Looking for the complete story about LifeVantage Protandim? Read Lazy Man and Money's post about Protandim.

Debunking the “Protandim Study” in American Heart Association’s Circulation

Many Protandim distributors point to a study published in American Heart Association's Circulation as proof that the American Heart Association (AHA) says that Protandim works.

If you don't read the study and just see the words "Protandim", "American Heart Association", and "Circulation journal" it would be easy to come to that conclusion. However, if you read the study, you are likely to come up with a lot more questions than answers. I've put them in a FAQ form:

Q: Did they study Protandim?

A: No, the study was Right Heart Failure and Chronic Pulmonary Artery Pressure Elevation. The background and the conclusion of the study do not mention Protandim in any way.

Q: The study was done on humans, right?

A: Not it was done on rats, kind of. The quote that got my attention was "A mechanical animal model..."

Q: Was Protandim used in the study

A: Not entirely. If you read the study, an "alcohol-based extract of Protandim" was used. LifeVantage does not sell an alcohol-based extract of Protandim.

Q: The rats ate the Protandim just like a human would, right?
A: No, they had it injected in them (see intraperitoneally). LifeVantage does not seem to sell an injectable form of Protandim. I can find nothing on LifeVantage's website this being a typical delivery method of the product.

Q: The amount of Protandim that was used was similar to what a human would consume, right?
A: Nope. Friend of ProtandimScams, Vogel, explains it best here:

"The rats in the study weighed 200 grams. Protandim was first extracted in ethanol and then 25 mg of the ethanol extract was injected into the abdomen. In medicine, dosing calculations for humans are based on a presumed average body weight of 70 kg. The normal 'dose' of Protandim for humans is one 675 mg capsule (so the dose is 675 mg per 70 kg body weight or roughly 9.64 mg/kg). The rats in the Protandim study received 25 mg per 200 g bodyweight -- this corresponds to a dose of 125 mg/kg.

In other words, the dose that the rats received in this study was roughly 13 times higher than what humans would take. Compounding the dosage problem is the fact that (a) an ethanol extract was used, which would be more potent than taking it in non-extracted form, and (b) it was directly injected into the abdomen which would greatly increase bioavailability as compared to oral ingestion and would result in an even greater dosage inequity. Thus, this study was poorly conceived and is utterly irrelevant to humans. In order to ingest a comparable dose to what the rats in this study received, a person would have to consume about a full bottle (30 capsules at $50) of Protandim per day."

Recap: The study's purpose was unrelated to Protandim. It didn't involve Protandim's intended audience. The form of Protandim wasn't delivered how the intended audience is supposed to use it. The amount of Protandim was many, many times the suggested amount for its intended audience.

The only conclusion one can make is that this study has zero relevance to its intended audience - humans. It is much more important to focus on the clinical trials of Protandim, which are very disappointing.

Originally posted 2012-03-10 18:44:53.

This post involves:

Protandim Studies

... and focuses on:

, ,

Looking for the complete story about LifeVantage Protandim? Read Lazy Man and Money's post about Protandim.
33 Responses to “Debunking the “Protandim Study” in American Heart Association’s Circulation”
  1. » Protandim Scam? Says:

    […] and was many, many times more product than the suggested amount for the consumer. (Read more: Debunking the “Protandim Study” in American Heart Association’s Circulation.) In every important way, the journal article is irrelevant to consumers, but Protandim marketers […]

  2. Fact Gathering Mission Says:

    Hi there, I have found this site very helpful. I’ve also come across several more helpful sites through links you have provided. Thank you! I just went to a friend’s presentation last night and, being the natural skeptic that I am, immediately went home and started investigating. I do have one question that I haven’t been able to find an answer to. You may have already answered it and I just did not see it or understand it. If that is the case, I apologize in advance. What I do not understand is why Protandim was even used in this mice study? If the purpose of the study had nothing to do with Protandim, why and how did Protandim even make an appearance? Was it because one of the scientists doing the study was somehow connected to John McCord or LifeVantage? And what was the point of injecting these mice with a Protandim extract? I am truly just on a fact gathering mission here, as I know my friend will approach me again at some point and ask if I’ve considered purchasing/selling. I want to be able to debunk this study completely and perhaps persuade him to give the whole thing up and minimize his losses. Thanks in advance.

