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.

A friend of mine sent me to Colorado Voices: A time when risk was considered a good thing and asked for my opinion.

I felt it missed on some obvious points. First, the points about mankind not making steady progress in a few areas seems flawed.

For example: Samuel Pierpont Langley had unmanned flights before the Wright brothers, and he was able to design a plane that did achieve flight before the Wright brothers... he just didn't have the funding to another shot at it until later. The Olds Motor Company used an assembly line before Ford. They actually patented it. It was Ford that was credited with it because he perfected it.

Neither the Wright Brothers or Ford were cases of progresses in leaps and bounds.

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

However, I wanted to do a little more research on the Steven and Jennifer that the article mentioned. The author, Michael J. Alcorn, makes the claim that with Steven living 11 years with ALS which is more than 90% of people, "he's certainly better off than most." He also makes the claim, "They think it's due to Protandim, and it's hard to argue with that."

Unfortunately, it is very easy to argue with them. You see, he is referring to Steve Bishop and Jennifer Bishop, who are Pro 4, Protandim distributors. I found an MP3 of a call-in show where they spread their testimonial about Protandim and Steve's ALS.

Interestingly, Steve admits that he didn't take Protandim until November 2009, some 8.5 years after his diagnosis with ALS. In other words he had already out-lived 80% of ALS patients by 3.5 years (if we are to believe Michael Alcorn's statistics as quoted in the article)... without Protandim. So logically, there's little reason to credit Protandim.

However, the Bishops have a financial incentive to crediting Protandim. At the 16:30 minute mark, Jennifer admits that Steven hasn't been able to work since being diagnosed in 2001 and that he hasn't been able to work. In her words, "Thank God, LifeVantage as the business... we were living off half the income." Steven chimes in saying, "I was kind of outliving my retirement... when your prognosis is not good you just don't worry about the finances so much."

What's interesting is that the Bishops are not new to the MLM field. Jennifer has been with the MLM SendOutCards since 2008. It seems more obvious to wonder if they joined LifeVantage, because they knew they could leverage Steven's unfortunate condition medical condition to solve their financial problem. In fact, Jennifer's life coaching business, Living Your Potential, LivingYourPotential.com, now just go her LifeVantage page. I guess she views that as the solution to everyone's life coaching needs.

I hate to pick on people who clearly haven't had very good luck for a decade. However bad the luck has been, it is no excuse to violate the LifeVantage distributor agreement:

8.11.2 – Product Claims
No claims, which include personal testimonials, as to therapeutic, curative or beneficial properties of any products offered by LifeVantage may be made except those contained in official LifeVantage materials. In particular, no Independent Distributor may make any claim that LifeVantage products are useful in the cure, treatment, diagnosis, mitigation or prevention of any diseases or signs or symptoms of disease. Not only are such claims violations of LifeVantage policies, but they potentially violate federal and state laws and regulations, including the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and Federal Trade Commission Act."

I wish Steven continued success with his fight with ALS. I only ask that they do so within the FDA and FTC laws. It seems like a reasonable request, doesn't it?

Originally posted 2012-04-25 05:07:46.

Recently, Donny Osmond was a guest on Dr. Phil. I was watching this closely as those with connections to LifeVantage said that the company promoted this appearance at their annual get-together. I was prepared for a mention of Protandim. Here's how it went down with the YouTube Video to follow:

Donny Osmond: Non-stop energy.
Dr. Phil: I can not even imagine. For example last night, you did a show last night, that was 90 minutes starting at 7:30, then you went through that, then you came here, you're here this morning.

Donny Osmond: That's right...
Dr. Phil: Doing all this...

Donny Osmond: It's non-stop. I don't sleep anymore. (Laughs)
Dr. Phil: So where do you get the energy. Seriously, I mean look at you. We've known each other a long time. You don't ever get older.

Donny Osmond: Well thank you. It's quick funny because people are kind of shocked when they hear that I'm 54 years old and they say, "How do you keep your youth?" I have found something Dr. Phil that I think is the closest thing to the Fountain of Youth.

Dr. Phil: Oh you do have a secret?
Donny Osmond: I have a secret and I've never really talked about it. I've been doing this for the last two years. It's called Protandim and it works and I'm telling everybody about this.

Dr. Phil: You feel differently.
Donny Osmond: I do.

Dr. Phil: Because you are running around like a chicken with your head cut off.

The video goes on from there, but it isn't relevant to Protandim in any way. It's worth watching just to get the full context of the exchange:

There are several concerning things by this video. If you read the title, you know the one that I'm most concerned about. However, before I get to that one, I'd like to address the others.

• Protandim Being Compared to a Fountain of Youth - This is completely irresponsible, especially coming from a paid company spokesman like Donny Osmond.
• "It Works" - This is the kind of marketing that MonaVie distributors have been making for years in the comments here. In the case of Protandim which isn't intended to make someone be younger, look younger, nor treat, prevent, or cure any disease... these companies can only make vague statements like these in hopes of misleading consumers to think, "Hey, I've got [fill in the blank condition] and could use anything that "works."
• Dr. Phil's "We've known each other a long time." - Now we know why he let Donny Osmond endorse a product he's paid to endorse without adhering to the FTC guidelines (see below).
• Donny's "I've been doing this for the last two years." - This is proof positive that Protandim hasn't made him any younger. Even according to Dr. Phil, "You don't ever get older." It is classic question, which came first the chicken or the egg. In this case we know what came first. Donny Osmond has looked young for a long time (my wife notes his obvious plastic surgery) and he got a contract with LifeVantage because of it. The cause of the LifeVantage contract was that Donny Osmond, it was not a case where he looks young due to Protandim. This is another case where LifeVantage misleads consumers.
• Donny's statement of "I have a secret and I've never really talked about it." - Really? Since he became the spokesman for Protandim he's talked about several times. The only thing that's a secret is that he's a paid spokesman and isn't disclosing it.

