quoting from the ORIGINAL from Mark Thorson Funny you should say that. Sunday and Monday nights I had no trouble falling asleep, but I awoke about an hour earlier than I normally do. If the effect were caused by a cocaine- or caffeine-like drug effect, I would expect to have trouble falling asleep in the first place, rather waking up earlier in the morning. And I had a really vivid dream last night, about aliens planting some sort of thing in people's brains so that they could control them, and forcing one person to dress up as an obviously fake alien to discredit the people warning of the alien invasion. http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/browse_frm/thread/9d43dc2 431ff891b/a757f728d0f436fe?lnk=st&q=Mark+Thorson++Cell+Tech+1995&rnum=15#a757f72 8d0f436fe http://tinyurl.com/dq2d3 Quoting form the ORIGINAL from Mark Thorson Where he *thinks* he knows it all. n article <4tiq9c$...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, RCfromLI <rcfro...@aol.com> wrote: >Oh, wow, Thorson was wrong. Not only that, he's playing games with his >posts. Mark, we forgive you for being wrong but why compound your >embarrasment by giving some lame-a.s excuse? I was trained as a scientist. That means you admit your mistakes. It's no embarrasment to be on the side of truth. ><< and my experience with physicists is that they think they know a lot >more >about chemistry than they really do. It would be so typical of a >physicist to think that to preserve a molecule, you bring it down to >low temperature. >> >You just gave your credibility another shot in the arm. I like taking shots at physicists. You should hear what I have to say about electrical engineers. ><< If I'm right, Cell Tech might be able to save a huge amount of money >on their electrical bill by acidifying the raw algae with vinegar >or something, rather than freezing. Then, they could simply dry it >with air, roll mill it, fumigate it, etc. That would be way cheaper >than freeze drying. >> >You should send Cell Tech your resume. As I recall, you even have >hands-on experience in this area! More than you know! I even did some undergraduate work on _Daphnia_ behavior. I think I could build a cheap _Daphnia_ excluder that would remove the bulk of the _Daphnia_ before the algae hits the centrifugal separators. _Daphnia_ are a bone of contention between Cell Tech and the FDA, because after the _Daphnia_ have been ground up, they are indistinguishable from insect parts. _Daphnia_, also known as the "water flea", are tiny animals that are not insects. About the size of a sesame seed, they have two little wing-like appendages they use to swim about, seeking out the algae upon which they graze. Your postings are information content-free. My postings are packed with solid information, backed up by specific references so anyone can check out what I say. BTW, I gave you detailed, explicit instructions how to obtain the FDA file on Cell Tech. Did you order a copy yet? When you get it, will you admit that the algae has powerful drug-like effects and addictive qualities consistent with the action of a cocaine-analog drug? http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/browse_frm/thread/eb7c95f aa2ba538/e1b7134c1dc3ed88?lnk=st&q=Mark+Thorson++Cell+Tech+1995&rnum=17#e1b7134c 1dc3ed88 http://tinyurl.com/cw5og Quoting from one who is SICK of Mark Thorson's OBSESSION Date: 1996/06/02 Subject: Mark Thorson & Super Blue Green Algae I wish to extend my thanks to those of you who went through the trouble to lookup the references that Mark loves to flood every thread mentioning algae as a potential source of nutrition. I spent a substantial amount of time refuting some of his references in public, after which he stopped listening and started thanking me for 'improving' his bibliography. While he displays remarkable stamina, he has a hidden agenda. He quotes out of context and relies on article titles to scare people regardless of the actual tone of the articles content. At first I thought he just didn't understand that more than one kind of algae exists; eventually I came to understand better. And another: RCfromLI Jun 3 1996, 2:00 am Bullshit I didn't refute them! At least two of them are based only on anecdotal evidence and the rest do not conclusively prove anything except that the particular sample of algae they tested contained toxins (just as many fish and shellfish often contain toxins due to environmental conditions.) The articles are, in my opinion, almost zero evidence to support MT's contentions. (See my posts in sci.med.nutrition.) The articles were WEAK and I invite ANYONE to go read them first hand and draw their own conclusions. Folks, reading Thorson's silly-a.s piecemeal quotations/references and taking them as the last word is NOT a good idea. Just remember that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing! PLEASE, go to the library and read the articles for yourselves. They are very readable and very enlightening! And another: Mark AdamS Jun 7 1996, 2:00 am [snip] I don't think you can condem the entire world based on one unclear post. However, you are clearly condeming yourself with your own nonstop misrepresentation. Anyone who reads the Lancent article and compares the text therein to your out of context quote will clearly see how objective you are. Mark AdamS Jun 6 1996, 2:00 am Mark KNEW the below, yet he STILL could NOT shut up! CELL TECH PRODUCT SAFETY AND PURITY A message from Christian Drapeau Director, Research and Development Cell Tech Recently, there have been several pieces of misinformation posted on this message board and elsewhere on the Internet regarding Super Blue Green Algae (SBGA). I would like to set the record straight regarding the safety and purity of SBGA once and for all. Super Blue Green Algae is a food supplement that is harvested from Klamath Lake in Klamath Falls, Oregon. The scientific name for SBGA is Aphanizomenon flos aquae. Cell Tech routinely tests its algae for possible toxins to ensure the 100% safety and purity of its products. In response to some of the concerns that have been posted: There are two scientific articles that incorrectly state that Aphanizomenon flos aquae from Klamath Lake could potentially be toxic. These articles generated quite a bit of misunderstanding and controversy and warrant specific attention. In the first article, referring to a toxic bloom in Klamath Lake in the late 1950's, Phinney and Peek reported that "no concrete evidence was obtained as to the effect of this toxin on the biota of the Lake and River, but experiments with mice proved that ingestion of the algal material was quickly lethal, and intraperitoneal injection of the aqueous extract almost instantaneous in causing death" (Phinney and Peek, 1961). The toxicity was incorrectly attributed to Aphanizomenon flos aquae with no further investigation. A sample of the same algal bloom was sent by Phinney to Dr. Paul Gorham, at the National Research Council, Ottawa, Canada, for further analysis. Gorham subsequently found that the sample consisted of equal parts of Aphanizomenon flos aquae and Microcystis. Dr. Gorham established that the toxicity came from Microcystis (Gorham, 1964). The second article is a review by Gentile reporting that blooms of Aphanizomenon flos aquae had been found to be toxic in Klamath Lake (Gentile, 1971). Actually, Aphanizomenon flos aquae was found toxic in Kezar Lake, New Hampshire in 1966 (Sawyer et al., 1968) and 1967 (Gentile et al., 1969). Both articles reported that the isolation of an atypical non-colony forming Aphanizomenon flos aquae from Kezar Lake killed fish and laboratory mice. However, when Gentile wrote his review on algal toxins, he mistakenly stated that the origin of the Kezar Lake sample was Klamath Lake, Oregon. An accurate review of the information mentioned here was written by Dr. Wayne Carmichael and Dr. Paul Gorham who wrote: (beside Kezar Lake . . .) "The only other case where toxic Aphanizomenon flos aquae has been strongly implicated is from Klamath Lake, Oregon, by Phinney and Peek (Phinney and Peek, 1961). The signs of poisoning produced by samples from this bloom, consisting of 50:50 Aphanizomenon, Microcystis, injected i.p. into mice were similar to those of microcystin. It was concluded that Aphanizomenon was either non-toxic or produced a toxin like microcystin. " However, it is the belief of Dr. Wayne Carmichael that Aphanizomenon flos aquae from Klamath Lake is genetically incapable of producing microcystin (Carmichael and Gorham, 1980). In conclusion, Aphanizomenon flos aquae from Klamath Lake has never been found to be toxic. This, however, raises another question: does Microcystis or Anabaena, or any other type of toxic algae grow in Klamath Lake? To answer this question, a sample of fresh algae is