  3. protandimscams Says:

    Thanks for the comment FGM,

    If you click the link to the study you’ll see that LifeVantage’s Joe McCord does appear as an author to the study.

    As Dr. Harriet Hall said here on a different study: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/brief-update-protandim/

    “No, on second thought, I think I do get it: they want to prove, by any means possible, no matter how circuitous or far-fetched, that Protandim does something, anything, antioxidantish (not a word? Well it is now!). Then they can dredge the literature for every condition where a possible correlation with oxidative stress has been mentioned. Then they can try to convince customers they should take Protandim for all those conditions.”

    This is all part of the LifeVantage marketing plan, which the inventor of Protandim went public with. I explain that in this article: Paul Myhill, Inventor of Protandim, Admits Science is for Marketing

  4. Fact Gathering Mission Says:

    Thanks for taking the time to respond to my question. I did try to trudge through the actual study to read about Protandim and its use. I can clearly see that Protandim seems to be a side note in the whole thing, not the focus of the study at all.
    Maybe it is just my lack of knowledge regarding how studies work and are initiated, but how did McCord become an author/consultant in this study? Is it because of an affiliation or friendship with one of the other authors? Or maybe because he paid to have the Protandim extract be a small element of the study? Thanks again for fielding my questions.

  5. Fact Gathering Mission Says:

    I know I may be focusing on the wrong thing. But Protandim seems to have such a weak purpose in the study that, for me, it calls into question how he even came to be a part of the study at all.

  6. protandimscams Says:

    Typically a study is done and then submitted to journals. In this case it seems like the study was done with the intention of showing something unrelated to Protandim itself and that was interesting enough for the Circulation Journal.

  7. Vogel Says:

    The criteria for authorship of scientific publications (see ICMJE Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals) dictate that in order to be included as an author, one must have made substantial contributions to the design, execution, analysis, and/or writing of the paper. Authorship should never be conferred to someone for merely having provided a product for a study or for just engaging in background discussions.

    Now in practice, the rules are not always heeded. In some cases, authorship is given out to senior people in a research group who have made no significant contributions whatsoever to that particular project. It’s often done for strategic reasons — ie, members of a research group or department agree to give each authorship even when they have made no contributions to each other’s research. This enables an individual to basically double their publication output, albeit dishonestly. It is also sometimes done to get a more widely-known and influential name on a paper that might otherwise not be accepted for publication by the journal.

    In the case of the Circulation study, there is no doubt that those few blurbs about Protandim were slipped in because there there was some form of reciprocity or patronage going on behind the scenes. Either money changed hands or there was some promise of reward (financial or otherwise) down the line. McCord was calling in a favor from a friend or promising to do some kind of favor in return. Of that, I have zero doubt.

  8. Fact Gathering Mission Says:

    Ok thanks. I also did a lot more reading the last few days and discovered some other things about LifeVantage “encouraging” studies and such. This site, Vogel’s comments and Lazyman’s site have all been invaluable. I appreciate the solid links you all have provided.

  9. Fact Gathering Mission Says:

    Thanks for the info Vogel. I appreciate you taking the time to respond. I suspected that’s what was going on with that study. I have to mention again how great this site has been for finding solid information on Protandim and LifeVantage. You all have done a great service by centralizing everything one would need to know to make an informed decision. I have since spoken to my friend about what I’ve found. Unfortunately, he’s still convinced the product and company are worthwhile, which just amazes me.

  10. Penny Parker Says:

    My dad is a heart patient, had open hard surgery 6 years ago and has Diabetes. He has been taking Protandim for a year with unbelievable “positive results”. Their are thousands of other testimonials with many different diseases and Protandim.

    If your going to do your research don’t go to the internet gossip or disgruntal past distributors. Go To PUBMED.COM and type in Protandim, also look at 27 of the Top Universities in the Country that are doing there on research with Protandim and are using their own funding.

    Use the product for yourself and if you are still a “doubting thomas” have a blood test after using the product for 30 days, the proof is in Protandim!!!!!!

  11. protandimscams Says:

    Penny, you are providing that internet gossip – you have not giving any verifiable information about your dad. This website isn’t run by a past distributor, so it is unclear who you are referring to. As for the Pubmed.com, I challenge you instead go to ClinicalTrials.gov and do a search for Protandim, only failed items show up.

    No universities are actually doing any studies on Protandim, one individual at a particular university may be, but no universities are supporting Protandim research. No university funding is actually being used for Protandim research.