And that last point segues to the biggest point Donny Osmond and LifeVantage are not heading to the FTC guidelines for celebrity endorsements. Here's a quote from the FTC:

Celebrity endorsers also are addressed in the revised Guides. While the 1980 Guides did not explicitly state that endorsers as well as advertisers could be liable under the FTC Act for statements they make in an endorsement, the revised Guides reflect Commission case law and clearly state that both advertisers and endorsers may be liable for false or unsubstantiated claims made in an endorsement – or for failure to disclose material connections between the advertiser and endorsers. The revised Guides also make it clear that celebrities have a duty to disclose their relationships with advertisers when making endorsements outside the context of traditional ads, such as on talk shows or in social media.

I've bolded the last sentence for effect. It specifically addresses this case of Donny Osmond not disclosing his relationship with LifeVantage on a talk show. The average Dr. Phil viewer would not be aware of LifeVantage hiring Donny Osmond to be its spokesman and this is clearly a deceptive advertisement as defined by the FTC.

The FTC goes into it more detail, in their official guidelines... specifically in section 255.5 under Example 3:

"Example 3: During an appearance by a well-known professional tennis player on a television talk show, the host comments that the past few months have been the best of her career and during this time she has risen to her highest level ever in the rankings. She responds by attributing the improvement in her game to the fact that she is seeing the ball better than she used to, ever since having laser vision correction surgery at a clinic that she identifies by name. She continues talking about the ease of the procedure, the kindness of the clinic’s doctors, her speedy recovery, and how she can now engage in a variety of activities without glasses, including driving at night. The athlete does not disclose that, even though she does not appear in commercials for the clinic, she has a contractual relationship with it, and her contract pays her for speaking publicly about her surgery when she can do so. Consumers might not realize that a celebrity discussing a medical procedure in a television interview has been paid for doing so, and knowledge of such payments would likely affect the weight or credibility consumers give to the celebrity’s endorsement. Without a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the athlete has been engaged as a spokesperson for the clinic, this endorsement is likely to be deceptive. Furthermore, if consumers are likely to take away from her story that her experience was typical of those who undergo the same procedure at the clinic, the advertiser must have substantiation for
that claim."

I wish my crystal ball was as functional as the FTC's because they saw this coming a mile away. It is similar in many ways. The big difference is that laser vision correction surgery is FDA approved and "Protandim as a Fountain of Youth" is, well, the exact opposite. We still have the celebrity endorser not disclosing the paid relationship with the company. As the FTC points out this endorsement is likely to be deceptive (the FTC was erring on the side of caution, it IS deceptive.)

I think one could make a case that consumers are likely to take away that Donny Osmond is a typical example of a Protandim taker and clearly the advertiser, LifeVantage, can not substantiate the "closest thing to the Fountain of Youth" claim.

Originally posted 2012-02-09 05:17:46.

Since many distributors just want to complain that they hate the FDA, I've created a place to put their comments. This helps clean up other topic threads for discussion related to Protandim.

It is important to note that a personal grudge against the FDA or any conspiracy theory doesn't impact Protandim in anyway. In fact, LifeVantage is free to market its product in other countries (they are in Japan for example) and can show extensive clinical trials there if they want to be approved by the Japanese equivalent to the FDA, Japanese Ministry of Health & Welfare.

Often the point of making a claim against the FDA is to get people to buy a natural product, like Protandim, even if it isn't proven to help people. Here is a related article: Health MLM Mind Game: The FDA Approves Drugs with Side Effects that Kill People

Originally posted 2012-05-30 20:50:10.

I found it interesting that Nick Bello decided to put out a press release announcing his joining of LifeVantage. Considering that there is no barrier to joining LifeVantage, this is similar to someone putting out a press release that they ate a sandwich. It certainly isn't "Breaking News!" as he describes it.

In the press release he points to the ABC video attempting to let it speak for itself. He omits The Truth Behind LifeVantage’s ABC Primetime Video.

He's also quoted as saying:

“With a product like Protandim that has been proven by science through 15 different peer-reviewed studies, when people start taking the product, they keep taking it, and it is very affordable.”

Actually proven by science, according to the National Institute of Health requires clinical trials and systematic reviews. There's only been two clinical trials. The first had a done of procedural errors that are elsewhere explained on this site and the second showed negative results. There have been no systematic reviews.

And people don't continue taking the product. In a LifeVantage Conference Call, they revealed that 95% of preferred customers quit taking it every year. You can read more with the cited information here: LifeVantage Reveals How Terrible the Business Opportunity Is

As for it being "very affordable", it's is a terrible value with about $1.50 worth of ingredients in every bottle as shown in this Protandim article. It is much more affordable to buy the ingredients separately.