taken every day and analyzed for speciation. These tests are conducted on a daily basis by Cell Tech. In addition, an independent lab performs these tests on every batch that Cell Tech harvests. (A batch consists of the product of two days of harvest.) The tests demonstrate that the algae present in Klamath Lake are more than 99% Aphanizomenon flos aquae. It is known that some genera of blue-green algae can produce two types of toxins under certain conditions -- hepatotoxins and neurotoxins. Hepatotoxins are produced by genera of blue-green algae including Anabaena, Nodularia, Oscillatoria and Microcystis. Neurotoxins are mainly produced by genera of dinoflagellates (red waterblooms), and by some genera of Anabaena and Oscillatoria. Aphanizomenon flos aquae has been known to produce neurotoxins under certain conditions in Europe and Northeast America, not in Klamath Lake. The conclusion is that certain strains of Aphanizomenon flos aquae in different parts of the world do have a history of neurotoxicity. However, it is well known that not all blue- green algae are toxic. Aphanizomenon flos aquae from Klamath Lake in Oregon has never been found to be toxic. Furthermore, it is believed that it is highly unlikely for a non-toxic strain of algae to produce a neurotoxin (Rapala, Sinoven, Luukkainen, and Niemela, 1993). To ensure that the algae harvested by Cell Tech are absolutely non-toxic, different biochemical assays are performed in a strict schedule to detect the presence of any toxin. Hepatotoxins are easily detected by a test called enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (An and Carmichael, 1994). Their presence can also be precisely assayed by a protein phosphatase inhibition assay (PPIA) (Takai and Mieskes, 1991; An and Carmichael, 1994). Anabaena primarily produces neurotoxins that are easily detected by high pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC). HPLC is one of the most sensitive and precise methods used to detect trace amounts of organic substances. Cyanobacterial neurotoxins can also be detected by anticholesterase assay (AchA) (Matsunaga, Moore, Niemczura, and Carmichael, 1989). All of the aforementioned testing procedures are made on every batch of Super Blue Green Algae (SBGA) by external laboratories. http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/browse_frm/thread/4eb8f70 c4e058012/98a7087e46bd61f5?lnk=st&q=Mark+Thorson++Cell+Tech+1995&rnum=23#98a7087 e46bd61f5 http://tinyurl.com/d5m4d Quoting from the 0RIGINAL from Mark Thorson [snip] Note that in the postings from Cell Tech in response to my files, they cite several specific tests they do on their algae. They perform the test for paralytic shellfish toxin, which happens to be a toxin that _Aphanizomenon_ is known to produce. They test for microcystins, which is a toxin that a contaminating algae in Klamath Lake is known to produce. They test for anatoxin-a(s), which is a different molecule from anatoxin-a that has a similar name, because both were originally discovered in an algae called _Anabaena_. To my knowledge, nobody has ever found anatoxin-a(s) in _Aphanizomenon_. But they do not perform the Stevens and Krieger test on the algae. I wonder why? Could taking the anatoxin-a out of _Aphanizomenon_ be like taking the nicotine out of tobacco?] THERE IS THE LIE, HE REPEATED, REPEATEDLY! *But they do not perform the Stevens and Krieger test on the algae*. He made that statement with NO basis. Which is L Y I N G. http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/browse_frm/thread/c5809a2 2ac10747a/a31bc3fa697b6117?lnk=st&q=Mark+Thorson++Cell+Tech+1995&rnum=25#a31bc3f a697b6117 http://tinyurl.com/c8j5d Quoting from the ORIGINAL from Mark Thorson AN ANATOXIN-A PRIMER Copyright Mark Thorson 1995, 1996 Super Blue Green (trademark, Cell Tech brand) algae is the species known as _Aphanizomenon_flos-aquae_. The remainder of this file is divided into five parts: I. What do people say about Super Blue Green Algae? II. What is anatoxin-a? III. Where does anatoxin-a come from? IV. What does anatoxin-a do? V. How can algae users protect against anatoxin-a? PART I. What do people say about Super Blue Green Algae? Here's a few quotes collected from both Cell Tech promotional literature and the FDA file on Cell Tech. There's remarkable agreement between these two sources on the effects of the algae. Capitalization added. Quoting from _Personal_Experiences_with_Super_Blue_ _Green_Algae_ (Cell Tech promotional literature): "On my initial consumption I felt better than ever, having incredible energy and elation. The excitement of it KEPT ME UP MOST OF THE NIGHT, yet that day at work I was without fatigue." -- C.H. "Since I've been taking Super Blue Green Algae I experience very little jet-lag, sleep well, feel more alert than exhausted on a long flight. Fellow flight attendants are ASTOUNDED WITH MY ENERGY LEVEL!" -- L.L.D. "When he was in the eighth grade, we decided to give him the Super Blue Green Algae. And we didn't tell anyone, because we didn't want there to be any bias. He took about six capsules, three Omega Sun and three Alpha Sun." "At the end of two weeks three teachers called me and asked me, 'What are you doing different, Mrs. D? Is Ricky BACK ON A DRUG or something?' They said his work had dramatically improved. His attention span was better, his concentration had increased, he was responding and his school work was getting done and it was accurate." -- Mrs. D. "We have begun to suggest Super Blue Green Algae to clients WITHDRAWING FROM COCAINE, with excellent results. It helps them through the depression and cravings connected with KICKING COCAINE." -- Robert Marrone, PhD, Sierra Center for the Healing Arts, Nevada City, CA. Quoting from the official FDA Complaint/Injury Report on Cell Tech, October 31, 1995, filed by Lina Cicchetto, Consumer Complaint Coordinator: "Product was supposed to be used in this manner: for the first week take digestive enzymes with spectrabiotics capsule 2 a day increasing weekly. For energy, after a week add to the initial capsules one capsule of the 'Blue Green Algae' capsule." "She [the complainant] did this for a week then she added the algae, the first day she felt very energized, but did not sleep, next day she was so wired she COULD NOT SLEEP FOR A WEEK." Quoting from the official FDA Complaint/Injury Report on Cell Tech, October 6, 1995, filed by Karen L. Robles, Consumer Safety Officer: "Complainant began taking blue-green algae product and after 10 months felt no benefits. She stopped taking the product and has had an ENERGY IMBALANCE since that time. She has been suffering WITHDRAWL and energy imbalance." Quoting from the official FDA Complaint/Injury Follow-Up Report on Cell Tech, November 24, 1995, filed by Susan R. Nelson, Supervisory Consumer Safety Officer: "She [the complainant] stated she did not feel the benefits and quit taking the product (she was still taking the ------). She immediately had an ENERGY CRASH and had to stay in bed for a week, she couldn't get out of bed. ---------- stated she felt the algae had an ADDICTIVE effect on her and she has not felt the same since she quit the product." ======================= (CAN YOU BEAT THAT?!?! ALL AT ONCE, MARK THORSON USES ANECDOTES!!!!!!! H Y P O C R I T E!!!!!) [snip the repeated that he has repeated, repeatedly for years] [Note that in the postings from Cell Tech in response to my files, they cite several specific tests they do on their algae. They perform the test for paralytic shellfish toxins, which happen to be toxins that _Aphanizomenon_ can also produce. They test for microcystins, which are toxins that a contaminating algae in Klamath Lake is known to produce. They test for anatoxin-a(s), which is a different molecule from anatoxin-a that has a similar name, because both were originally discovered in an algae called _Anabaena_. To my knowledge, nobody has ever found anatoxin-a(s) in _Aphanizomenon_. But they do not perform the Stevens and Krieger test on the algae. I wonder why? Could taking the anatoxin-a out of _Aphanizomenon_ be like taking the nicotine out of tobacco?] ============= BACK TO THE LIE, AGAIN!!! During the last several years, I have from time to time posted to this and other newsgroups a file of information called "An Anatoxin-a Primer." I now retract the statements made in the Anatoxin-a Primer. The Anatoxin-a Primer implied that Super Blue Green Algae from Klamath Lake, produced by Cell Tech, contains anatoxin-a (a neurotoxin I characterized as addictive), and that Cell Tech deliberately avoids testing for this toxin because anatoxin-a is responsible for the effects reported by SBGA users. I have since been advised that Cell Tech conducts regular tests that would disclose anatoxin-a, and that this toxin has never been found in Super