    Due to the placebo effect, trying the product itself isn’t a good test. Wait for LifeVantage to begin clinical trials and gets FDA approval. The fact that they haven’t even tried to get it approved shows that LifeVantage itself doesn’t believe that their product works.

  12. Fact Gathering Mission Says:

    Penny, as I have mentioned above, this site is one of only a very few others that provide links to legitimate sources of information about Protandim. If you would just take one hour of your time to go to these links and read the information, there is no way you would not be embarrassed to post what you just did.

  13. protandimscams Says:

    Thanks FGM and Cyberxion,

    FGM, I’m glad that you recognize that I’ve tried to meticulously link to authoritative sources to prove my points. That was a much better response, more succinct and to the point than my repsonse.

  14. Skeptic Says:

    I just took your challenge to look up “Protandim” on ClinicalTrials.gov, so I could look at the “failed” studies.

    What I found made me question the truthfulness of statements made by “protandimscams.”

    There are, as of today, 3 studies listed. 2 of these studies have not gotten underway, and the third is unclear whether it has begun. None of these three studies have any results, either positive or negative. The studies simply haven’t been done. And in the one case, the study is only to last for 7 days, when all of the literature states that to be effective Protandim must be taken for at least 30 days. So the very premise of the study is set up for failure, should it ever get underway.

  15. protandimscams Says:


    If you read the clinical trials you’d see the third one (http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00936000) lines up with this published study (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22268125). This study did have negative results… the placebo group performed better than the Protandim group. In fact it was such a spectacular failure in the very design and execution that it made this reputable independent doctor laugh… in her own words. Ironically, that’s the one that was to last for 7 days. Pretty odd that McCord’s own connections at U.C. Denver would set it up for failure.

    As for the other two studies, I think we are using the word “failed” in two different contexts. All the studies are tied to LifeVantage either through LifeVantage’s Joe McCord’s connections at the University of Colorado at Denver or explicitly mention LifeVantage as a collaborator. One hasn’t been updated in three years. The other was withdrawn very quickly after it was designed if we are to use the received and last updated dates (presumably the last update was the withdrawal).

    I don’t understand how you can classify the execution of these as anything but a failure. If they weren’t connected to LifeVantage, I could understand how one would categorize them as inconclusive and neither positive nor negative. However, since they are clearly linked to LifeVantage, the inability to even follow-through reflects as a failure on the part of LifeVantage. Since Paul Myhill, Inventor of Protandim, Admits Science is for Marketing one can imagine a scenario where LifeVantage didn’t like where things were going and abandoned them. I’ll admit that is just educated speculation for the most likely scenario on my part, I have no evidence of this being the case.

    Your questioning of my truthfulness, when I did not lie, makes me question your critical thinking skills.

  16. Bonnie Says:

    Your truthfullness website, this one, cannot be vetted on http://www.scholar.google.com therefore, how can I beleive anything you say when you can not prove anything. I know toooooooo many people that have benefited by this product. Sorry you got burned by somebody so that you spend your days trashing a company that has set those of us who have suffered under the FDA drugs and sided effects that have put us in wheelchairs and crippled us, and killed us for the worship of the all mighty dollar company that being the FDA. I am guessing you work for them and they are paying you to do this. (liars go to hell my friend check it out in the Bible) This product works and it doesnt matter how it got here. I pray it never goes away. This is a miracle from God.

  17. Bonnie Says:

    Right out of the American Heart Association journal online: http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/120/20/1951.full?sid=b8356683-65bb-4830-b5b0-0884f79ded7f

    In this study, we show that chronic progressive RV pressure overload per se does not lead to severe RV dysfunction and that RV failure in experimental PAH is associated with myocardial fibrosis and capillary rarefaction. We also demonstrate that RV failure is associated with decreased RV VEGF protein expression and impaired myocardial VEGF transcription despite increased HIF-1α protein levels. We further show that induction of Nrf2 by the herbal supplement Protandim prevents cardiac oxidative stress, preserves HO-1 and VEGF expression and myocardial capillary density, and prevents RV failure without modifying lung angioproliferation.

