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

LifeVantage and Dr. Joe McCord Lied about the Creation of Protandim!

One of the most common things a potential LifeVantage distributor will hear is the background of a Dr. Joe McCord. Dr. Joe McCord and LifeVantage Protandim are almost synonymous at this point. LifeVantage would like for potential distributors to believe they are synonymous because it gives the impression that Protandim was developed by a doctor. However we know that Protandim was invented by Paul Myhill who has no medical background.

Since this fact seems to be public knowledge it was quite puzzling to find the following on LifeVantage.com

You can see this page archived at the Internet Archive Wayback Machine on May 14, 2010.

[Click to see the larger, more readable view...]

Here's a quote:

"Our breakthrough product, Protandim, was created by Dr. Joe McCord, a world-renowned scientist, pioneer of Free Radical Biology, and discoverer of the anti-aging enzyme Superoxide Dismutase in 1969. He received the Elliot Cresson Medal from The Franklin Institute—awarded to distinguished inventors and scientists, putting Dr. McCord in the same company as Pierre and Marie Curie, Alexander Graham Bell, Orville Wright, and Henry Ford."

I added a little bolding for emphasis on the company claiming that Protandim was created by Dr. Joe McCord. This seems to be the lie the company is still telling as I write this on May 14th, 2011.

The rest of the quote is also noteworthy. They mention a lot of prestigious people. If you didn't know that it was a lie about Dr. Joe McCord creating Protandim you might judge Protandim to be the "breakthrough product" the page touts. However, we know better. We know the truth because Protandim inventor Paul Myhill spilled the beans in an interview with Blogtalk radio. He specifically states:

Because the core composition came from a very unlikely source – me – we initially decided to hide that fact for marketing purposes and instead rely on the impeccable background of Dr. McCord.

It sounds like Paul Myhill was wrong about one thing... the word "initially." Years after he admitted to the deceit the company continued to hide the fact that Dr. McCord didn't create Protandim. In the previous quote we also see how the company is relying on his impeccable background. As of the original publishing of his article, the company continued to mislead consumers by giving them the impression Dr. McCord was prominently involved when in fact his name isn't on the patent. The page gives no mention to Paul Myhill as the inventor at all.

In fact, in a filing with the Securities Exchange Commission, Lifeline Therapeutics (which later became LifeVantage) back in February of 2006 states:

"William Driscoll and Paul Myhill, the original inventors, have assigned all patent filings to Lifeline Nutraceuticals and the assignment has been filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office."

I've added bolding there to make it clear.

Update 1:

The original article above exposed LifeVantage's lie about McCord inventing Protandim. This caused McCord and LifeVantage to change their story. At the 2011 Protandim conference for distributors, McCord gives another version about the invention of Protandim, one that gives the impression he had a significant role in creating Protandim.

"What I was presented with was a list of 41 potential ingredients for a product [Myhill and Driscoll] wanted to call Protandim. And I went through the list and penciled out rapidly about 36 of those ingredients because they were either not of interest or not likely to be effective. What I was left was 5 botanicals..."

As we'd soon find out from an official letter from McCord himself in 2005, clearly this story is another lie intended to cover up the first lie.

Update 2:

Paul Myhill has supplied irrefutable documentation from McCord himself that his contributions do not qualify him as inventor of Protandim. McCord says specifically, "Again, I must congratulate you and Paul for having framed the concept of Protandim so close to its final embodiment, prior to the beginnings of our association.":

Joe McCord Didn't Invent Protandim

Joe McCord Didn't Invent Protandim

This makes it clear that McCord and LifeVantage not only lied once about him inventing Protandim, but multiple times. It's just another reason why you shouldn't trust anything LifeVantage says.

Update 3: As of September 9th, 2011, LifeVantage has updated the language on the page to read, "Dr. Joe McCord is the scientist behind our breakthrough product, Protandim." This replaces the text of "Our breakthrough product, Protandim, was created by Dr. Joe McCord."

Update 4: This article shows that McCord was passing himself off as the inventor early on in LifeVantage's history.

Originally posted 2011-05-14 21:26:18.

This post involves:

Joe McCord, LifeVantage Lies

... and focuses on:


Looking for the complete story about LifeVantage Protandim? Read Lazy Man and Money's post about Protandim.
65 Responses to “LifeVantage and Dr. Joe McCord Lied about the Creation of Protandim!”
  1. Protandim, Miracle Claims, Scientific Breakthroughs, and the FTC | Protandim Scams Says:

    [...] Protandim Scams Skip to content HomeSample Page ← LifeVantage and Dr. Joe McCord Lie about the Creation of Protandim? [...]

  2. » Protandim Scam? Says:

    [...] it appears that Mr. Myhill is incorrect in using the word "initially." LifeVantage and Dr. Joe McCord continue to lie about the creation of Protandim for marketing purposes as of May 21, 2011 more than two years after the admission by Paul [...]

  3. Tom Says:

    You seem displeased about the Dr McCord and his lies. In spite of Dr McCord not being the creator the question is, does Protandim work on chronic illnessess? Have you documented results from all those who are using it? Look at the FDA. They are a bunch of liars who endorse medications that should not be in the market and yet people buy them. Why? Only when hundreds die do they consider certain medication dangerous to be prescribed.

  4. Protandim Scams Says:

    Yes, I’m very displeased when a company lies to me.

    Protandim does not work on chronic illnesses from LifeVantages own words: “Protandim is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.” – http://lifevantage.com/company-faq.aspx

    How do you figure that the FDA is a bunch of liars? How do you figure medications should not be in the market? Such medications have undergone extensive clinical trials with many, many people.

    LifeVantage has refused to put together any such trials for its product. It would seem like they don’t want to prove to the world that it doesn’t work. As long as they don’t have a trial at least they can con people like you into believe that it is possible that it could work.

  5. Dr. Joe McCord’s Financial Interest In LifeVantage/Protandim | Protandim Scams Says:

    [...] of those numbers may be enough for for Joe McCord to let LifeVantage lie about the creation of Protandim. That’s quite a good sum for using McCord as marketing as the company [...]

  6. Mary Says:

    Why are you determined to bad mouth an incredible product that can help many people in distress or prevent that distress from happening in the first place?
    Please read on for the story of why we have not heard about Paul Myhill and the amazing work that he and Dr Joe McCord were doing and their motives.