Blue Green Algae. I had no basis for the suggestions I made in the Anatoxin-a Primer, and I hereby retract it in full. Misstate misstate : to state incorrectly : give a false account of false: intentionally untrue ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > It just burns Jan up that I can post examples of her lies, You wish, actually, it just shows your REPEATED lies and cheap tricks. > but she can't do the same thing to me. Think again. YOU landed yourself in court. With the below to say. First, you have NO regard to what you have done to others. One individual was responsible for a great deal of miscommunication regarding anatoxin-a, information which is still accessible on many Internet sites. Cell Tech sued Mark Thorson for posting defamatory statements about Cell Tech, its products and its personnel to various Internet or Usenet news groups. Cell Tech's lawsuit against Mr. Thorson has now been settled. As part of the settlement agreement, Mr. Thorson has posted the Retraction Statement that appears below. Although he did retract the allegations that he had been widely circulating, we all know that one cannot, with a single correct statement, undo all the harm done by many mis-statements that continue to circulate. The following is a retraction statement that Mark Thorson has posted to various newsgroups: Subject: Retraction of Anatoxin-a Primer During the last several years, I have from time to time posted to this and other newsgroups a file of information called "An Anatoxin-a Primer." I now retract the statements made in the Anatoxin-a Primer. The Anatoxin-a Primer implied that Super Blue Green Algae from Klamath Lake, produced by Cell Tech, contains anatoxin-a (a neurotoxin I characterized as addictive), and that Cell Tech deliberately avoids testing for this toxin because anatoxin-a is responsible for the effects reported by SBGA users. I have since been advised that Cell Tech conducts regular tests that would disclose anatoxin-a, and that this toxin has never been found in Super Blue Green Algae. I had no basis for the suggestions I made in the Anatoxin-a Primer, and I hereby retract it in full. Mis-state to state incorrectly : give a false account of False intentionally untrue lie untrue with intent to deceive =========== Having no basis is L Y I N G! As for Mark Probert, he ia a DISBARRED ATTORNEY. Your further lies are also noted. LIAR. YOU REPEATEDLY LIED OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER. >I merely posted the URL >to a database that had your PUBLIC information in it, the >same information anyone could have found in a phone book. Wrong. >The URL to a database is: http://www.switchboard.com >At the top of that page is says: >Telephone Directory. In that posting, you posted a link that says at the top Switchboard *People Results* >I did not, otherwise a Google search on my name and this >newsgroup for "Bryant" would turn up such a posting. Can it Mark. Anyone can clearly see this Byrant things is just another dirty trick of yours. You are a liar and you know it. > At the time >I posted it, three J. Drew's showed up in Bloomington, Well now. That was a people's results page and NOT the URLto a database that had your PUBLIC information. You went to the datebase, then you posted the results AFTER you did the searching. Now to prove the total liar, you are. You see Mark liars are sooner or later exposed. Today is your day, and most likely you won't learn, that your bringing it up over and over, is a problem with you. My asterisks added. From: Mark Thorson (nos...@sonic.net) Subject: Re: Admitting when one is wrong View this article only Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative Date: 2002-05-26 21:30:10 PST Karuna wrote: > Is this what happened? > Mark (Thorson): In July 2001, someone suggested to you, here on mha, > that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > access to several names and phone numbers, one of which might be that > person, thereby *inviting* such harrassment. > Is that true? **"Inviting" is your characterization, but I did post the link to switchboard.com, which was a simple search that yielded several names, any or none of which could have been Jan, which came from a public database.*** **And if Jan had said it that way, I would not have disputed the accuracy of what she said, except in the area of intent. *** It was more of an impulse*** decision, triggered by the previous posting in the thread ***It was as though a finger-shaped holes suddenly appeared in front of me.** ****I couldn't resist sticking my finger in it.**** At the time, it didn'tseem like a big deal, because it was just like calling up information on the phone. But I see now that it doesn't look any different than encouraging harassment, so I agree that I shouldn't have done it. On this one point, Jan, I apologize. I do not wish any third party to harass you. === Mark Thorson Sep 12 2004, 8:35 pm You said I posted your address. Not true. You said I posted search results. Not true. For me to be a liar, there must have been a LIE. YEARS LATER, YOU ARE STILL LYING! > BEWARE!! > Mark Thorson makes libellous statements and then retracts same when faced > with law suits.Being a slow learner he will always do this until he converts > to Falun Dafa. Rod. But you still haven't shown even one statement made by be which is false, much less a lie. You post a big mass of stuff, including statements made by me and statements made by other people in an attempt to give an impression that I may have lied. But you can't point to any one statement I made which is false. I've asked you many times to do this, and you can't. Will you do so now? I just gave you two examples of your lies. In each case I posted an example of a statement you made which is a lie, and then backed those up with other statements which prove that they were lies. Always with links to the originals. Why don't you do that, Jan? Why don't you post an example of a statement I made which is false? Why do you instead post a big mass of statements (including statements made by other people) in order to hide your inability to find a lie? Poor, pathetic Jan. You're so full of hate. > LIES and a retraction tell ALL one needs to know about Mark Thorson. What did I say which is a lie? Even Wakfer didn't accuse me of that. You constantly accuse people of lying, but you never back up your accusations with proof. Here is ANOTHER EXAMPLE of what proof looks like: Quoting from this ORIGINAL POSTING from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?&selm=20040924222415.01015.00001086%40mb-m15.aol.com I have stated nothing about the Catholic faith. ----- statements about Catholics from Jan's earlier postings ----- Quoting from this ORIGINAL POSTING from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?&selm=20040922214509.08241.00000819%40mb-m10.aol.com Absolutley no bigotry, no act, nor any of the desperate accusations. Eric, do show us where we are instructed to pray to saints. Where did this belief come from? It is a man made rule and the work of Satan, placing saints before Jesus Christ. Quoting from this ORIGINAL POSTING from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?&selm=20040922212212.08241.00000817%40mb-m10.aol.com The truth that praying to saints doesn't come from God, is in not way a bigot, nor prejudice. It is simply the truth. Jan Quoting from this ORIGINAL POSTING from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?&selm=20040602133702.13763.00000187%40mb-m27.aol.com Praying to saints comes from man, not God, and indeed comes from Satan. Jan Quoting from this ORIGINAL POSTING from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?