  18. Bonnie Says:

    This website recommending you to read the Lazy man’s debunking of Protandim is like two liars telling each other how big a fish they caught when neither of them have ever gone fishing. Neither of them have tried Protandim. And I can find fault in every drug created by man. Oh, wait, I noticed that the lawyers on TV are doing that now. And, all those commercials that advertise those drugs, and those potential side effects that require that you take more of their drugs, until it kills you. People wake up Protandim is not dangerous no matter what this site proclaims, it never killed anyone and before you invest all of your time debunking this product spend a few lousy dollars and try the product. If you want we can talk about how your food is killing you!! GMO= no nutrition pesticides means chemicals in your body. Products you use to clean yourself-filled with chemicals. So ask yourself this, how long before the engine quits running in a car when you put sugar in the tank. I rest my case

  19. protandimscams Says:

    From the Google Scholar about page:

    “Google Scholar provides a simple way to broadly search for scholarly literature. From one place, you can search across many disciplines and sources: articles, theses, books, abstracts and court opinions, from academic publishers, professional societies, online repositories, universities and other web sites.”

    This website, like many reputable websites such as the New York Times and CNN are not affiliated with academia and thus not eligible for Google Scholar. You can’t use Google Scholar to vet IBM’s stock price either, but it doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t believe what Yahoo Finance says it is.

    I didn’t get burned by anybody. I just stumbled on a company acting illegally and conning people. People deserve better. And no I’m not getting paid by anyone to write this.

    You can go look it up, there’s no Protandim mentioned in the Bible. Not only that, but it isn’t a miracle and like all the MLM products that people claim are miracles are not. Sorry you got mislead and don’t understand the industry and the psychology behind the placebo effect.

  20. protandimscams Says:

    “Background – The most important determinant of longevity in pulmonary arterial hypertension is right ventricular (RV) function, but in contrast to experimental work elucidating the pathobiology of left ventricular failure, there is a paucity of data on the cellular and molecular mechanisms of RV failure.

    Conclusion – These data brought into question the commonly held concept that RV failure associated with pulmonary hypertension is due strictly to the increased RV afterload.”

    I’m going to reiterate the conclusion of the article and you can tell me where you believe I’m mistaken: “The study’s purpose was unrelated to Protandim. It didn’t involve Protandim’s intended audience. The form of Protandim wasn’t delivered how the intended audience is supposed to use it. The amount of Protandim was many, many times the suggested amount for its intended audience.”

  21. protandimscams Says:

    Which specific lies do you see on Lazy Man’s website? I’ve read through all the comments and didn’t find anyone point out a single lie. I couldn’t find a lie either.

    Having done the research of quite a few MLM products, there’s no point in trying them, because everyone claims they are all miracle products. They aren’t. They logically can’t all be. And if any one was shown to be effective for something, the company would fight tooth and nail to prove it so that they can make billions. No MLM company does that. They make no claims for any of their products and they don’t even petition to have their products legally listed as helping with anything.

    It doesn’t make any sense to compare Protandim to medicine. It is like comparing a car to a couch, they don’t do similar things at all. Protandim is like green tea, one of the ingredients in Protandim, it won’t hurt you, but it won’t cure your cancer or diabetes or any other condition. You could make a case doesn’t hurt either, but that doesn’t mean it is medicine.

    If you don’t like medicine, that is fine… just don’t try to replace with stuff that is not medicine.

  22. Chris Says:

    Just trying to figure this out. I have been taking Protandim and it seems to have profound beneficial effects on me. Is it the Placebo effect? I would like to know your opinion on this link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21167278

    Im sorry if it has been discussed earlier.

  23. Chris Says:

    Also had placed discussions on lazymanandmoney. Its unfortunate that in my search for the truth that when I started asking about certain studies that I was no longer getting my posts published on his site. Seriously, im a cancer survivor and im not using Protandim as a cure but to help in my recovery. It seems to help but is it Placebo effect? I just want the truth, this is my life. I cant figure out which side is correct. I have seen and heard so many testimonials saying how great it is. I have read studies saying it works. I then run across sites like this. Frustrating.