Bello then adds, “LifeVantage has grown at an amazing rate with no hype. It is the best kept secret in the industry.” That is further misleading as it one of the few publicly traded MLM companies. As such it's not a "secret" in any kind of way. As far as growing at an amazing rate with no hype, what do you call Donny Osmond breaking the FTC's celebrity endorsement guidelines on Dr. Phil? And then he followed it up with a repeated breaking of the FTC guidelines on another talk show.

Why must Nick Bello feel the need to spam the Internet with self-promotional press releases? It's yet another reason to hate MLM. You don't see other supplement company employees putting out press releases about them joining the company.

Final Thought: I really don't like to call out people personally, but these people deserve it. Why let them continue their scamming ways unchecked?

Dr. Harriet Hall has written about Protandim again. I had covered her last writing here: Dr. Harriet Hall on LifeVantage Protandim. That article covered how there were a lack of clinical trials and that there is POEMS: Patient Oriented Evidence that Matters.

So what does Harriet Hall have to say now? She analyzes the second human trial... making note that it doesn't qualify as a clinical trial. She points out that it isn't listed on LifeVantage's website and "coincidentally" the research shows that Protandim didn't work.

Dr. Hall covers a lot of technical detail, but the important details are summed up in these paragraphs:

"To recap their chain of reasoning: alcoholics might develop lung disease, that lung disease might be correlated with abnormal epithelial permeability, protein levels measured by bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) might be a valid measure of permeability, permeability might be affected by underlying oxidative stress, and Protandim might reduce oxidative stress by stimulating the body to produce its own antioxidants. Do they perhaps think that lots of “mights” add up to a “mighty” argument?

Why would they want to study this particular mixture of 5 herbs? The second listed author, Joe McCord, has a vested interest: he is an officer of the LifeVantage company, the manufacturer of Protandim. They explain that Protandim is “a nutraceutical with a lengthy history of use in homeopathic, Ayurvedic, and traditional Chinese medicine.” An interesting statement, since Protandim was invented only a few years ago by a person with no medical background and it was patented in 2007. Doubly interesting since it belies the common myth that natural medicines are not profitable because they can’t be patented.

How many Protandim customers are alcoholics taking it for lung injury due to alcohol abuse? I would guess not many. Why on earth would they pick an esoteric detail like this to study and why would they look at Protandim’s influence on lab tests instead of looking for a useful clinical benefit?"

...

I really don’t get it. Why did they do this study? Why did they use twice the recommended dose? What was the IRB thinking? Why didn’t they study something with a useful clinical endpoint? As an e-mail correspondent said, 'They make claims about diabetics being able to go off of insulin or reduce insulin... why not do a trial on that?' That’s an excellent point: a diabetes trial would not involve invasive procedures and would be far easier to carry out and far more meaningful. When advocates do esoteric, convoluted laboratory studies instead of straightforward simple clinical trials, it raises the suspicion that they believe at some level that such clinical trials wouldn’t help their case.

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!).

One thing that I like about Dr. Hall is that she boils it down to a level that the average person can understand. You don't need to understand the study. She explained it in enough detail that you can see that it doesn't make sense. The conclusion supports what this website, and Protandim inventor Paul Myhill has claimed long ago: Paul Myhill, Inventor of Protandim, Admits Protandim's Science is for Marketing.

When will LifeVantage answer Dr. Harriet Hall's questions? My guess is that they never will. Why? They have no answers and Dr. Harriet Hall is right.

Originally posted 2012-04-10 04:48:52.

I got an email the other day with an interesting observation. The FTC suggests that people do Internet searches to learn more about MLM before investing your time and money and LifeVantage says that you shouldn't. Here's the scoop:

The FTC has put together a set of guidelines for those considering getting involved in MLM. The very first thing it says is:

"Find — and study — the company’s track record. Look for newspaper or magazine articles about the company. Do an internet search. Look through several pages of search results to get a good idea of the information available about the company.

• How long has the company been in business? Does it have a positive reputation for customer satisfaction?
• What can you find out about the product and the service?
• What’s the buzz about the company and the product on blogs and websites?

I've highlighted a couple of important points in bold.

Here's what's at the very top of LifeVantage's official FAQ about Protandim:

Is information that I find on the Internet (by Googling) reliable?

The Internet can be a fantastic source of high-quality information, but it is also a place where anyone can say anything they chose about any subject. There is no fact-checking for blog posts, and the ignorant and uninformed have the same right to speak their mind as the world’s experts, on any topic. So use a little common sense. If you want the most reliable medical information, it is all at your disposal at the PubMed database website, provided by the National Library of Medicine. Just go to PubMed.gov and type in your search parameters. Type “Protandim” and hit Search, and you will see all the peer-reviewed studies that have been published so far. Click on any publication that turns up, and you will see a summary (abstract) of the study, and you may have access to the full paper as a PDF file. Type in “oxidative stress cancer” and you will find more than 8,300 papers on the topic. (You may need a Ph.D. to fully understand the papers, but you will be surprised at how much you can understand from a well-written abstract.)

Notice that it is the very first point that LifeVantage makes. They place this above the question of "What is Protandim?"

So you can listen to the unbiased FTC who says to do research and seek out information on the Internet or you can listen to biased LifeVantage and LifeVantage distributors telling you to do the opposite. As LifeVantage might say, use a little common sense and listen to the FTC, an organization that is designed to help consumers.

Originally posted 2012-06-01 00:07:08.