    From an interview with Paul Myhill
    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lifevantage/blog/2009/03/09/inside-protandim-the-paul-myhill-interview
    “What happened next was nothing short of amazing. I was confident that we were on to something, especially since the preeminent scientist in the field saw validity in the original research and composition, but I never imagined the type of results that we would eventually attain. I thought that maybe we’d impact oxidative stress levels by pushing out or decreasing the slope of the age/oxidative stress relationship, but I was very surprised to see that we practically flat-lined it (almost totally eliminating age-related oxidative stress levels).
    Rather than going into more detail, I believe there were two primary factors involved that helped Protandim come into existence:
    First, I think that because I’m not a formulary scientist (and had no formulation experience up until that point), I didn’t realize that it couldn’t be done. Big Pharma had tried and failed using synthetic approaches to get the body to up-regulate the enzymes. The nutrition industry had largely failed using supplement approaches (after all, that’s what they do) to try to get more of the enzymes into the body. Nobody had really tried (that I’m aware of) to employ a natural approach that causes your body to simply produce more of the good stuff internally. Because the core composition came from a very unlikely source – me – we initially decided to hide that fact for marketing purposes and instead rely on the impeccable background of Dr. McCord. However, I now feel the genesis of Protandim makes for an interesting story that provides a unique marketing angle in its own right.
    Second, I committed the formula to assist in rescuing and caring for orphans in the developing world. Orphan Lifeline (similarly named purposefully) was used as the non-profit vehicle for Lifeline to provide shares and contributions to see this mission occur. I also donated personal shares and income for this reason. Regardless of one’s specific beliefs or faith, we see the care of widows and orphans as a common priority across generations and cultures. I don’t think that’s a coincidence and I believe the development process and formula of Protandim were blessed accordingly.”

  7. Mary Says:

    And another excerpt from the interview with Paul Myhill http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lifevantage/blog/2009/03/09/inside-protandim-the-paul-myhill-interview
    “LifeVantage’s current science program to encourage or promote issue-specific studies is a sound strategy indeed. Since Big Pharma (through its proxy, the FDA) doesn’t allow supplements to make any disease claims, I think it’s important for the scientific literature to make those claims for us. Most people can then make the connection and understand how Protandim can be a positive part of their health regime.”

  8. Mary Says:

    In fact Protandim has been proven to reduce oxidative stress on average by 40% in 30 days and by 70 % in 120 days.

    Are you deliberately misconstruing information?
    Anybody who takes Protandim can have a blood test to find out their Tbar count before and after taking it. http://www.genprice.com/tbars.htm
    Tbars are a scientific measure of the level of oxidative stress.
    This is what taking Protandim reduces. There are hundreds of diseases that are directly related to one’s level of oxidative stress.

  9. Protandim Scams Says:

    Mary,

    What kind of distress are you referring to exactly? People can be distressed about a lot of things, such as an upcoming deadline or an unexpected car repair bill. Protandim clearly doesn’t with these, nor does it prevent them. As far as any health-related distress goes it is important to head the warning at the bottom of LifeVantage’s FAQ: “Protandim is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.”

    It is worth noting that Dr. McCord had millions of dollars at stake when Lifeline’s (now LifeVantage) deal with CereMedix to market CMX-1152 as Protandim fell through. It is hardly surprising that McCord would keep his name off the patent (because he wasn’t involved and/or didn’t want to tarnish his name with it). It’s also hardly surprising that Dr. McCord would let someone else to it, in the off-chance that he could save his millions in LifeVantage stock.

    I have yet to look into Orphan Lifeline’s non-profit status. If it is in good-order, then good for Paul Myhill. However, it would have been better if he didn’t scam people out of their money in the first place.

  10. Protandim Scams Says:

    Yes, Mary, that is a particularly damning quote from Paul Myhill about LifeVantage’s scam. It is discussed in much greater detail here:

    Paul Myhill, Inventor of Protandim, Admits Science is for Marketing

  11. Protandim Scams Says:

    Mary,

    Protandim has not been “proven” do any such thing. There was on small study done 6 years ago where more than half of the people dropped out of. Furthermore, the study wasn’t conducted on unbiased subjects, but people who made millions in the transaction funding LifeVantage. There are so many things wrong with the study that LifeVantage hasn’t even bothered to try to again for fear of further embarrassing themselves.

    As for the TBAR test, here is what LifeVantage’s Company FAQ says:

    “To the best of our knowledge no commercial lab offers a T-BARS test. Why is this? First of all, because there is no “fix” for T-BARS other than Protandim and so it is not a priority. Next, it is a difficult test to perform outside of a research lab because the products are unstable and the samples have to be measured very quickly, a process that is difficult to do under commercial conditions. For these very reasons, the commercially offered T-BARS can be inconsistent and unreliable.”

    The blood test you mentioned clearly is labeled as “FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY. NOT FOR in vitro DIAGNOSTIC USE”, which fits with what LifeVantage is saying in the above quote.

    Finally the entire validity of a TBARS test is called into question. A multivitamin, some fruit juice, or any kind of antioxidant, can radically alter the results. There are more examples here: TBARS: An Unreliable Test of Oxidative Stress. That isn’t intended to be a definitive source, but it does provide you with great evidence that is backed by many, many non-commercial articles (as opposed to the Protandim ones) on Pubmed

    Finally, the TBARS test is universally bad for a number of reasons.

  12. Kevin Says:

    Your quote about Dr. McCord inventing Protandim is currently incorrect as of September 9th, 2011. The quote lists him as being the scientist behind its development. Given that Paul Myhill admits as much in the blogtalkradio.com interview you have posted(Dr. McCord is given credit for helping balance the ratios and keying in on which ingredients were required), you should update your post accordingly.

    http://lifevantage.com/products-breakthrough.aspx

  13. Protandim Scams Says:

    Thanks for staying on that top Kevin.

    I updated the article to use the past tense as well as point out that the company is no longer telling a straight-forward lie. (I think I got most of the places.) However, it was worth making the additional mention that while the company responded to this criticism, the changes they made are still are designed to deceive people into believe that McCord was significantly involved when his name wasn’t on the patent as a contributor.

  14. DianeS Says:

    Actually, Dr. McCord openly shares that Paul Myhill had a “theory” and brought a list of approximately 40 plant ingredients to Dr. McCord. Dr. McCord quickly reduced that list to the 5 ingredients that are now contained in the formulation of Protandim. Mr. Myhill did not invent Protandim, Dr. McCord did, and he pays tribute to Mr. Myhill for his theory.

  15. Protandim Scams Says:

    Diane,

    If that were indeed true then LifeVantage is likely in a whole lot of trouble.

    First, it would mean that Paul Myhill lied when he said that he invented Protandim. The invention of something is not bringing a list of 40 possible building blocks and giving it someone else to build.
    Second, it would mean that the patent was filed incorrectly.

    It doesn’t add up. The patent is hard evidence that Myhill invented it, and Myhill’s later words saying that they tried to hide it and pretend that it was McCord explains what why McCord is continuing with the lie by minimizing the role that Myhill played. With Dr. Joe McCord’s financial interest In LifeVantage/Protandim, it is not surprising he’d want to continue the lie.