  24. Chris Says:

    Oh wait, doing my research. Lazyman owns this site to!! How funny, finding scam alert sites about Lazy Man scam sites. I know this post wont make it on the discussion board. I will make sure that I stop taking Protandim so I can get back on my “Big Drug Company” medications that I have been able to stop taking. I will start taking pain meds 5 times a day again and the $150 medication for my bladder I was taking before Protandim. Lazy-Man would you be attacking this if it were sold on store shelves instead of through MLM? Why don’t you make this a peer reviewed site and have a committee that monitor all posts including yours? Make sure that its a level playing field and that your not posting under various names. A placebo effect, really? I had half my pelvis cut out! I have been suffering from depression, chronic pain, bladder problems, nerve damage and since I started Protandim I have had most of these issues resolved. The only issue not resolve, nerve damage, has started to improve. Why would you do this? MLM is not for me, but Protandim is. I also just spoke to a women with an autistic son. This lady was in tears telling me how much Protandim helped her son. Must be a good actor and the autistic son must have some how had the Placebo effect.

  25. protandimscams Says:

    You know that Protandim was sold at GNC for years before it went to MLM. When it was sold there, no one was flooding the internet with claims that the product helped with any disease like there are now. You can look it up, you won’t find any forums claiming that it worked wonders in 2007 or 2008.

    It’s worth taking a step back from Protandim and realizing that the claims about autism and everything under the sun come from these being an MLM. If you understand the history of various MLM products (MonaVie, Nopalea, Xowii, Xango, Zrii, Jusuru, etc.) you’ll see that someone claiming that these products help any condition is common. I wrote an article on the topic that a bunch of scientists and researchers wanted to republish on their website. Read it here: http://www.aitse.org/no-your-mlm-doesnt-work/.

    The comments here are for peer review. If anyone has a problem with the article, they can point it out. There’s a Wikipedia article if you are looking for something that is completely open to edits, but the article doesn’t dig in depth. For example, Wikipedia wouldn’t point out that articles on Pubmed are not intended for consumers, shouldn’t be used for marketing, and in general leads people to making bad choices (when used that way). This NY Times article explains why in detail: What Do Scientific Studies Show? Here’s an excerpt:

    “The trouble with much science reporting is that it does not do enough to ensure that the public can tell just how significant a scientific result is. The better reports will implicitly hedge results that are merely correlational, saying, for example, that vitamin D ‘may’ decrease arthritis pain or that niacin ‘can’ prevent heart attacks. But they seldom explain how preliminary and unreliable most correlational studies are. They don’t explain the specific limited role such studies usually play in the overall scientific process.”

    I wrote this article about how insignificant the PubMed study was before this NY Times article came out.

  26. Chris Says:

    Im not sure what to think. Confused. It seems to work but your telling me it doesn’t.

  27. protandimscams Says:

    Have you ever watched this clip from Funny or Die where a fraternity threw a keg party with non-alcoholic beer, but didn’t tell people: http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/a0ef3fd8c8/nonalcoholic-keg-prank-of-2002-princeton-from-nickconfalone?rel=player

    Everyone acted drunk. So if you were to ask the people drinking the non-alcoholic beer they’d tell you they were drunk. However, clearly that was not the case… it wasn’t possible for them to get drunk off of non-alcoholic beer.

    So would you say that non-alcoholic beer works to get people drunk? Maybe you can. However, I would say that it requires a special set of circumstances. Time and again, we see that the circumstances in MLM foster these claims as Dr. Bowden points out for many MLMs. By the way he wrote that article two weeks before LifeVantage announced that they were going to the MLM model.

  28. Onewhocares Says:

    I was skepitical also when these two gentelmen came into my office with Protandim. I listened to the with skeptical ears. I watched their ABC report. I told them I would try protandim for 90 days. Around 35+ days I started noticing sleep changes and more energy. I figured I would put my mother on the product with her 8 diseases. Four months later her doctor of 20 years said she had several improvements with her heart, lungs and pancrease functions. I began to recommend this to my patients. The results range from A-Z with foks health improving. Even my dog has shown great results. There’s no placebo affects on animals. I understand your comments and your stance but if folks feel better form taking natural products over medication. I will choose natural every time. What’s the 3rd leading cause of death? Drugs given for the correct diagnosis…! I would suggest you stop slandering companies with good intent and go about your ways. I will not visit your site again. Good day and good bye.
    To the folks trying Protandim having good results. Keep sharing your story and ignore these psuedo-scientist.

  29. protandimscams Says:

    If you were truly skeptical, you would have done some research and realized that the ABC video is 8 years old and they’ve never done a follow-up. The video itself left it as an open question and they clearly haven’t considered Protandim important enough to revisit.