Today, I noticed a press release from LifeVantage a couple of days ago: LifeVantage Corporation Expands Management Team to Further Strategic Corporate Objectives. It's pretty ordinary as press releases go, but one thing caught the eye.

MLMs and pyramid schemes tend to be quick with the international expansion as that's the easiest way to get fresh people into the scheme. It allows them to start all over again to escape saturation.

One key quote came from LifeVantage President and CEO Douglas C. Robinson,

We are gratified to lead the fight against oxidative stress, primarily through Nrf2 activation, and because leading companies lead--they never follow--it's critical we continue to have the right people in place to help us further our objectives and accomplish our strategies."

What caught my eye is the claim that "leading companies never follow." A tipster just last week had pointed out that LifeVantage Corporation F4Q08 (Qtr End 06/30/08) Earnings Call Transcript:

"Another huge market that we're looking at very strongly is the networking channel. That's an almost $8.0 billion market in the United States, with almost $40.0 billion in global sales. Well, you’ve heard of Fitch Companies and Amway and Herbal Life who have revenues in the several billions of dollars.

You may not be familiar with a more recent company such as Mona Vie, which in only three years has obtained almost a billion dollars in sales, or Vango, which is about a $400.0 million company. Tahitian Noni, which is over $500.0 million. Nuwaves is also in the $500.0 million range.

A number of these companies are actually single-product companies and it’s interesting to note that the single products that they are promoting and having such great success in selling are largely juices that are highly touted for their anti-oxidant benefit...

So I feel that this is a very fertile market for us to explore. It's actually the segment of the industry that has, by far, the fastest rate of growth and is also the segment of the industry that has the vastly larger percentage of international sales than any other channel has been able to attain."

[Note: I'm going to presume that "Vango" is a transcription error for "Xango", which would make much more sense.]

What does this mean? Well since LifeVantage clearly followed MonaVie, Xango, and Nuwaves, it is not the leading company that Douglas C. Robinson claims that it is in the press release. Admittedly, this isn't one of LifeVantage's smallest marketing problems, but it was still worth pointing out.

It is also important to note that LifeVantage modeled its business plan to scam people just like MonaVie.

Originally posted 2012-06-04 20:47:26.

A few months back we covered news that Donny Osmond broke the FTC's celebrity endorsement guidelines on Dr. Phil. The time to reflect on this infraction didn't make Donny Osmond or LifeVantage any wiser... or more likely they simply don't care because each are making money from it.

The LifeVantage video promoting the infraction is here. (Note: LifeVantage is likely to take the video down soon after I write this post.) No need to click through there, I'll share it here:

In the video above you'll want to fast forward to the 2:30 mark. I suggest that because that's where Donny says, "It's non-stop" That's exactly where the pitch started with Dr Phil. It also quickly moves to the 2:40 mark where all the FTC Endorsement Guidelines are being broken.

As a refresher, here's a quote from the FTC:

"Celebrity endorsers also are addressed in the revised Guides. While the 1980 Guides did not explicitly state that endorsers as well as advertisers could be liable under the FTC Act for statements they make in an endorsement, the revised Guides reflect Commission case law and clearly state that both advertisers and endorsers may be liable for false or unsubstantiated claims made in an endorsement – or for failure to disclose material connections between the advertiser and endorsers. The revised Guides also make it clear that celebrities have a duty to disclose their relationships with advertisers when making endorsements outside the context of traditional ads, such as on talk shows or in social media.

Like the previous Dr. Phil spot, Donny Osmond fails to disclose his relationship with his advertisement with LifeVantage as a paid spokesman in his endorsement in a talk show. You can't come up with a more clear and obvious example of a company hiring someone to break the FTC guidelines and then pitching the advertisement on their website as if it was an unbiased review.

Getting back to Donny, here's is his endorsement. Note it is the same scripted talk from the Dr. Phil show.

Dao Vu: - They love how you look - like you're ageless... it's incredible. What is...
Donny Osmond: - I have a secret.
Dao Vu: - What is your secret?

(It's worth noting that this is obviously scripted since Dao is quick with the talk of "secret" as soon as Osmond mentions it.)

Donny Osmond: - I have a secret formula... [Editor's note: Donny Osmond lies. He endorses LifeVantage Protandim that is not a secret formula. The composition is on its Wikipedia page]

From there it just gets a little crazy... Let me clarify that. First Donny said previously that he's only been taking it for two years. That's fine, but he was considered youthful looking then... so he can't attribute any youthful looks now to LifeVantage. It's like Michael Jordan claiming that Nike Air shoes make him jump higher... we know that simply isn't the case.

More importantly Dao Vu points to the basket of LifeVantage product on the table in front of them. It's amazing that she knew the "secret" in advance, right? (Ok we all agree it is scripted now.)

Osmond goes on to the "clinically proven" speech, which is shown not to mean anything. Plus we know that there is only clinical trial and that has:

evidence of data rigging in the Protandim human clinical trial

and...
LifeVantage used company insiders and investors in that study

And ClinicalTrials.gov hasn't shown any success. In addition unbiased researches have shown the same - Brief Update: Protandim.

It is clearly not "clinical proven" as the celebrity endorser makes it out to be.

Donny Osmond: - So I tested it and it works...

Wait a second here... how did it work for you, Donny? You just went on about how youthful you look, but that was well established years ago... before you claim to have been introduced to Protandim.