  16. entzu Says:

    I am just wondering who cares who invented but the point is the product helps lower the oxdative stress is true. The porpotion of the ingredients are the reason that this product works. All this talk is just pure political about bring down someone or some comapany. If TBARS in not scientificly reliable, then shame on the scientists who published on medical jounals that I have been reading and so are the entire medical fields because they are the ones approved and published that what they been using TBARS as a way to measure free radicals.

  17. Protandim Scams Says:

    It is dangerous to presume that unproven supplements like Protandim “work”, but a wise consumer should be 100 times more skeptical when relying on solution from someone with no medical background and approval from the FDA. You don’t want the bagger from a grocery store who has never fixed a car to attempt to fix your car. Well may you do. I don’t.

    The point to note with TBARS is that just about anything with any antioxidant properties will yield results. A vitamin C pill, cup of coffee, tomato… the list goes on… all show results with TBARS. Since literally about $0.03 of vitamin C and a $1.70 Protandim pill both show TBARS results, why do we care about TBAR results – why are they noteworthy?

  18. Olivia Robison Says:

    First of all, the FDA doesn’t “approve” any natural substance which Protandim is–look at the ingredients. Second, the FDA receives hundreds of billions of dollars in fees from the major drug companies based upon their sales. Third, the FDA has repeatedly tried to ban all natural substances as it benefits their income if people take drugs instead. We know from the drug companies own advertisements that they actually have to break down the horrific side effects into three sections in their ads in order to minimize the emotional impact. If you are a drug believer, fine. You take what you believe in and leave those with more common sense and less programming to take what works for them.

  19. Protandim Scams Says:

    Let me take those claims in order:

    1) The FDA maintains a list of Health Claims Meeting Significant Scientific Agreement. These include all natural substances and ones you have most like heard of such as calcium, vitamin D, and osteoporosis. If LifeVantage felt their combination of ingredients could help with any medical condition (like osteoporosis), they could take the necessary path for proving it and getting it listed.

    2) Olivia said, “the FDA receives Hundreds of billions of dollars in fees from major drug companies based upon their sales.” Let’s look at this MSNBC article from less than two weeks ago:

    “Last fiscal year, the FDA collected $573 million in user fees under the program, making up 62 percent of its total budget for prescription drug reviews. The portion of FDA’s budget underwritten by industry has steadily increased since 1992, drawing criticism from consumer advocates that the agency has become financially dependent on the companies it regulates. Ten years ago the industry contributed about 49 percent of FDA’s drug review budget.

    Woodcock said the portion of FDA funding that comes from user fees is ultimately “up to Congress, and they can set it up however they want.” She pointed out that some countries rely on user fees for 100 percent of their drug review budgets.”

    So it isn’t hundreds of billions of dollars, but it is actually a little more than half a billion dollars. The fees that FDA charges are used to review prescription drugs, which in is very important for public safety. It isn’t like the FDA is getting rich, buy private jets and getting lap dances at strip clubs with the money. The system works how it should. Those who are selling more medications should have their medications reviewed more because more people are impacted by it.

    Also, if you have a problem with the user fees, talk to your congress representatives. It isn’t the FDA that sets them. That sounds very fair to me.

    If you are on the side of Protandim you are programmed a lot more than those who rely on large-scale clinically-proven results of medicine. There’s a reason why Americans live longer today than we did 100 years ago. It certainly isn’t that Americans eat better or get more exercise. It certainly isn’t due to Protandim which hasn’t been around for 10 years yet. Perhaps it’s because our health care and medicine is better. You think?

    3) “The FDA has repeated tried to ban all natural substances…” Did I read that correctly? Last I looked vitamin C was a natural substance. Green tea and turmeric are natural substances in Protandim. Cinnamon is a natural substance. If cinnamon and green tea are natural substances, why not put an apple into that group too? Are you telling me that the FDA has tried to ban all of these? I’m sorry, I require extensive evidence of that.

  20. Olivia Robison Says:

    As you can see, my name is on this comment. I am not afraid to tell you my name.
    I am a 64 year old woman who has been taking all kinds of dietary supplements since 1972. I have no degenerative diseases, i.e: diabetes, high blood pressure, cancer, etc.
    I am not overweight. I have no joint pain, headaches, etc. I TAKE NO PHARMACEUTICAL DRUGS!!! I have rejected the FDA’s recommendation that I eat several servings of grain daily. I reject your theory that taking drugs has increased the life span of Americans. Prove it.
    Who are you? It’s easy to make claims when you are anonymous. You are using a pseudonym.
    Definition of pseudonym: false, pretended, sham, not real, fictitious name. So before we go any further, please identify yourself and who you are representing. If you are unwilling to do this, your credibility will be seriously impaired.

    I am not a user of Protandim. However, the FDA’s efforts to ban and/or control natural substances is ongoing. In order to accomplish their latest attempt at removing vitamins, minerals, and herbal supplements from the American consumer, they are proposing ludicrous tests. See the dosages of fish oil they propose to test below. Since these dosages will kill anything, they will be able to remove this valuable nutrient from the market.

    Here you go:

    [Editor’s Note: The rest of this comment is taken from this article which can be read by clicking this link.]

  21. Protandim Scams Says:

    Olivia Robinson,

    You are not a corporate whistle-blower. If you were, perhaps you would understand that my life has been threatened because of what I write about Multi-level Marketing Scams like Protandim. These distributors very much don’t their targets having easy access to this material. They’d like to just continue to tell their story that Joe McCord invented Protandim without me exposing the lie.

    Your definition of pseudonym seemed a little off. Merriam-Webster defines it as a fictitious name. There’s no mention of a sham or anything like that. They give an example, “Mark Twain is the pseudonym of the American writer Samuel L. Clemens.” By your logic, Mark Twain was a sham and he should not be trusted.

    Also by your logic, the American public should have never have known about Nixon and the Watergate scandal because the the whistle-blower went by the pseudonym of “Deep Throat.” His information was proved to be credible and the public realized that it isn’t about who delivers the message, it is the value of the message itself. That’s what they should do here.

    It’s easy for you to be open with who you are. Walk a mile in my shoes. I wonder if you would be willing to put your life on the line to help educate others.

    As for the “FDA effort to ban and/or control natural substances”, you should actually read the FDA guidelines that are referenced in the article that you mention. The article clearly references these draft guidelines:

    1) They are a draft. They are not binding.
    2) They are a series of questions designed to allow public comments.

    It is also worth noting that this applies to new dietary ingredients (NDI), which wouldn’t apply to substances that were marketed before 1994. This has nothing to do with removing or banning vitamins and minerals. There are no new ones since 1994 that I’m aware of. Are you of any? I’m not sure there are new herbs introduced since then either.

    As for the FDA being able to remove fish oil from the market, that would seem to be false. According to this site, “By 1936 the medicinal [Cod Liver Oil] was generally available and being marketed.” This is clearly long before 1994 and not subject to new dietary guidelines.