&selm=20040525010815.13455.00001025%40mb-m06.aol.com I personally think the Catholics have done many things wrong. Quoting from this ORIGINAL POSTING from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20031128180805.08361.00001014%40mb-m24.aol.com There's a huge mistake. NOWHERE is man instructed to pray to ANYONE OTHER THAN GOD THROUGH JESUS HIS SON. Sadly praying to saints comes from Satan. Jan Quoting from this ORIGINAL POSTING from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20040524015357.02666.00001366%40mb-m24.aol.com All prayers to Saints bounce off the ceiling. No where did God instruct man to pray to anyone except him THROUGH his son Jesus Christ. Praying to Saints is a man made up rule, led by the help of Satan. Quoting from this ORIGINAL POSTING from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20040602133702.13763.00000187%40mb-m27.aol.com I have never mention Catholics. Praying to saints comes from man, not God, and indeed comes from Satan. Jan >> x-no-archive: yes >> [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > --Paul Wakfer Peer-reviewed journal studies have been covered on these newsgroups. Get a clue. >> x-no-archive: yes >> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >carried by LEF, particularly by the omission of negative information >about the supplement under consideration. I couldn't agree more with this. LEF's info is generally fairly good place to start. And go on from there. No single source of information is useful. But at least we KNOW that LEF is selling stuff. Too many "non-profits" are nothing more than marketing fronts for pharma and give you even WORSE information about health and disease management. I wonder if Susan works for Glaxo or BMS or something. They hate competition. Maybe she's a Karl Rove acolyte. George M. Carter > >> x-no-archive: yes > >> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > I wonder if Susan works for Glaxo or BMS or something. They hate > competition. Maybe she's a Karl Rove acolyte. Or maybe she just disagrees with someone about the quality of LEF's information. I'll say upfront, I know absolutely nothing about LEF or its products, but it's getting mighty tiresome seeing anyone who makes a criticism of almost anything at all being accused of nefarious activity; your post, for instance, made your point perfectly well before you went on to cast aspersions on someone else's motivation. Apart from the fact that you have no reason to believe that she's, for instance, working for Glaxo, it actually detracts from your argument, because it makes you look like a conspiracy loon. Cathy > George M. Carter > Or maybe she just disagrees with someone about the quality of LEF's > information. I'll say upfront, I know absolutely nothing about LEF or > its products, but it's getting mighty tiresome seeing anyone who makes > a criticism of almost anything at all being accused of nefarious > activity; your post, for instance, made your point perfectly well > before you went on to cast aspersions on someone else's motivation. Yes, which casts the OP's position in at least a questionable light. I don't care where or from whom anyone buys their supplements; I just decide which brands I want and then froogle them up for deals. I buy from several manufacturers, depending upon the product and the formulation, then the price. > Apart from the fact that you have no reason to believe that she's, for > instance, working for Glaxo, it actually detracts from your argument, > because it makes you look like a conspiracy loon. Yep. Susan You know, it never ceases to amaze me when people start bashing LEF. Okay, so they are not perfect. But don't throw the baby out with the bath water. They are very up front as to where they get their raw products from and they offer references to help support the choices and recommendations that they make, and they have helped a lot polictically. Which on both counts is far more than most companies do. If you don't agree completely with everything that they say or do, well then welcome to an imperfect world. But if you disagree with everything or most of what they say, then what in the heck are you doing here in the first place? You obviously don't belong. As for Paul, I am very grateful that he is here. He is very knowledgeable and has provided a lot of valuable input, information, and debate. If there is some particular area that you disagree with him on, he has always appeared to be very willing to debate in an intelligent and thoughful way, complete with all of the scientific references that he has based his decisions on. But just bashing him with a bunch of nonsensical dribble is certainly less than meaningful and is not productive. As a lay person, I genuinely appreciate his contributions. Chuck > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Susan > You know, it never ceases to amaze me when people start bashing LEF. > Okay, so they are not perfect. But don't throw the baby out with the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > or most of what they say, then what in the heck are you doing here in > the first place? You obviously don't belong. Doing where? I read and posted to this thread on the nutrition group. Do you even *read* your headers? I didn't bash, I offered my opinion in reply to a veiled commercial post. > As for Paul, I am very grateful that he is here. He is very > knowledgeable and has provided a lot of valuable input, information, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > and is not productive. As a lay person, I genuinely appreciate his > contributions. Chuck I don't read the group you seem to think you're posting to exclusively, and have no opinion about "Paul" or "Tom" other than wariness about those who make a living by selling only one particular brand of any product. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Doing where? I read and posted to this thread on the nutrition group. > Do you even *read* your headers? I apologize for that. I only belong to sci.life-extension. > I didn't bash, I offered my opinion in reply to a veiled commercial post. LOL! Well it sure sounded like bashing to me. > > As for Paul, I am very grateful that he is here. He is very > > knowledgeable and has provided a lot of valuable input, information, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > and have no opinion about "Paul" or "Tom" other than wariness about > those who make a living by selling only one particular brand of any product. Paul doesn't sell LEF supplements > Susan >x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >from several manufacturers, depending upon the product and the >formulation, then the price. First--apologies. I did jump the gun. Sorry Susan! And as far as their products go, the quality I cannot comment on; their prices are too high. Meanwhile, I think the information they produce is an OK place to start. George M. Carter > First--apologies. I did jump the gun. Sorry Susan! Accepted. > Meanwhile, I think the information they produce is an OK place to > start. We disagree; a seller's site is the worst place to start or consider at all, and theirs is shameful because they should know better. Susan > I wonder if Susan works for Glaxo or BMS or something. They hate > competition. Maybe she's a Karl Rove acolyte. > > Uh, no, Susan prefers to avoid using pharma products with few exceptions and prefers quality supplements instead, actually. Susan is waaaaay left of center and is just a lay person, information junkie and fervid guardian of her own health. Any time I've read an LEF protocol for a condition I have or know about, it's been sloppy crap, IM informed opinion. I considered the lack of supplement sales to be a check in favor of the LE authors decades ago, and I consider it to be all they're about now, frankly. If they held it up as a mark of questionable integrity then, who am I to dismiss their assessment? Susan >x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >left of center and is just a lay person, information junkie and fervid >guardian of her own health. Thanks for the calm reply in the face of a false accusation! >Any time I've read an LEF protocol for a condition I have or know about, >it's been sloppy crap, IM informed opinion. I think they're not that bad but then maybe I read their stuff with an eye already anticipating a marketing job and expect spin. But I do that when I read journal articles as well. The worry I have is when I don't have the opportunity to actually read the studies they cite. >I considered the lack of supplement sales to be a check in favor of the >LE authors decades ago, and I consider it to be all they're about now, >frankly. If they held it up as a mark of questionable integrity then, >who am I to dismiss their assessment? I guess I have a soft spot for LEF mainly because of Stephen Harris who used to be a scrappy and smart fighter against the idiocy of denialists who claim HIV doesn't cause AIDS. Otherwise, I despair at the idea that science has been so completely subsumed by marketing, profits and salesmanship, whether it is dietary supplements or pharmaceuticals. Or hell, even food. George M. Carter > Thanks for the calm reply in the face of a false accusation! It's a habit, one worth cultivating. > I think they're not that bad but then maybe I read their stuff with an > eye already anticipating a marketing job and expect spin. But if you aren't reading it having already read the pertinent scientific research, you're not in a position to understand how spun it is. But I do > that when I read journal articles as well. The worry I have is when I > don't have the opportunity to actually read the studies they cite. Don't read their citations, they're cherry picked for sales and often out of date; read all the available relevent science elsewhere. > I guess I have a soft spot for LEF mainly because of Stephen Harris > who used to be a scrappy and smart fighter