Donny Osmond: - "It works for me... I'm 94 years for old.

I realize that was a comment in jest, but considering the FTC endorsement guidelines that were broken such off the cuff comments can't be ignored.

Originally posted 2012-06-29 05:24:36.

Someone pointed me to LifeVantage's new FAQ on Protandim. It's not nearly as good as our Protandim Scams FAQ, but we figured it was worth writing about anyway. Here, I go through each item on their FAQ and add in some of the information consumers should have that LifeVantage conveniently forgot to put in there.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

What is Nrf2?
Nrf2 is a protein that binds itself to a DNA sequence. It has been called the "master regulator of the body's aging process." When activated, Nrf2 enters the nucleus of a cell and stimulates protective genes and enzymes to neutralize the effects of free radicals and other reactive substances.

What they don't say: When we created Protandim we didn't know what Nrf2 was and for years never mentioned Nrf2 in any of our literature. However, since science seems to be showing that it is important we'll mention it as well. Also, Cheap Curcumin in Protandim Activates Nrf2 by Stimulating Free Radical Production and our product isn't shown to do any more than that product that costs hundreds less and may already be in your kitchen.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

How is Protandim different from other antioxidant supplements?
Made from five natural plant ingredients, Protandim is the only supplement clinically proven to reduce oxidative stress by an average of 40 percent in 30 days. Protandim activates Nrf2, which turns on the body's antioxidant enzymes to help protect against oxidative stress.

What they don't say: Protandim isn't actually clinically proven. We did a study on around 30 people, which is far less than the thousands of people that any FDA approved medicine uses. We also used company insiders and investors in that study. In addition, we might have rigged the data.

Aside from that we've suppressed the negative data that disproves our claim. Since that last test on 30 people was done more than 5 years ago, we've done another clinical trial, but the placebo group had better results.

Also, while we talk a lot about oxidative stress, we hide at the bottom of one of our pages on our website the important information for consumers: "Protandim is a dietary supplement, not a drug. We do not promote or intend to imply or represent that Protandim can prevent, cure, treat or mitigate any disease or class of disease. Protandim is not intended to be an alternative or replacement for any drug or biological product."

LifeVantage's FAQ:

What science and clinical proof are behind Protandim?
Protandim is validated through peer-reviewed studies that have been conducted in the research labs of prestigious universities such as Ohio State University and Harvard University and show that Protandim reduces oxidative stress by an average of 40 percent in 30 days. The results of these and other studies have been published in well-respected medical journals such as "Free Radical Biology" and "Enzyme Research." To view these studies, visit www.pubmed.gov and type in "Protandim" in the search box.

What they don't say: None of studies have actually been done in any Harvard labs, but we are happy to lie to you and the SEC about it, because marketing it that way sells more product.... and you'll probably never do the research to learn otherwise. None of the studies at Ohio State or even our faked Harvard one show that Protandim does anything to reduce oxidative stress in people.

We hired Dr. Joe McCord who was on the board of directors of Free Radical Biology, so he could get our studies published there.

The Journal of Enzyme Research has a very low impact factor of 4.62 which is considered very low and not well-respected.

We don't want you to go to see the mess at ClincalTrials.gov and would prefer you look at the low quality stuff that we've been able to push through via our connections.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

What are the main ingredients found in Protandim?
Milk thistle extract containing 80% silymarin, bacopa extract containing 45% bacosides, ashwagandaha root powder, green tea extract containing 98% polyphenols, turmeric extract containing 95% curcumin.

What they don't say: Actually they do a good job here of listing ingredients that you can get at local vitamin store such as GNC or via Amazon.com.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

Are the ingredients used in Protandim "organic?"
The ingredients of Protandim are harvested in a natural environment but are not "certified" organic.

What they don't say: We needed to address the fact that our product isn't organic, but we wanted to soften it by adding the words "natural environment" in there. Please don't read this this article on natural snake oil. Also don't heed George Carlin's words that "Everything is natural! Nature includes everything! It’s not just trees and flowers! It’s everything! A chemical company’s toxic waste is completely natural! It’s part of the nature! We’re all part of nature! Everything is natural! Dog [poop] is natural! It's just not real good food!"

LifeVantage's FAQ:

Can I take these ingredients individually and achieve the same effect?
No, the blend of ingredients and their special formulation is unique to Protandim and holds four patents. The combination of ingredients provides much more antioxidant power than any food or conventional supplements. A scientific peer-reviewed study shows that Protandim produces a 300 percent increase in the antioxidant glutathione.

What they don't say: Sure you can take these ingredients individually and achieve the same effect. We have no evidence that the combination taken as one pill is any different than separately. We went out and got a few patents to make it seem like the exact combination is unique, but the US Patent board doesn't do any testing to prove that what we applied for actually works or is an optimal combination. After all they approved these ridiculous patents as well.

As for our "scientific peer-reviewed study showing the 300 percent increase in gluthathione" we didn't actually do it on people, but instead our Dr. Joe McCord did it on "a mouse beta-cell line" and "a human neuroblastoma cell line." No scientists have found our study worth duplicating in a systematic review which is the typical of any notable scientific findings. This shows that we aren't discovering anything valuable to the scientific community.

Finally, please note the above that no matter what we say about glutathione, it is irrelevant, "We do not promote or intend to imply or represent that Protandim can prevent, cure, treat or mitigate any disease or class of disease."