    You shouldn’t assume that you are the norm. There are a lot of 64 year old women who have taken all kinds of dietary supplements since 1972 (even longer!) and they do have degenerative diseases, diabetes, high blood pressure, cancer, etc. They do have join pain and headaches. Scientifically, should we use your statistically small sample size of 1 and suggest that supplements cure all these things, or should we use the statistically large sample size of the rest of the population who also takes supplements and do come down these medical conditions. I think we should err on the large sample size – perhaps you just happen to have good genetics.

    Good luck rejecting my theory that medicine has increased the life span of Americans. Want me to prove it to you? How many Americans used to die of polio? How many die of polio now? That’s proof that medicine has helped people live longer by preventing early deaths from that 1 disease alone. Your turn to prove that medicine has had no effect on lifespan.

    Finally, I should mention that this discussion is not related to this article and not directly related to Protandim. It only distracts people from learning about the product, I will delete it in a few days. Olivia, I suggest you cut and paste your comments a more appropriate place, where I will be happy to continue discussion: http://www.healthmlmscam.com/mlm-scam-the-fda-is-evil-and-not-to-be-trusted/. I may move the comments there myself, but I wouldn’t rely on it.

  22. Haley Says:

    I really don’t care who invented Protandim! I am just thankful it came into my life!!

    Because it is sold as a supplement, it does not require FDA approval. The FDA has “approved” 1,000′s of supplements that could not obtain US patents. Protandim just received it’s 4th. I think that speaks volumes.

    So these 8 published peer reviewed studies are completely false? Do yourself a favor and check out the national library of medicine (pubmed.gov) and search Protandim.

  23. Protandim Scams Says:

    Haley,

    Considering there is no verification that this product does anything for people and fits the FTC’s description of Scams and Frauds, a wise consumer should care about who, how, and why it was invented.

    The FDA does require approval for use of any medical claims associated with this product. This is why the product doesn’t make any. LifeVantage doesn’t believe in their product enough to even attempt to get approval for any condition.

    As for the patents, this patent seems to break FDA law by explicitly stating that the product helps for the conditions listed. Not only that, but many of the conditions are listed multiple times. I think that speaks volumes, but if you want more, here’s a list of other ridiculous patents from Business Week. This shows that a patent does not actually mean that it product is functional or that it serves any kind of practical purpose.

    The published studies are in low Impact Factor Journals and Paul Myhill, Inventor of Protandim, Admits Science is for Marketing. There are conflicts of interests in them as Dr. Joe McCord of LifeVantage is included in the studies making them extremely biased. In addition, a few are published in a journal that Joe McCord is on the board of, which is clearly an unethical use of his authority.

  24. Daisy Says:

    Paul Myhill is not the formulator of Protandim. He did his research and came up with the ingredients for Protandim. He brought his research to Dr. Joe McCord who for 40 years researched free radical biochemistry. Paul Myhill is a man with curious and great mind, but he admits that he had no background to come up with a formulation. Dr. Joe McCord came up with the formulation. Lifevantage is NOT lying. As a matter of fact, Paul Myhill will be featured at Lifevantage’s Elite Academy, Oct, 29 and 30, in San Antonio. TX. Paul Myhill’s work on the illegal trafficking of women is the charity being supported by Lifevantage. Protandim does reduce Oxidative stress in eveyone who takes it. Oxidative stress is related to hundreds of diseases. Just go to http://www.pubmed.gov and search both Protandim and Oxidative stress. Protandim is pure botanical….not a drug so it does not have to have FDA approval. I personally love Protandim and recommend it to everyone I talk to. Protandim is being accepted in both the medical and holistic fields.

  25. Protandim Scams Says:

    I understand the company is telling that story now. However, it’s hard to figure out what to believe. Here’s what we know:

    1) Paul Myhill and William Driscoll are on the patent: http://static.protandimscams.com/documents/7241461_Compositions_for_alleviating_inf.pdf. There is no mention of Joe McCord at all.
    2) We have the company lying in the past about McCord creating Protandim and not mentioning Paul Myhill’s leading role (as the inventor in the patent) at all. See the screenshots in this article for proof.
    3) We now have the company claiming that it was a collaborative effort, but Joe McCord had a majority role.

    The only physical evidence is what we have in #1 – the patent. Given the company’s history for lying, as we see in #2, why should we believe their statement in #3 when it contradicts the physical evidence of the patent. Even if we do believe LifeVantage’s “Story of the Week”, it would mean that they falsified the patent filing which is further reason not to trust the company.

    I applaud Myhill’s charitable efforts. I’ve got no problem with that. I guess he’s moved on from helping orphans to victims of human trafficking. They are both worthy causes. I think that Myhill is probably the only reputable person who was ever associated with the company. He seems to be the one telling the truth about him inventing Protandim and that the company just used McCord for marketing the product. I give him credit for giving us the only explanation for why Joe McCord wasn’t on the patent – because he didn’t have a hand in the invention. As much as I respect Myhill for this, it doesn’t mean that the product is effective.

    The product most certainly does have to have FDA approval for it to make any medical claim. If you are saying that it doesn’t need FDA approval to be sold, then you are right – but then again basil doesn’t does need FDA approval to be sold either. Protandim is just a combination of herbs – to the FDA it is no different than basil. However, if you are going to make a claim that Protandim does something for disease which is what you are doing with oxidative stress – you need to have FDA approval for that.

    We already know that the Protandim “studies” on Pubmed are for marketing the product – Paul Myhill told us this: http://www.protandimscams.com/paul-myhill-protandim-science-marketing/

    Go to pubmed.gov and search for both vitamin C and E and oxidative stress. You’ll find a lot more articles and you’ll find that they are much, much cheaper.

    Of course you love Protandim and recommend it to everyone you talk to – you are getting paid by the company to do so.

    Protandim is not accepted by the medical fields. You don’t have to look any further than LifeVantage’s penny stock and their SEC declarations that the fortunes of the company depend on selling marketing materials to Protandim distributors.

  26. » LifeVantage Used Company Insiders and Investors in Only Human Protandim Study Says:

    [...] article, Colo. Doctor Invents 'Anti-Aging' Pill from ABC7 News in Colorado says that McCord invented Protandim which is a lie – as we know. However, it also quotes another participant of the study, Leigh Severance. The [...]