against the idiocy of > denialists who claim HIV doesn't cause AIDS. What's that got to do with evaluating science before experimenting on your own body? > Otherwise, I despair at the idea that science has been so completely > subsumed by marketing, profits and salesmanship, whether it is dietary > supplements or pharmaceuticals. Or hell, even food. So you're willing to substitute one form of unprincipled salesmanship for another? Not my thing. Susan snip >So you're willing to substitute one form of unprincipled salesmanship >for another? Not my thing. I don't think what LEF does is as bad as what pharma does. Pharma has destroyed the integrity of the journal articles themselves by submitting -- and having approved -- articles that bear less and less resemblance to science. LEF uses extant data to support the point that supplements are good for you--and gosh, why not buy their's? I also don't have quite as negative a view of their articles as you do but I actually don't read them that often. I have read some; I can generally tell where the spin is. Definitely, there are other organizations that do a better job. I think Thorne Research, as a company, does a better job in their information. There are not enough independent journals for supplements and CAM therapy. But there are a few. I don't think they're as bad as you feel they are. Maybe if you gave a couple of examples of their more egregious writings, that would help me to understand your position. But finally, the ability for those of us making treatment choices to do so without bias, based on scientific evidence, is increasingly difficult. And rendered the more horrible by pharma's utter destruction of science in the name of profit. George M. Carter > I don't think what LEF does is as bad as what pharma does. Pharma has > destroyed the integrity of the journal articles themselves by > submitting -- and having approved -- articles that bear less and less > resemblance to science. Yeah, perfect analogy. > LEF uses extant data to support the point that supplements are good > for you--and gosh, why not buy their's? They use very selective culling of the science to support sales, IME, not legitimate reviews with integrity. Frankly, they made Very Big Deal about not trusting supplement sellers in their first book. You're turning a blind eye to what they have told you about their view of sales vs. integrity. > I also don't have quite as negative a view of their articles as you do > but I actually don't read them that often. I have read some; I can > generally tell where the spin is. Definitely, there are other > organizations that do a better job. I think Thorne Research, as a > company, does a better job in their information. I don't rely on companies, I rely on my own review of the biomedical research, and that of a few trusted others. > There are not enough independent journals for supplements and CAM > therapy. But there are a few. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > difficult. And rendered the more horrible by pharma's utter > destruction of science in the name of profit. If you make treatment choices based upon the sloppy, inaccurate cut and paste work of a supplement seller, you have more than just health problems. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > in their first book. You're turning a blind eye to what they have told > you about their view of sales vs. integrity. Are you refering to Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw or LEF?? I think LEF has always sold supplements. Durk and Sandy are completely separate from LEF. > Are you refering to Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw or LEF?? As if there were a diff? I think LEF > has always sold supplements. Durk and Sandy are completely separate > from LEF. Pearson and Shaw made it very clear in their book that you could trust their information *because* they did not sell supplements. That means they didn't/don't believe you should trust supplement sellers for your clinical recommendations or decision making. Til they saw how much others profited from those supplements, is my guess. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Susan Okay, point well taken. Durk and Sandy seem to be much more associated with Life Enhancement products. Will Block, one of the founders use to work for LEF until they had some kind of falling out. > Okay, point well taken. Durk and Sandy seem to be much more associated > with Life Enhancement products. Will Block, one of the founders use to > work for LEF until they had some kind of falling out. If so, it must have been a long time ago. In the 1980s, Will Block was one of the founders of a company called Life Services Supplements, based in New Jersey. There apparently was some kind of a falling out in the early to mid 1990s, when LSS was completely taken over by the other founder. It was then that Will Block helped to found LEP. LSS, in the meantime, began marketing a special line of foods known as Keto foods and dropped out of supplement manufacturing. LSS ultimately went bankrupt. Bob > > Okay, point well taken. Durk and Sandy seem to be much more associated > > with Life Enhancement products. Will Block, one of the founders use to [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Bob I remember LSS. They sold a lot of Durk And Sandy products. That was a long time ago. But I think Life Enhancement is still around. I actually spoke to Will Block on the phone one time about something (spironolactone). I called back again and his wife answered and she got pretty upset that I had their number, haha! Oh well. She identified herself as Dr. Block so I guess she is a physician. Or a minister. > > > Okay, point well taken. Durk and Sandy seem to be much more associated > > > with Life Enhancement products. Will Block, one of the founders use to [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > pretty upset that I had their number, haha! Oh well. She identified > herself as Dr. Block so I guess she is a physician. > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Don't read their citations, they're cherry picked for sales and often > out of date; read all the available relevent science elsewhere. My father just had open heart surgery. Here is an LEF protocol. Can you recommend any better ones? If so I would appreciate it. http://www.lef.org/protocols/heart_circulatory/coronary_artery_disease_atheroscl erosis_01.htm >>x-no-archive: yes >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > http://www.lef.org/protocols/heart_circulatory/coronary_artery_disease_atheroscl erosis_01.htm I am not about to share my strong opinions about what a heart patient should do in prescriptive manner here. I will say that the LDL (the worst lipid predictor of CVD) recommendation of below 100 is flat out misguided and is a number promulgated by statin selllers, the only ones to benefit from such a target, though the TGL and HDL ones are on target. Lowering homocysteine has never proven to improve CVD risk. The biggest, most unforgivable oversight is pantethine; go to Medline and search on "pantethine and lipids." You'd be a dope to take my word or the LEF's without doing your own research. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > Susan I am still confused about homocysteine. But thanks for the tip on pantetheine. I will look it up. > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Susan It's well established that they've never taken back a single "recommendation". They have put iron in, taken it out, put copper in, taken it out of the LEF mix. They will do close to sell things. OTOH by and large they sell qualiy products and inspect the places where there products are manufactured. Yes, is an occasional product X which contains little if any X (and we all know that a noted university analyzed Resveratrol products from many sources and found little if any Resveratrol as the stuff needs to be prepared and kept with no exposure to oxygen) and product Y is mislabeled and you're getting 3 isomers, not one. In the suppliment business they are one of the standard bearers for quality, though there's lots of debate whether or not all of the ingredients in LEF mix don't fight with each other. If you're asking this question, you're interested in the answer. Be ready, willing and able to do your own independent research on LEF's website and VRP.com's website plus Pubmed. Back in 1989, I suddenly came down with Raynaud's Syndrome. First one, then another of my fingers became freezing cold and turned purple. When I went to the rheumatologist, tests came back indicating scleroderma - one of those horrible connective tissue diseases for which there is NO CURE. Doctor said nothing could be done - that there were some drugs like penacillamine, but they had terrible side effects