LifeVantage's FAQ:

Are there any side-effects to taking Protandim?
There have been individual cases of allergic responses to Protandim that appear as gastrointestinal disturbances or sometimes as a headache or rash on the hands or feet. None of these have required medical treatment, and the symptoms disappear if Protandim is discontinued.

What they don't say: It would be fairly common for people to allergic to our product because we use milk thistle which often triggers a reaction to those who are allergic to ragweed. Ragweed is a common allergy. We should warn you that if you are allergic to ragweed, that you should use extreme caution in taking Protandim, but we have decided not to be helpful and would rather you buy our product in hopes that you might not suffer allergic reactions.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

Are there situations when Protandim is not recommended?
Protandim is not recommended during chemotherapy or radiation treatments for cancer. Also, if you have an autoimmune disease, you should consult your physician before taking Protandim.

What they don't say: Protandim is not recommended if you are actually for a product that does something, since "we do not promote or intend to imply or represent that Protandim can prevent, cure, treat or mitigate any disease or class of disease" and we can't think of anything else our product would be useful for.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

Does Protandim interfere with any prescription drugs?
No significant interaction of prescription drugs with Protandim is known.

What they don't say: In this case, they pretty much do say it... "We don't know!" Also, we hire cheap proofreaders, because it should be "interaction with prescription drugs"

LifeVantage's FAQ:

Can a woman who is pregnant or breastfeeding take Protandim?
With an obstetrician's consent, there is no known concern for a pregnant or breastfeeding woman to take Protandim.

What they don't say: Again, we don't know because we haven't our product sufficiently tested, but if you have a doctor that says it's okay, it's fine by us.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

How do I take Protandim? (dosage, with/out food, time of day, etc.)
Take one pill daily with food at any time during the day.

What they don't say: Since our product doesn't really do anything, it doesn't matter much what you do.

It is also further proof that our claim of synergistic ingredients is bunk. If the exact formulation of Protandim was important, we would warn you to not take Protandim with foods containing any of the ingredients in our super special pill. Since it really isn’t an issue, go ahead and drink some green tea with it, or enjoy some food with turmeric. It just doesn’t matter.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

What is a T-BAR test?
A T-BAR test reflects oxidative damage to polyunsaturated lipids, perhaps the most sensitive major class of biological molecules to free-radical damage.

What they don't say: TBARS is an unreliable test of oxidative stress that can be circumvented with a few cents worth of vitamin C. It's typically referred to as a TBARS test, but we'll just go with T-BAR because the creator of our FAQ doesn't know any better.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

Can Protandim be crushed and taken that way?
Yes, there is no harm in doing this.

What they don't say: This is further evidence that taking the ingredients as one pill rather than separately doesn't matter.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

Where is Protandim manufactured?
Protandim is manufactured in the United States.

What they don't say: We don't want to give any particular specifics. However for a long time we used Chemins which used illegal manufacturing practices and that exemplifies our attention to quality... or lack thereof.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

How long has Protandim been around?
Protandim was in existence prior to the founding of LIfeVantage in 2003.

What they don't say: The name Protandim has been around prior to the founding of LifeVantage in 2003, but the product was based on the active ingredient known as CMX-1152. We paid a lot of money for the licensing of it, but we weren't able to bring that to market for reasons that we refuse to talk about. To recoup our money, we created a new Protandim, the one with the formulation mentioned above and hired Dr. Joe McCord to lie about the creation of Protandim.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

Can minors take Protandim and how young?
Protandim is recommended for adults. Because Protandim is clinically proven to reduce oxidative stress to levels of that of a 20-year-old, there is no need for a child or adolescent to take it.

What they don't say: We are really sticking to our clinically proven story here despite the fact that this is clearly not true.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

Is Protandim Kosher?
Protandim is not certified as Kosher.

What they don't say: We don't want to spend the extra money on doing that.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

What is a Preferred Customer?
Preferred Customers receive discounts by purchasing products on a monthly basis for as long as they would like. No other commitment is required and an order can be cancelled or adjusted at anytime by calling 1.866.460.7241. To purchase product at our discounted rate, register as a Preferred Customer in the "Discounts" Section of Step 3 in the checkout process.

What they don't say: Our product is so overpriced that we can afford to give people a discount for no particular reason. You just call us up and choose "Preferred Customer" at the phone prompt and we'll give you a cheaper rate. We don't even need to talk to you to let you know how much we "prefer" you over other customers for simply selecting that option.

LifeVantage's FAQ:

What is a Retail Customer?
Retail customers pay the full retail price. The option to select the retail price or preferred customer price is a step later in the checkout process.

What they don't say: Of course if you don't want us to prefer you by selecting the option when you call, you can chose to pay us even more money. We are thinking about creating an option in the future called "Hated Customers" that will charge you still more money if you elect to choose that option.

We create these options because we want to thoroughly confuse you. Hopefully this has confused you enough to miss the numerous issues we glossed over in the rest of this FAQ.

Originally posted 2012-07-11 23:26:12.

I wrote about CMX-1152 and Protandim previously. Specifically the point made was that Protandim was originally a product called CMX-1152 that was supposed to reduce oxidative stress. That product was prevented (for some undisclosed reason) from ever reach the market, so LifeVantage was a company, with a debt, and no product to sell. So they decided to invent one.