  27. Vogel Says:

    McCord was trying pass himself off as the inventor in this article too:

    “Colo. Doctor Invents ‘Anti-Aging’ Pill”
    http://www.thedenverchannel.com/health/4565649/detail.html

    “A Colorado doctor has invented a supplement that he says slows the aging process and could possibly prevent diseases. The pill is called Protandim”

  28. DrRKC Says:

    I don’t give a spit who invented it, I take it and it has done wonders for me and my wife. Your assumption is assinine, that everyone who is for Protandim is selling it. My wife and I both run our own sucessful bussinesses and neither one of them is selling Protandim. I did my research about the product and I know how to read a clinical assay because I have written a few. I have a B.S. in both Toxicology and Anatomy, a minor in Chemistry, and a Doctorate in Chiropractic, and there is NOTHING that I have read in the research by:
    The University of Florida
    The University of Michigan
    The University of Colorado
    The University of Kentucky
    The Ohio State University
    Vanderbilt University
    Louisiana State University &
    Circulation – a journal of The American Heart Association
    That made me have to think twice about trying it. As far as your earlier comments on FDA approved meds, you keep on taking them, and run the risk that over 100,000 Americans who die each year do. I bet they thought they were safe because they were “FDA APPROVED”.
    On that subject, this link is where the rest of this e-mail is taken from.

    http://www.studynrf2.com/blog/index.php/2011/06/protandim-and-the-fda/

  29. Protandim Scams Says:

    Shame on you DrQuackery! You seem to be attributing Protandim for having done some “wonders” for you, but you fail to mention that not only are there no clinical trials to show that it has ever done anything for anyone, but also the company itself says, “Protandim is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.” Your vague use of “wonders” makes you sound like a distributor for any other MLM health product such as MonaVie, Zrii, Xango, Xowii, etc. They all say the same thing, but don’t have any evidence.

    You should not that none of those universities actually studied Protandim. Universities don’t conduct studies. People affiliated with them do. Plus we know that Paul Myhill, Inventor of Protandim, Admits Science is for Marketing. You can tell those are just for marketing because they don’t involve any people or any real world situations.

    Also note that the Circulation mention wasn’t about Protandim. The study had no conclusions involving Protandim.

    Okay, so you want us to believe that you are a legit doctor who is against FDA approved meds. I shouldn’t have even approved your comment, but you seem to be confused on a monumental level. Anyway, regarding your issue with the FDA approved meds, it’s been well-addressed here: Health MLM Mind Game: The FDA Approves Drugs with Side Effects that Kill People. You can take your mind-games elsewhere.

    You left a link about Protandim and FDA approval. Protandim certainly does need FDA approval for making certain health claims. As long as LifeVantage wants to continue to tout that Protandim is useless with it’s claim of, “Protandim is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.” then you are correct, it doesn’t need FDA approval. That essentially puts it in the same category as toast or ice cream – a product that isn’t going to do any “wonders.”

  30. DrRKC Says:

    Okay, “wonders”…my blood pressure has dropped by about 20 points (I check it daily), my energy level is like it was when I was 25 years old, my bowel movements are normal again (after each meal instead of once daily), and my sex drive is like it was 10 years ago. And no, this is not based on a controlled, randomized, double blind study…but draw your own conclusions. I have not taken a prescribed drug in 20 years, I have not changed my diet, and I have not altered my exercise routine. But, I know what to eat and what not to eat, I know I have to exercise. My blood pressure does not go up because my body is not producing enough Lotensin or Capoten. It goes up because of poor diet and lack of exercise, with no changes to my life other than Protandim, I can attribute it to nothing else.

    So where do you suggest these “people” conduct their scientific research or for that matter study to become board certified physcians…an online unversity? Yes, they are affiliated with, study at and in some cases work for those universities. And I absolutely agree that science is used for marketing, I would never use a product that markets itself as “not scientificly tested”. That would be idiotic. We use to have a running joke when I was in under grad school, that we would let the english majors use the products that weren’t tested on animals. Any how, there are clinical trials…here is one

    http://www.lifevantage.com/documents/2006%20FRBM%20Protandim.pdf

    The American Heart Association Journal Circulation was about Protandim, it specifically states:
    “By inducing nuclear factor E2-related factor 2 and heme-oxygenase 1, the herbal supplement Protandim prevented a loss of myocardial capillaries, reduced the degree of RV (right ventricular) fibrosis, and prevented RV dilation and loss of myocardial contractility.

    http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/120/20/1935.full?sid=9a3c7d97-c8fa-46f4-ab64-25bc88266c79

    Protandim is required by the FDA, as a FDA regulated supplament, to state “Protandim is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.” You keep using this same line throughout your writings…THEY HAVE TO SAY THIS, IT IS REQUIRED BY OUR ALL KNOWING, ALL SEEING, ALL PROTECTING GOVERNMENT THAT THEY DO SO!!!

  31. Vogel Says:

    DrRKC is a liar. No research on Protandim has ever been published from 4 of the institutions he mentioned (i.e., U. Florida, U. Michigan, U. Kentucky, and Vanderbilt).

    Why are you Protandim shills always such lying dicks?

  32. Protandim Scams Says:

    All of the things you are state are attributable to the placebo effect. As I mentioned there are tens of thousands of these claims on the Internet for MonaVie, Xango, Xowii, and Zrii, etc. So when you ask that me to draw my own conclusions, it’s that MLM distributors like yourself tend to get very creative to sell their overpriced product. They seem to even break the the FTC Guidelines about testimonials as you just did. Here’s a quote you should look into:

    “You can’t make claims about a product that would require proof you don’t have. For example, you can’t say a product will cure a particular disease if there isn’t scientific evidence to prove that’s true.”

    This includes your testimonial about bowel movements, blood pressure, sex drive, etc. You legally can’t make these claims because LifeVantage has not provided evidence of it. You should also note that such testimonials are against your distributor agreement.

    I’m okay that such studies are conducted at Universities, but don’t suggest that the Universities are engaged in studying the product. There’s a very big difference as the later implies that the University itself is interested in Protandim, when we know that it simply isn’t true – it is for marketing as was previously pointed out.

    The Circulation conclusion was, “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 don’t see Protandim mentioned. The takeaway is clearly stated in the title, “Chronic pulmonary artery pressure elevation is insufficient to explain right heart failure.” That’s the important thing. There’s nothing in the study to suggest that Protandim was unique in providing this effect. Also worth noting is that, the study used “A mechanical animal model”, and involved something that wasn’t actually Protandim (it was an alcohol extract of it) and it was injected. Oh and the amount was the equivalent to a whole bottle for a human. For this study to have any relevance, we need to be mechanical animals, and Protandim has to be injected in an alcohol form – and we need to spend $50 pure dose.

    As for your study on LifeVantage involving people, you seem to have missed the article: LifeVantage Used Company Insiders and Investors in Only Human Protandim Study. Clearly it wasn’t intended to be a true scientific study, but also more marketing. In fact it turns out that they falsified data in the study as well. That article will be coming soon.

    Some supplements are approved by the FDA to make health related claims. For example calcium can make a claim about osteoporosis. You can learn more about this on the FDA’s website. Clearly, Protandim as a supplement could go through the same process with the FDA and prove that it is helpful for blood pressure. The company has chosen to avoid the human trials that would lead to such approval.