    You mention having patients. If true, you must be one of the worst doctors in the world. You lack basic writing skills to divide your thoughts into like paragraphs. You refer to the “placebo effect” as a “placebo affect.” Finally you state that there is no “placebo affect” in animals, but 20 seconds of research shows that there are studies that show a placebo effect in dogs. For example:


    As George Carlin once said, everything on earth is natural… dog poop is natural… it just isn’t very good food. To put it another way, there are numerous types of natural poisonous mushrooms. If you’d rather take than say Benedryl (Diphenhydramine) because it grew from the ground, you are insane… and again one of the worst doctors in the world.

    Finally, someone leaving a common from “Onewhocares” wouldn’t just take his ball and go home (“I will not visit your site again. Good day and good bye.”), but show that he/she actually cares enough to engage in logical discussion rather than make a bunch of false and erroneous statements and then leave.

  30. ProtandimUser Says:

    Are you suggesting that I will stop taking Protandim so that I would be in pain again and go back to my wheelchair?

    Hell NO!

  31. protandimscams Says:

    I’m suggesting that Protandim is not shown to be a helpful with pain and your anonymous, unverifiable story should not be trusted as an honest account of something that occurred.

  32. Howlandwoof Says:

    ABC Primetime usually debunks things. If it turns out to have some value, then they say so, as John Quinones id in that brodcast. Also, anecdotally, there are some folks I’ve spoken with who have run into Mr. Quinones in the last few years, including one this year. In response to the question about whether he si still taking Protandim, Mr. Quinones responds that he is still taking it. Sorry, only anecdotal but there nonetheless. Also, there are more and morer studies being done on Nrf2 activation all the time. It’s the hottest thing being studied by skin care companies at the moment. And there’s a Biochemical Society conference cming up in the UK soon in January og 2015 at which there will be researchers present from the UK (both England & Scotland), USA, Switzerland, Portugal. Finland and Japan. So the interest seems to waxing rather than waning. And I believe that the formulation for much of the research may employ Protandim, as it is already an effective formulation with few side effects. Dr. McCord was given a Cressey Award by the way, so he’s among the company of folks such as Henry Ford, Orville Wright, Marie Curie and others for his discovery (along with Dr. Friederich) of Superoxide Dismutase. His 30 + years of research have been directed at finding the correct levels of various whole food substances that work synergistically with each other and have the least side effects… I’m looking forward to the reports of the folks at this Biochemical Society conference…
    The conference is called, The Keap1/Nrf2 Pathway in Health and Disease and it’s being held at Robinson College in Cambridge, UK

  33. protandimscams Says:

    The ABC Primetime video was from 2005, before any kind of decent testing had been done on Protandim (this website has already covered the failings of the first clinical trial such as small sample size and company insiders and investors as subjects). At the time their ratings were horrible, a piece about a fountain of youth is always good for ratings.

    More to the point, ABC Primetime clearly missed numerous things that this website has found. Not only that, but ABC Primetime doesn’t seem to have reran the story since 2005 and hasn’t followed up with it. I don’t see Time magazine or USA Today writing about it either. So if it’s the fountain of youth that ABC Primetime made it out to be in 2005, every media organization seems to be in on a conspiracy to keep it a secret. They must have partnered with Wall St. to keep the company at a penny stock too.

    Maybe you should read: The Truth Behind LifeVantage’s ABC Primetime Video

    When Mr. Quinones talks about taking Protandim, we’ll cross that bridge. In the meantime, it’s a rumor without any evidence from an anonymous source. I could spread the same rumor that he didn’t remember what Protandim was when asked.

    As for the NRF2 activation, Cheap Curcumin in Protandim Activates Nrf2 by Stimulating Free Radical Production. Thus Protandim is nothing special. It’s like saying that a cake is healthy because it has eggs and eggs are healthy. If you want NRF2 activation just take the cheap ingredient that activates NRF2.

    Finally, Protandim has not been shown effective in treating, curing, preventing or mitigating any diseases to paraphrase from LifeVantage’s own Protandim.com.

    McCord was not given a “Cressey Award” and it doesn’t matter since it seems clear that Paul Myhill invented Protandim according to McCord’s own signed admission. Please do your research on this site before spreading falsehoods.


Previous: Donny Osmond Breaks the FTC’s Celebrity Endorsement Guidelines on Dr Phil
Next: Dr. Harriet Hall on LifeVantage Protandim Again