I found this article from 2005 that gives extensive detail about this time in LifeVantage's history. One of the things that's of interest is this:

For a time, Lifeline continues to use the experimental results from CMX-1152 to tout their new non-CMX-1152 product, which could charitably be described as a potpourri of existing antioxidant supplements. This also is documented in the the Immortality Institute thread on Lifeline.

Originally posted 2012-08-01 15:25:05.

LifeVantage recently demoted Dr. Joe McCord from Chief "Science" Officer and hired Darlene R. Walley to replace him. Like any good public relations team would do, they mentioned that he's still be sticking around to help. That's usually code for "we are phasing you out", which isn't much of a surprise as McCord is at retirement age (67).

This move was hardly surprising. After all this space has exposed a lot of controversy regarding his tenure at LifeVantage:

• LifeVantage and Dr. Joe McCord Lied about the Creation of Protandim!
• Joe McCord Illegally Says that Protandim is about Cancer Prevention
• Dr. Joe McCord’s Role at LifeVantage - He's a spokesman cashing in on his reputation.
• Dr. Joe McCord’s Financial Interest In LifeVantage/Protandim - It looks to be more than 10 million dollars from the SEC filings.

It was really just a matter of time... as long as someone is watching the company for it's bad conduct.

Unfortunately LifeVantage's choice for successor in Darlene Walley doesn't look much better: Darlene Walley the New LifeVantage Chief Science Officer

Originally posted 2012-11-01 07:11:47.

With the news of LifeVantage beginning a $40M stock buyback, I thought it would be an interesting exercise to explore how much LifeVantage is actually spending on research and development of its products.

After all in the LifeVantage 2013 Annual 10-K filing with the SEC, LifeVantage stated:

"We believe our research and development efforts to date related to our Protandim®, LifeVantage TrueScience® and Canine Health® products are among our competitive strengths. We intend to continue our research and development efforts to create, develop and evaluate new products that are consistent with our commitment to provide quality, scientifically-validated products to our customers and independent distributors. We also plan to continue sponsoring additional studies on our current products in an effort to further validate the benefits they provide."

The last sentence goes to further prove what we already knew: the research for LifeVantage isn’t independent, despite what they claim.

That said, here are the numbers that LifeVantage reported to the SEC in their annual reports. In many cases I looked at even years of reports since each one has the previous year's numbers allowing me to get two years of information from one filing:

June 30, 2013 - $2,948,000 (Source)
June 30, 2012 - $1,359,055 (Source)
June 30, 2011 - $508,603 (Source)
June 30, 2010 - $392,691 (Source)
June 30, 2009 - $224,366 (Source)
June 30, 2008 - $324,106 (Source)
June 30, 2007 - $245,561 (Source)
June 30, 2006 - $114,163 (Source)
June 30, 2005 - $37,933 (Source)
June 30, 2004 - $21,000 (Source)

From before that the company wrote: 10-K Filed - 12/31/2003
"The Company has no plans for any research and development in the next twelve months. The Company has no plans at this time for purchases or sales of fixed assets which would occur in the next twelve months." (Source). It isn't worth going back any further as the company reported having cash of $754 at the end of 2002 and it predates even their relationship with CMX-1152.

Analysis of the R&D spending by LifeVantage of a decade shows a TOTAL expenditure of $6,175,478 or an average of $617,548 a year. That cumulative 10-year number is less than half of what the Boston Red Sox are paying Ryan Dempster this year.

Ryan Dempster, who you probably have never heard of, could fund 10 years worth of LifeVantage's Research and Development twice-over. If R&D were truly a "competitive strength", they'd be willing to invest resources into it and they clearly are not doing that and show a poor history of doing it in the past.

So why does LifeVantage think it is a good idea to spend $40 million dollars buying back its stock and only $617,548 on average per year in Research and Development? That's the kind of thing that a snake-oil company with no real science behind its product would do.

With Joe McCord stripped of his Chief Science Officer title at LifeVantage, it is worth looking at little at his successor.

According to the LifeVantage press release they've hired Darlene R. Walley to fill that role.

What does Darlene Walley bring to the table? One thing that stands out is her history.

She seems to have been President at Unither Pharmaceuticals in 2001. During that time the company developed HeartBar.

The marketing for HeartBar went over the line and the The FTC had to come down on Unither's marketing for being misleading. As part of the agreement with the FTC, Unither dumped the Heartbar and their distributors. It's worth noting that finding that agreement with the FTC is difficult since the agreement itself seems to include a clause to delete the agreement.

It's also worth noting that Unither was an MLM company, much like LifeVantage. Unither dumping HeartBar and their distributors looks to be a great example of foreshadowing considering the LifeVantage Protandim situation.

Now in fairness, Darlene Walley jumped ship before the FTC took action. However, let's not lose sight of the fact that all the things that the FTC took action on appear to have happened on her watch.

Originally posted 2012-11-01 07:44:36.

[The following post is from Vogel. Here he shines a spotlight on LifeVantage's attempt to mislead and lie to consumers once again.]

Just came across a corporate press release from LFVN in which they made the following claim:

“Protandim Is Certified by Banned Substances Control Group (BSCG) as Safe for Consumers and Athletes”

BSCG is a so-called certifying "organization" – but one that seems to serve the MLM industry exclusively (red flag #1).