  33. DrRKC Says:

    I’ll quote myself…”Your assumption is assinine, that everyone who is for Protandim is selling it.” So you writing…”You should also note that such testimonials are against your distributor agreement.” makes you ASSININE!!! I don’t have a “distributor agreement” with anyone you idiot! I never gave you a “testimonial”, I simply stated that there are no changes that we have made to our lives in more than a year other than taking a supplament that is all natural, cheap and safe!!! We feel better!!! I’m done with you idiots, your not worth my time!

  34. Vogel Says:

    DrRKC, you lied by claiming that you had personally read research by 4 universities that were never involved in published research on Protandim. So you’re either a lying dick who doesn’t sell Protandim or a lying dick who does sell Protandim. The latter seems infinitely more probable; but the keep point is that you are a lying dick. And putting “Dr” in front of your anonymous user name only makes it more so.

  35. Protandim Scams Says:

    DrRKC said,

    “I’ll quote myself…’Your assumption is assinine, that everyone who is for Protandim is selling it.’ So you writing…’You should also note that such testimonials are against your distributor agreement.’ makes you ASSININE!!! I don’t have a “distributor agreement’ with anyone you idiot! I never gave you a ‘testimonial’, I simply stated that there are no changes that we have made to our lives in more than a year other than taking a supplament that is all natural, cheap and safe!!! We feel better!!! I’m done with you idiots, your not worth my time!’

    I don’t mean to call you out as a liar, but you weren’t too hard to track down, DrRKC. Let me introduce everyone to:

    Ronald Keith Cormier
    From his about page (http://www.cormierchiropractic.com/?page_id=2) we see that his BS in Toxicology (just as he stated previously) and his Doctorate of Chiropractic from Parker College of Chiropractic. You can click on his Health Grades (http://www.healthgrades.com/provider/ronald-cormier-2n9rv/) and see that he goes by Ronald Keith Cormier there. Hence the DrRKC name. Additionally, on his Cormier Chiropractic website, you can see a page devoted to Protandim, where the good “doctor” states the following:

    “This is the biggest thing since Penicillin.”
    “Everyone who is interested in being healthier and greatly slowing down the aging process should be taking this product.”

    Also, there’s the line, “Call Cormier Chiropractic or ask Dr. Cormier for a bottle on your next visit.”

    So you want to still claim that you are not selling Protandim?

  36. Vogel Says:

    ROFL. Righteous! Score another victory for the truth! Is there anyone affiliated with this product who isn’t the lowliest form of lying vermin imaginable?

  37. Questionman Says:

    Ok quick question can taking protandim cause any harm to the body long term. Second question are you guys says that protandim cannot even help the body at all atleast to make a difference long term

  38. Questionman Says:

    I mean scandals like this have been going on for
    hundreds of years since the old man selling a bag of power saying if you drink this you will live forever you guys are probably a non-profir organization vs a multi-million dollar industry robbing people of there hopes and dollars people will believe about anything but i just want to know the truth looking kind of bad for the protandim side thanks to dr. lies a lot a few posts up

  39. Protandim Scams Says:

    It’s not known if taking Protandim could cause harm to the body long term. It simply hasn’t been studied.

    As for your second question, there also haven’t been any legit studies to show that it could help the body either. LifeVantage has apparently fudged some data on a small sample size (couple dozen people) five years ago, but that’s all we have to go by as far as anything done on the body.

  40. AnnC Says:

    Since there are no studies to show any harm to the body long term, the next logical step would be to research each ingredient in Protandim individually. There could be drug interactions and complications to those with existing health problems like diabetes, etc.

    When I was first approached by a Protandim newbie distributor, the first claim made was about the inventor, Dr McCord. She knew next to nothing about the product except that her husband had “renewed” energy.

  41. Protandim Scams Says:

    There are no studies to show that Tropicana juice does any harm to the body long term either. The truth is that according to LifeVantage, the people the company encourages are the ones that are studying it. In the cases where negative things have come out LifeVantage suppresses the negative data.

    It is wise to look at the individual ingredients. For example, my wife, like many people, has an allergy to ragweed. Milk thistle is in that family and thus it is best for her to avoid products like Protandim with milk thistle in it.

    AnnC, I want to reiterate one more time that this article proves conclusively that Dr. McCord was not Protandim’s inventor.

  42. Steven Says:

    Hey, thanks a lot for posting valuable, reliable, and useful information for debunking this nonsense. My cousin’s mother is dating some a-hole who gave us a presentation, on the pyramid schemes used to distribute Protandim. Anyways, he has my cousins really hyped up about it, and is trying to convince them to give him 700$ so they can “invest” in their own business. I’m am trying to convince my cousin not to go with that a-hole, but I was wondering if you could help me present some main points, to convince them not to side with this prick, seeings how you seem to be very knowledgeable on this subject. I really care for both my cousins, and would hate for them to be scammed, and all I’m trying to do is look out for them. Thanks.

  43. Protandim Scams Says:

    Thanks for the kind comment Steven. Most of the main points are presented in a somewhat orderly manner at: http://www.lazymanandmoney.com/lifevantage-protandim-scam/.

    Just so that you know what you up against, here’s a good article to read, “Emergency Handbook: What to Do When a Friend Loves Woo ” – http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4187

  44. Ariel Says:

    This is a little irrelevant but why doesn’t the FDA website not state that vitamin C cures scurvy?

  45. Protandim Scams Says:

    Good question. See item III at: http://www.fda.gov/food/labelingnutrition/labelclaims/ucm111447.htm

    “Structure/function claims may also describe a benefit related to a nutrient deficiency disease (like vitamin C and scurvy), as long as the statement also tells how widespread such a disease is in the United States. The manufacturer is responsible for ensuring the accuracy and truthfulness of these claims; they are not pre-approved by FDA but must be truthful and not misleading.”

    The key here is that it is a nutrient deficiency disease – a class that is well known by scientists. You can see a list of them here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutrition_disorder#Deficiencies.

  46. swindler alert Says:

    Questionman Says:
    “I mean scandals like this have been going on for
    hundreds of years since the old man selling a bag of power saying if you drink this you will live forever you guys are probably a non-profir organization vs a multi-million dollar industry”

    wait a minute here Questionman. Non-profit does not mean Paul Myhill isn’t getting paid for his “orphan” work! Of course he is making a wonderful living off the shoulders of the kids his “non-profit” uses to raise funds.

    Ever hear of voluntourism? And “orphan” Exploitation? People are seeking vulnerable people to raise themselves up or to profit off of. Paul Myhill makes money off his orphan and “anti”trafficking business, All the while he is able to spread Christianity and feel warm and fuzzy inside.