and I wasn't bad enough off to use them. A friend was a drug rep working for Merck, and he gave me the Merck Manual for Rheumatic & Arthritic diseases (something they normally give to MDs) and told me to look into the "free radical" connection. That they were finding that "free radicals" had connections to a lot of diseases. Remember this was 1989 - not too many folks were talking about "free radicals" and anti-oxidents back then. But Durk and Sandy sure were, I bought their Life Extension books and started reading up on free radicals and what I could do to quench their activity. I settled upon a "coctail" of beta-carotene, selenium, vitamin C, vitamin E, and cysteine. I was taking mega doses and about 30 pills a day. But within 2 weeks all symptoms disappeared. So I stopped taking them and the symptoms came back. I went through this process several more times and finally decided that the supplements were truly helping and stuck with them. Was I ever glad when I discovered "Oxy-Quenchers" from TwinLabs (though I hear TwinLabs no longer exists.) Anyhow, they must have been reading Durk & Sandy's work because their supplement combined what I was taking in exactly the dosage I was taking it. I could now take just 5 pills a day. Many other companies had combo pills, but Durk & Sandy had explained how it was important to take 3 x as much Vitamin C as cysteine otherwise the cysteine would reduce to cystine and that would cause problems, etc. The other combo pills were not in the proper combination. Anyway, years went by, and my major symptoms were under control, but the disease was still progressing and if I went off the Oxy-Quenchers everything would come back with a vengence. It was now the mid-nineties. Then a miracle happened. A new anti-oxident came on the market: alpha lipoic acid. It was unique in that it was both fat and water soluble. I started taking alpha lipoic acid from Life Extension Products in Petaluma, California. 250mg 3 times a day. Wonderful things started happening. It felt like the disease was reversing itself. I also started cold diffusing Eucalyptus Oil because I had developed chronic bronchitis with the disease. My respiratory problems cleared up. Finally, a few years ago, my tests came back totally NEGATIVE as if I had never had this incurable disease at all. I haven't had bronchitis since, and I'm off all supplements except for Glucosamine/MSN for mild arthritis and the use of the Essential Oils which I find health affirming. The scleroderma is gone for good as best I can tell. Praise and thanks to Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw and their groundbreaking Life Extension work. > Was I ever glad when I discovered "Oxy-Quenchers" from TwinLabs (though > I hear TwinLabs no longer exists.) Twinlabs is alive and well as a company, producing high quality supplements. Many of the supplements I buy are theirs. Anyhow, they must have been reading > Durk & Sandy's work because their supplement combined what I was taking > in exactly the dosage I was taking it. Uh, no, that's not my understanding. Twinlab's Steve Blechman was reading the research and formulating from that. In fact, in the original book, where Pearson and Shaw made great noises about proof of their trustworthiness because they didn't sell a line of supplements, they recommended TwinLabs' products very highly. > Then a miracle happened. A new anti-oxident came on the market: alpha > lipoic acid. It was unique in that it was both fat and water soluble. > I started taking alpha lipoic acid from Life Extension Products in > Petaluma, California. 250mg 3 times a day. Wonderful things started > happening. It felt like the disease was reversing itself. It's very well studied in the peer reviewed literature; that's how I began taking it as an insulin sensitizer. > I also started cold diffusing Eucalyptus Oil because I had developed > chronic bronchitis with the disease. My respiratory problems cleared [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Praise and thanks to Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw and their > groundbreaking Life Extension work. Uh, no. Thanks to the researchers who performed the original science and published it. I'm sure Pearson and Shaw have been well compensated monetarily for popularizing the literature years ago for those incapable of searching and comprehending it themselves. OTOH, they must no think so, since they seem to be primarily supplement sellers now, the very thing they preached against in their original work. Susan > x-no-archive: yes LOL! Why? Ashamed of what you write? It does not work. Archives can be archived! >> Was I ever glad when I discovered "Oxy-Quenchers" from TwinLabs (though >> I hear TwinLabs no longer exists.) [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > Susan > I'm sure Pearson and Shaw have been well compensated monetarily for > popularizing the literature years ago for those incapable of searching > and comprehending it themselves. OTOH, they must no think so, since > they seem to be primarily supplement sellers now, the very thing they > preached against in their original work. Actually, to be strictly accurate, Durk and Sandy still do not sell supplements. What they have done is to license some supplement manufacturers to produce and sell products that they have designed. They claim that they did this out of concern that some supplement manufacturers were selling improperly formulated products and then claiming that the products were what Durk and Sandy had talked about in their books. Bob > Actually, to be strictly accurate, Durk and Sandy still do not sell > supplements. I'm sure that's strictly accurate, if they're not being compensated by the licensees. If they are, it isn't. Nor does it negate the fact that their position used to be that selling supplements would diminish credibility. What they have done is to license some supplement > manufacturers to produce and sell products that they have designed. They > claim that they did this out of concern that some supplement > manufacturers were selling improperly formulated products and then > claiming that the products were what Durk and Sandy had talked about in > their books. Whereas in the past, they just recommended those they knew to be of high quality, such as TwinLabs (I'm just an occasional customer, not affiliated) and some others. Susan > What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? Them seem to have > some good advise and good products. Is there a better choice for high > quality supplements? Their web site is That sounds very commercial to me. If you have a Wal-Mart store near you buy Centrum's multi-vitamin and mineral supplement. There are even cheaper multi-V&M supplements very much like Centrum on the same shelves. LW Re-Start - 7/5/06 - 170lbs Today - 154.5 lbs Goal - 130 lbs Height: 5'6" Female. Age: 61 Don't worry about what people think, they don't do it very often. =================================== > > What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? Them seem to have > > some good advise and good products. Is there a better choice for high [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > buy Centrum's multi-vitamin and mineral supplement. There are even cheaper > multi-V&M supplements very much like Centrum on the same shelves. LOL! Centrum?? That's a joke, right? > > That sounds very commercial to me. If you have a Wal-Mart store near you > > buy Centrum's multi-vitamin and mineral supplement. There are even cheaper > > multi-V&M supplements very much like Centrum on the same shelves. > > LOL! Centrum?? That's a joke, right? So you pay more for the same thing? Guess you have money to burn! :-p In comparisons, many vitamins/minerals (the basics) are probably the same no matter who makes them. Some companies may be a nudge 'better' because of their sources and or they dont use any artificial fillers, or are vegetarian based etc, but when it comes right down to it most are basically the same. From cheaper to more expensive, it all depends on the extras you are looking for in a complex vitamin and or not looking for added to it. To the OP, compare the ingredients and serving size, as you may be taking more of the cheaper version (what you percieve to be cheaper that is) than say a more expensive version that has more per serving (more cost effective alto it appears more expensive). The one thing about Centrum vitamins (as their new ads touts) is to make sure the vitamins/minerals are 'helpers' to each other. Many people dont know if you take vitamin whatever you need to also have enough of another vitamin/mineral to have your body absorb it properly. So as vitamins go, Centrum is not a 'joke', not a poormans vitamin, but only one of many choices for those who dont know much about vitamins/minerals