  47. Mike Says:

    Amazing how an idiot brain-washed by Allopathic doctors wants to talk down who invented something without a medical background, OKAY and if something is NATURAL it CANNOT hold FDA approval. The FDA and American MD’s are just scammers trying to make $$$ off of feeding people chemicals. Yeah way to make it through Med school Im sure you know all.

  48. Protandim Scams Says:

    Mike,

    I’m not brainwashed by doctors. I believe in the scientific process that shows us that products aren’t snake oil in disguise dependent on the placebo effect. These are scams that have been going or hundreds of years, predating the FDA. An example of a well trusted scientific process is clinical trials and Protandim doesn’t have any relevant ones.

    The FDA Allows for Natural Products to Make Health Claims. There are plenty of examples there. Here’s a basic one that most people know… calcium and vitamin D help with osteoporosis. Last I checked calcium and vitamin D are “NATURAL” (to borrow your shouting). Here are more.

    If LifeVantage agreed with you that the FDA and American MDs are just scammers trying to make $$$ feeding people chemicals, they would move their company to any other country in the world. Oh, yeah, just about every advanced company has an equivalent to the FDA to protect consumers from snake oil and quackery. Click that link, you’ll notice that LifeVantage has many of the signs of quackery.

  49. Ric Says:

    Hello,
    I read about this stuff till I’m punchy… but your claim about the Dr. not creating Protandim is not accurate. As you quote, MyHill work constituted the “core” of the first product, but it wasn’t until McCord came on board that the Protandim formula was created. So… didn’t they both “create” it?

  50. Protandim Scams Says:

    I quoted another source of Myhill claiming that the core of the product came from him. That quote didn’t make mention of McCord helping with the product, just promoting it.

    If you read Protandim Paul Myhill has no Medical Background, you’ll see that McCord wasn’t on the patent at all.

    It is clear that McCord didn’t play any role in creating Protandim.

  51. Paul Myhill Publishes Letter From Joe McCord on Facebook | Strangely Perfect Says:

    [...] LifeVantage and Dr. Joe McCord Lied about the Creation of Protandim! [...]

  52. Cat-lover69 Says:

    There has not been any information published regarding the use of protandim supplement for animals. However, cats in particular are very sensitive to supplements even when just added to their normal diet. I gave my 7 year old cat protandim in small amounts for 3 months and all of the sudden she passed away. I took her to the vet for an autopsy and found out that cats do not mix well with some ingredients that protandim has. I think the dr. Said it was the milk thistle that was no good for her. Hope nobody else has to go through this.

  53. protandimscams Says:

    There are a lot of things that people don’t suspect hurt animals and they do. Natural foods like grapes and chocolate are harmful to dogs. So when you say that milk thistle might not be good for cats, I’m not surprised.

    I’m not going to treat my pet like a lab rat… some pun intended there.

  54. Ross Says:

    Hmm, you seem a little sour grapes over the deal scammer. I personally don’t care who invented it… it was nature wasn’t it? I have read many papers on oxidative stress along with the several Protandim studies, and the science makes sense. but then again I only have a master’s in science. Actually when I am taking it I experience increased energy, and I have almost lucid like dreams–very real. strange, but I figured I’d give it a shot and continue to do MY OWN DUE DILIGENCE! my choice. and if you really think the best medicines are see the light of pharmacy shelves, you need a lesson on recouping research investment and profit margins shareholder relations :)

  55. protandimscams Says:

    Since Protandim doesn’t have the clinical trials to show that it works, the next best thing we can do is evaluate if it plausible to work. That’s where you take into account who invented it and why.

    It would be very different if LifeVantage had done any helpful clinical trials and got it approved by the FDA to work for any medical condition.

    Ross, if you had a masters in science, you clearly wouldn’t have read the studies and said that they make sense. There are very few done on people and the only one in the last five years had better results for the group NOT taking Protandim.

    It is impossible for one to do their own due diligence on a health product due to the placebo effect. If you had any science background at all, you would have known this. I guess it’s just easier to come here and lie to people and hope that it tricks people.

  56. Vogel Says:

    Ross said: “I personally don’t care who invented it…”

    Really? What if I told you it was invented by Hitler? Jeffery Dahmer? How about my 4-year old daughter? Of course you care, so why are you popping in to tell us this silly lie. The true inventor of Protandim matters mainly because the organization was lying to the public for years by claiming that it was invented by Joe McCord. When it turns out that the inventor is some obscure hayseed non-scientist, the story doesn’t sound quite so compelling.

    Ross said: “I have read many papers on oxidative stress along with the several Protandim studies, and the science makes sense. but then again I only have a master’s in science.”

    If that pile of $hit “makes sense” to you (beyond the fact that the Protandim studies are written in English and English makes sense to you) then I have to conclude that the bar for obtaining a Masters degree in science has been lowered much too far. Keep reading articles for another decade or so and then you might have some worthwhile insights to share — the kind that were conspicuously absent from your comment. If you were equipped with the skills required to critically analyze scientific papers, then you wouldn’t have walked away with anything favorable to say about Protandim. In fact, it is clear that you don’t understand the research or its caveats at all; nor, annoyingly, did you bother to take any time to read the posts here in which we’ve spoonfed the details.

    Ross said: “and I have almost lucid like dreams–very real. Strange…and if you really think the best medicines are see the light of pharmacy shelves, you need a lesson on recouping research investment and profit margins shareholder relations.”

    OK, maybe I was a bit premature when I speculated that you understand English. Were you high on something when you wrote that? It would explain both the strange lucid dreams and your incomprehensibly mangled grammar.

  57. TK Says:

    This is incredible! The owner of this site has an answer to every concern! It’s clear you don’t want people to use the product or make money. Of course, you will not say that but bring up McCord and Myhill’s names over and over again! There are countless products in the market that people haven’t stop buying even though it is not good for them and all you do is make Protandim seems like poison or should I say, fish oil. Yet, you have not indicated your disapproval of nutritional stores or drug companies making money off some people who are struggling financially. All you focus on is Myhill, McCord, and LV. Who gives a rat’s ass who put the whole thing together? If most people say it’s working for them, isn’t that enough evidence? Instead, you’d call them liars! People buy what works, and if they are given the opportunity to make money out of it why not do it? In your case, you don’t publicly approve of this because you categorize Protandim as a fish oil or whatever name you prefer calling it. So, who do you work for?

  58. protandimscams Says:

    Yes, I have an answer for every concern because there is an easy answer for each of them.

    I haven’t noticed nutritional stores making illegal claims that their products help with cancer, heart disease and other things. Some pharmaceutical companies may make these claims about their products, but they are legally entitled to do so because they’ve shown that their product works in extensive clinical trials.

    Protandim lacks any meaningful clinical trials. LifeVantage hasn’t wanted to do them. Understand the placebo effect and you’ll find that people will a sugar pill worked for them. “Enough evidence” in the scientific community is quite easily determined by placebo-controlled studies, not testimonials that are likely caused by the placebo effect. It’s also worth noting that you find the same claim of any MLM health product such as Zrii, Xango, Xowii, MonaVie, etc. If you believe that all these treat and/or prevent cancer, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

    It’s not fish oil, it’s snake oil. If you haven’t heard of it, I don’t know what rock you’ve been living under your whole life.

  59. gigi Says:

    guys
    protandim contains bacopa and ashwagandha. both are anti anxiety herbs used in ayurveda for ages.
    You dont’ need to pay $40 for that.

    Just go to amazon and buy from banyan botanicals or a good company.

    As for your increase in energy and ability to focus, well, that’s what brahmi (bacopa) does. When your depression and anxiety go down, u naturally feel better with those “good side effects”. Just purchase brahmi and ashwagandha. that’s all. easy peasy.

    oh and most diseases are related to stress. so when anxiety and depression goes down, the physical disease symptoms also go down. that’s all. easy peasy.

  60. Vogel Says:

    The company announced today that they are putting McCrud out to pasture. Guess he couldn’t take the heat anymore.

    Now he’ll have time to spend the ill-gotten gains from the Protandim pyramid scheme he was promoting.
    http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20130625-906253.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

  61. Naomi Says:

    Thank you for the great info. I’m a student, not a scientist. But I am fairly intelligent and practice critical thinking skills.

    I started researching this “wonder pill” after a friend learned about the product and was debating whether or not to get involved with the company. Her mother has cancer. Who wouldn’t want a once-a-day cure with no marked side effects in a $50 bottle? She had reservations, however, so I thought I’d look into it as well.

    Protandim makes several claims that should make anyone of average intelligence and a minimum of critical thinking skills skeptical.

    For the benefit of those who are doing “due diligence” prior to becoming involved with this or any other MLM “health” product:

    Firstly, there is no such thing as a “scientific breakthrough.” The scientific process is painfully slow. Studies are conducted over a long period of time. The process is meticulously described so it can easily be replicated by other researchers. Once the data is collected and analyzed and proven to be statistically significant, it goes through the peer review process. If it is shown to have merit, it can merely mean that it can be used to justify further research. (Please note that this explanation of the process is overly simplistic.) Findings mean nothing without a meaningful and scientifically valid interpretation of those findings.

    Protandim was examined for efficacy in treating DMD but was not found to be significant at the 0.05 level (which means that the results obtained were as likely to have happened by chance as anything else). It notes changes in TBARS and OPN and PON1 levels/activity. But what does that mean for me? So far, from what I can discover, not even the scientists can say. In fact, a study of lycopene (delivered via tomato juice) also lowered TBARS in both plasma and urine. But TBARS are just one of several biomarkers of oxidative stress and inflammation. There is no more evidence to support the idea of TBARS as a causative, as there is that the blue smoke blowing from your vehicle’s tailpipe is the cause of your engine trouble. It’s an indicator, not a cause. To connect those dots without evidence is neither scientific nor indicative of critical thinking. (Critical thinking seeks not to oversimplify and considers other interpretations.)

    Secondly, research passes through several phases (up phase V). A drug has to pass through phase III, I believe, before being approved for the general public. Preclinical comes before phase zero. During this phase a substance is tested in unrestricted doses in a petri dish/test tube (in vitro) on cells and on animals (in vivo) to assess its potential efficacy, absorption, distribution, safety, etc. Protandim has been examined only at the preclinical phase.

    As was pointed out, if these studies were to be conducted and Protandim was proven to be effective for treating inflammation, cancer and whatnot, the product would be in such great demand, the manufacturers would be hard-pressed to produce enough to fill the orders. They certainly wouldn’t need to sell it through independent distributors.

    Circumin and green tea have both been studied and shown to have some effect in different applications (anyone can access those studies through pubmed). A study comparing either one or both to Protandim would be rather easy and helpful, but to date none have been done. There is, in fact, zero proof that there is any sort of “synergistic” quality to this product.

    I could go on, but if, after reading the reams of evidence you have provided, people are still gullible enough to purchase this product, then I suppose the best one can hope for is that they don’t rely on it solely and neglect their regular check ups. It would be very sad to sell someone a product he believes to be a magic cure-all, only to have him die of a preventable disease because he mistakenly trusted the salesperson.

  62. Steamboat Capital Seems to Agree: LifeVantage Protandim a Scam » Lazy Man and Money Says:

    […] largest shareholder-Dr. Joe McCord-who has steadily been selling his shares". They didn't bring up the controversy involving LifeVantage marketing McCord as the inventor only to find that out that the truth was it was someone with no scientific Myhill who created it by […]

  63. LifeVantage Axio Analyzed » Lazy Man and Money Says:

    […] In the past I've shown how LifeVantage has sent contradicting messages on its products. For example, this marketing page on their website says that Protandim was created by a Dr. Joe McCord, while this filing with the SEC states: "William Driscoll and Paul Myhill, the original inventors of Protandim…" The document filed with the SEC doesn't mention Dr. Joe McCord as an inventor. The marketing page on LifeVantage's website did not mention Driscoll and Myhill inventing Protandim in any way. A co-founder of the company admitted that Dr. Joe McCord didn't invent Protandim and was used for his reputation. He even produced this signed letter by McCord where McCord admits he didn't invent Protandim. I cover this story in detail here. […]

  64. Amy Says:

    You expend a lot of energy focusing on who invented the product, when really it’s a question of how much each contributed to the formulation and research. BUT, I am curious, as I’m sure many readers are, what is your angle? Who do you work for? You’d be a hypocrite if you didn’t explain this to the readers.

  65. protandimscams Says:

    There are many different issues going on, making this important.

    Protandim hasn’t undergone large-scale clinical trials. In fact, it has only had two of them and the only one in the last 9 years showed a placebo worked better. Instead of proving the product scientifically, they’ve focused on marketing. As I point out in this article, they’ve purposely held up McCord as having invented Protandim, but in SEC filings they clearly say that it was invented by Myhill. So why does LifeVantage tell consumers one thing and the SEC another thing?

    If it’s a question of how much each contributed to the formulation and research, Myhill’s blog and McCord’s signed admission seems to show that it would be 99% Myhill and 1% McCord, if not Myhill 100%. I understand that LifeVantage tried to say it was a grey area where both contributed, but even if true, why the very different stories to the SEC and USPO that doesn’t mention McCord as an inventor and a very different one to the public that didn’t credit Myhill?

    I’m a consumer advocate that doesn’t work for the health industry. I’m simply being a good human and reporting fraud. Helping people my “angle.”

 

Previous: More About CMX-1152 and Protandim’s History
Next: Joe McCord No Longer the LifeVantage Chief Science Officer