only that they should be taking one. Its a good place to start. joanne snip >The one thing about Centrum vitamins (as their new ads touts) is to >make sure the vitamins/minerals are 'helpers' to each other. Yes, but there's so little of most vitamins that the stuff is basically overpriced placebo. Centrum is crap. George M. Carter compare the ingredients and serving > size, as you may be taking more of the cheaper version (what you > percieve to be cheaper that is) than say a more expensive version that > has more per serving (more cost effective alto it appears more > expensive). Here are the ingredients for Centrum Silver. $14.99 for 150 tabs. Vitamin C 60 mg 100 Vitamin D 400 IU 100 Vitamin E 45 IU 150 Vitamin K 10 mcg 13 Thiamin (B1) 1.5 mg 100 Riboflavin (B2) 1.7 mg 100 Niacin (B3) 20 mg 100 Vitamin B6 3 mg 150 Folate,Folic Acid,Folacin 400 mcg 100 Vitamin B12 25 mcg 417 Biotin 30 mcg 10 Pantothenic acid 10 mg 100 Calcium 200 mg 20 Phosphorus 48 mg 5 Iodine 150 mcg 100 Magnesium 100 mg 25 Zinc 15 mg 100 Selenium 20 mcg 29 Copper 2 mg 100 Manganese 2 mg 100 Chromium 150 mcg 125 Molybdenum 75 mg 100 Chloride 72 mg 2 Potassium 80 mg 2 Nickel 5 mcg * Silicon 2 mg * Vanadium 10 mcg * Boron 150 mcg * *************************************************************** I can get 60 One Per Day tabs from LEF for 13.99 (2 month supply) Vitamin A (as 20% beta-carotene and 80% palmitate) 5000 IU Vitamin C (as ascorbic acid, niacinamide and calcium 500 mg ascorbates) Vitamin D (as cholecalciferol) 400 IU Vitamin E (as D-alpha tocopherol succinate) 200 IU Thiamin (Vitamin B1) (as thiamine HCI) 75 mg Riboflavin (Vitamin B2) 50 mg Niacin (Vitamin B3) (as niacinamide ascorbate) 50 mg Vitamin B6 (as pyridoxine HCI) 75 mg Folic acid 800 mcg Vitamin B12 (as cyanocobalamin) 300 mcg Biotin 300 mcg Pantothenic acid (as D-calcium pantothenate) 100 mg Calcium (from dicalcium phosphate, 20 mg D-calcium pantothenate, and calcium ascorbate) Iodine (from Atlantic kelp) 150 mcg Magnesium (as magnesium oxide) 100 mg Zinc (as OptiZinc® Zinc DL-methionine complex) 30 mg Selenium (as L-selenomethionine) 100 mcg Manganese (as manganese gluconate) 2 mg Chromium (as chromium polynicotinate) 200 mcg Molybdenum (as molybdenum amino acid chelate) 100 mcg Potassium (as potassium citrate) 25 mg Alpha-carotene 50 mcg Boron (as boron amino acid chelate) 3 mg Choline bitartrate 23.9 mg Inositol 50 mg Biolut Marigold Extract (Tagetes erecta L.) (flowers) 11 mg [std. to 45% free Lutein equivalent (5 mg), 2% zeaxanthin (220 mcg)] Lycopene (as Lyc-O-Mato® tomato extract) 2 mg PABA (para para - aminobenzoic acid) 30 mg Look at some of the basic ingredients of B vitamins and C and E etc and figure out just how many Centrums that you would have to swallow to get those doses. Then consider all of the ingredients that are not included in Centrum. And then consider that to get the levels of b vitamins in LEF's One Per Day, you would be taking that many times more of the amounts of A and minerals etc. Can you imagine taking, say, 100mgs of copper a day? > What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? I write articles for their mag, I use their supps, and do some consulting work for them. I have recommended LEF for years. >> What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? > > I write articles for their mag, I use their supps, and do some consulting > work for them. I have recommended LEF for years. I highly recommend LENutri.com instead of the Life Extension Foundation; they don't have a "mag" nor as glitzy promotional materials; but they do have a number of potent high quality; several unavailable elsewhere Life Extension and Life Enhancement products for a helluvalot cheaper then lef.'s prices. Then again I could be biased. Thanks/Best Regards, Mike LENutri http://www.lenutri.com/ 856-347-8070 I highly recommend you UTFSE on Smil2le.biz and Michael Rizzar, owner of Smil2le.biz, now Mike of LENutri. I have some major problems with the way LEF does business, but Bill Faloon is not a bipolar who goes off his meds, uses the proceeds of sales to self medicate with street drugs and says "screw the customer". Check the archives, then decide. Now, not the eBay archives. The Google groups archives. > >> What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > http://www.lenutri.com/ > 856-347-8070 > I highly recommend you UTFSE on Smil2le.biz and Michael Rizzar, owner of > Smil2le.biz, now Mike of LENutri. It was called smi2le.biz and someone bought the domain the day it expired; I could have kept it but have no current use/plan for it though I still own smi2le.org, saxc.com and a number of other domains that will rock your little world some day. My handle while at smi2le on usenet was Michael Rizzer not Rizzar or Rza or even Razor. I have some major problems with the way > LEF does business, but Bill Faloon is not a bipolar who goes off his meds, What is bipolar? Is that a Jim Hendrix Song? > uses the proceeds of sales to self medicate with street drugs What street drugs? When where how do you know this information? and says > "screw the customer". Check the archives, then decide. Now, not the eBay > archives. The Google groups archives. Yes, check them I, Michael Donohue have had a good record doing business on the internet for over 10 years now; I made a much larger profit then amazon.com (my main competitor at that time) for the time I was in business in 1996 but decided to explore other things......... What can we search up on Tom Pall; what do you do for a living and why should anyone trust what you say? And who or what I screw is none of your business; LENutri doesn't even deal with protrected consumers we sell to researchers and people into self-awareness,improvement, life-extensions etc.; People who are ready and willing to take responsibility for their own lives,decisions and actions. if they are interested in me personally I am single 29 heterosexual and my number is on the site. >>> In article <jaulf216p9fnph2ou82p73inr958vb8muf@4ax.com>, bob@notmail.com > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >> http://www.lenutri.com/ >> 856-347-8070 > Yes, check them I, Michael Donohue have had a good record doing business > on the internet for over 10 years now; I made a much larger profit then > amazon.com (my main competitor at that time) for the time I was in > business in 1996 As the resident stock market guy here, I'll chime in. Amazon was not profitable until about 4 years ago, so as long as you didn't lose money, you made more than Amazon, up until maybe 2002. Anyone who would resort to this kind of meaningless and deceptive comparison as a way to gain legitimacy is making questionable choices in business right off the bat. >> Yes, check them I, Michael Donohue have had a good record doing business >> on the internet for over 10 years now; I made a much larger profit then [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > to this kind of meaningless and deceptive comparison as a way to gain > legitimacy is making questionable choices in business right off the bat. I have used paypal and ebay and shopped at amazon in the last year; they are all pretty much the best at their main market. They're could be something much better for all concerned if it wasn't for some BrainLosT "Resident Stock Guy" who produces nothing value and continually "contributes" questionable information to productive and/or wealthy humans attempting to turn their blood from red to green. Regards, Mike http://www.LENutri.com/ >>> Yes, check them I, Michael Donohue have had a good record doing >>> business on the internet for over 10 years now; I made a much larger [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Mike > http://www.LENutri.com/ Doug, Sorry that wasn't meant at you... I think it was just some random angst..... I didn't make that much in 96 or 97 selling computer programming books; Alot of the customers came from compuserves then well populated forums for computer programmers; moreso then usenet.....I did turn a profit though; while amazon lost money..... They also charged more money then me while getting their books cheaper due to higher volume purchasing... I think this might have gone way off topic here... Mike, You were off your meds and Jeff came in to fix things up for you. He acted as Customer Service before the day you took a fit and threw him out. Jeff reported extensively right here and on various Yahoo groups what you were doing, how you were acting and what you were saying. Try to think back through the haze of Jeff Whitmore, Jeff@Smil2le.biz at the time. > > I highly recommend you UTFSE on Smil2le.biz and Michael Rizzar, owner of > > Smil2le.biz, now Mike of LENutri. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > > Yes, check them > Mike, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > doing, how you were acting and what you were saying. Try to think back > through the haze of Jeff Whitmore, Jeff@Smil2le.biz at the time. Whether or not it's true, using a mental health history as a tool to try and slander someone is despicable. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Susan Mental history? This is the way Mike ran his business for the last 6 months of it. I'm not slandering Mike. I am warning potential customers about how he's done business in the past. It's not an issue of his having a mental/physical condition per se. It's a fact that for 6 months he took in money but didn't send out product to many customers, particularly those who sent money in forms which prevented them from charging back. History tends to repeat itself. Once again, I'm not slandering Mike and am not trying to pounce on his disorder. That he went off his meds once, turned to street drugs and kept saying and kept doing what he said, "screw the customer" should be taken into account. If he did it once, how do we know when he's done it again? How will you know that the product you get is contaminated or has been improperly stored? Until we were told the truth about what had gone on, none of us customers knew what was happening until Jeff revealed it to us all. > Mental history? This is the way Mike ran his business for the last 6 months > of it. I'm not slandering Mike. I am warning potential customers about how [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > gone on, none of us customers knew what was happening until Jeff revealed it > to us all. I think the history of bad business practices and screwing customers would be sufficient warning without discussing any psychiatric problems. Susan >> x-no-archive: yes >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > money but didn't send out product to many customers, particularly those who > sent money in forms which prevented them from charging back. This is an outright lie. 99+% of my orders came in thru credit card or paypal........I do not have to explain myself or any of my actions; anyone who ever did business with any company I have owned/ran in the last 10 years and did not receive products they paid for can e-mail me here or at problems@lenutri.com and give me a little information and I will give you products/money back +++ etc... The people I'm looking for to be our customers see what's really going on and are looking to LENutri to come out with the latest and greatest in Life extension, nootropic and related products etc. Check out our website as we will have new stuff coming out regularly and are going to push the envelope as far as these types of products are concerned until we receive a letter from an agency that says we can't sell a particular item; If such agencies violate decency and steal taxmoney to monitor and/or invade our labs again we will use any and all means we have to make sure they are prosecuted/sued and press releases are circulated about their unethical actions and the money that was spent when we were openly agreeable to doing things in civilized ways. Thanks, Mike http://www.LENutri.com/ History tends > to repeat itself. Once again, I'm not slandering Mike and am not trying to > pounce on his disorder. That he went off his meds once, turned to street [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > gone on, none of us customers knew what was happening until Jeff revealed it > to us all. > Mike, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > doing, how you were acting and what you were saying. Try to think back > through the haze of Jeff Whitmore, Jeff@Smil2le.biz at the time. Tom, What can we search up on Tom Pall; what do you do for a living and why should anyone trust what/anything you say? Regards, Mike LENutri There is much I could say about Jeff but he makes himself an easy target and I for one would rather avoid swimming in that sewer even though it would be very easy to score a few points for myself and against the business Jeff started when I suspended him without pay for 2 weeks.... after telling him many times that he could come back to work in a few weeks after I took control of somethings and got the business on track he would not leave the place and I had to physically remove him from it (he then threw himself at the stairwell hoping to somehow get injured or something but I caught/held him back so he didn't get hurt.) >>> What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Then again I could be biased. Ya THINK? Susan > What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? Them seem to have > some good advise and good products. Is there a better choice for high [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Bob LEF's primary focus is synthetically manufactured pharmaceutical grade isolates as opposed to food-grade nutrients and their naturally-occuring synergists. Faloon's nutraceutical bent seems awfully quick to accept a consensus view based on science that has been persuasive, but without benefit of giving equal time to other viewpoints. The nutritive value of soy in human health comes to mind. This seems to move LEF in the direction of the "magic pill" approach typical of the pharmaceutical crowd. Even that, however, is light years ahead of the trial and error drug-based "treatment." I belief LEF products are good and useful. I use their Se-methylselenocysteine because of its unique bioavailability for synthesis of glutathione peroxidase (supported by studies) and because I couldn't find it elsewhere. In the majority of cases, though, you can find the same products of equal quality for less. As a medium for popularizing the cold hard facts of nutritional science with appropriate scientific references, I don't think anyone does it better. In terms of a more holistic context in which to interpret and use this information, that requires a more creative approach than LEF has yet explored. PeterB > > What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? Them seem to have > > some good advise and good products. Is there a better choice for high [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > PeterB I meant to add that LEF has been proactive in their defense of consumer rights in terms of access to dietary supplements (ie., opposing the misuse of science during development of guidelines for Codex), and that also puts them high on my list of trusted supplement makers. PeterB I agree completely. They have been very proactive in helping our freedoms and helping to educate the consumer on the political issues. > > > What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? Them seem to have > > > some good advise and good products. Is there a better choice for high [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > PeterB I think you are being very fair in your assessment. > > What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? Them seem to have > > some good advise and good products. Is there a better choice for high [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > PeterB > I think you are being very fair in your assessment. Thank you, Chuck. > > > What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? Them seem to have > > > some good advise and good products. Is there a better choice for high [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > > > PeterB There is plenty of good information on LEF's site, but there is clearly a conflict of interest involved, at least the way I see the phrase "conflict of interest." On my site, there is nothing I am selling and you don't have to register to read the articles and posts. LEF's general idea about health may be correct, but what they don't tell you is that if you avoid certain foods, you don't need expensive supplements, and may not need any supplements at all. My great grandfather lived to be over 100 and only started taking a basic multi when he was very old, for example. Interestingly, after all of my years of research on this subject, my diet is now very similar to my great grandfather's. You can read my articles, etc., at: http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-/ I will take a look. > There is plenty of good information on LEF's site, but there is clearly > a conflict of interest involved, at least the way I see the phrase [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > You can read my articles, etc., at: > http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-/ > I think you are being very fair in your assessment. Thank you, Chuck. > > > What do you think about Life Extension Foundation? Them seem to have > > > some good advise and good products. Is there a better choice for high [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > > > PeterB |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.