What's really deceptive about the press release is that the BSCG does not conduct "safety" tests; they only test for the presence of substances banned for competitive athletes. It’s one thing for the company to say that Protandim is certified to be free of substances banned by the IOC, for example, which is relevant only if one is a competitive athlete who doesn’t want to fail a doping test after ingesting a dietary supplement. However, it’s a straight up lie to claim that Protandim "has been certified... as safe for consumers”. The BSCG provided no such certification about safety or anything relevant to non-athletes (i.e. general consumers).

Under US law, supplement manufacturers are not allowed to make unqualified safety claims about their products unless they submit reliable safety data from high-quality studies to the FDA for assessment and approval. LFVN has not done so. In fact, they have no published human safety data at all. When supplement manufacturers use GRAS ("generally recognized as safe") ingredients, there is an inherent assumption that they are “generally” safe, but there are many examples of supplements with GRAS ingredients that can have serious side effects. That’s why the FDA does not allow manufacturers to make unqualified safety claims. Furthermore, if a company uses ingredients in novel combinations, then it can’t be assumed that the safety profile is the same as when the ingredients are taken individually. This is particularly relevant to Protandim, since LFVN claims that the ingredients display unique “synergistic” properties. In that light, the safety of Protandim is even more uncertain. The FDA states:

"Where there is reason to suspect that the combination of multiple ingredients might result in interactions that would alter the effect or safety of the individual ingredients, studies showing the effect of the individual ingredients may be insufficient to substantiate the safety of the multiple ingredient product. A better approach would be to investigate the safety of the specific combination of ingredients contained in the product."

To make matters worse, LFVN even acknowledges in their FAQs that Protandim can cause side effects (allergic responses, stomach ache, diarrhea, vomiting, headache, and rash of the hands and feet). Obviously, it’s not entirely safe and they shouldn't be deceiving consumers to the contrary.

Originally posted 2011-09-02 16:38:47.

A lot of people ask this very question. The short answer is that it has never been sufficiently tested and this website has shown that the company in general shouldn't be trusted as they've been caught purposely lying to the public about Protandim as well as breaking FDA and FTC laws in promoting it.

I want to share a few words from Chris Redmond that may help you see it clearly:

"Let’s look at Protandim, and create two simple models or theories.

Theory one is that Protandim works as LifeVantage claims. Now, if this were the case we could reasonably expect and predict the following:

1. Anecdotal accounts of all round improvements in health, exactly as described in LifeVantage literature.
2. Serious debate about Protandim in the media as the anecdotal evidence is subsequently supported by General Practitioners and health professionals who are able to corroborate these anecdotal accounts
3. LifeVantage to start multiple human trials of Protandim, confident that any cost will be an investment as the science behind their product is solid, and the results being experienced by customers confirms Protandim’s effectiveness.
4. Results from the trials show beyond a reasonable doubt that Protandim works as described.
5. Medical professionals across the globe have instant access to the results of these studies, and en masse begin to endorse Protandim, with the proviso it is not a medication.
6. Demand for Protandim increases dramatically, production struggles to keep up with demand, and as more results from trials are published LifeVantage’s stock is exploding.

If this model is the one anyone recognizes I’d be interested to know.

The second theory is that Protandim does not work, and if this was the case we’d could reasonably expect to see:

1. Anecdotal accounts of all round improvements in health, exactly as described in LifeVantage literature.
2. A lack of serious debate about Protandim in the media as the anecdotal evidence is not subsequently supported by General Practitioners and health professionals who are able to corroborate these anecdotal accounts.
3. LifeVantage to avoid using multiple human trials of Protandim, as the science behind their product is not solid and the results being experienced by customers is only anecdotal and can be explained perfectly by placebo.
4. Results from any human trials that are carried out show that Protandim does not work, or that placebo is more effective.
5. LifeVantage do not carry out further human trials, preferring to cherry pick any positive results of trials involving ingredients of Protandim.
6. Medical professionals across the globe do not take Protandim seriously because it has no trails or evidence to support the claims of it’s manufacturer.
7. Demand for Protandim decreases, LifeVantage’s stock is imploding, it is decided to sell Protandim via the tried and tested avenue of pyramid marketing.

I could go on, anybody could, but basically Protandim fits the model of an over-hyped product with zero hard evidence of any health benefit perfectly, and LifeVantage perfectly fit the model of a company who realize this.

(I've taken the liberty to "Americanize" some of the British English. Hopefully Chris forgives me.)

Originally posted 2013-02-07 18:39:05.

[This article is intended to serve as a summary of other articles available on this site. Comments can be left on those other articles.]

LifeVantage makes a big deal about Dr. Joe McCord. However a little research shows this is unwarranted.

For example, LifeVantage lied about Joe McCord inventing Protandim. The true inventor of Protandim is Paul Myhill who has no background in science. Paul Myhill admits the following in an interview with Blogtalk radio:

"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."

Having said that, it's worth asking who much Dr. Joe McCord was paid to be part of the deception. A look into the company's SEC files shows that Dr. Joe McCord’s Financial Interest In LifeVantage/Protandim is significant which included a 10% ownership in the company when he signed on in 2004, worth millions. Since then he's been granted over a million stock options meaning that he can gain millions more if the company performs well.

In this sense, Dr. Joe McCord is acting as a celebrity endorser, which is best summed up in this Dave Chappelle short comedy bit (note: minor adult language):

Originally posted 2011-09-10 00:27:10.

Lifevantage distributors have been using a ABC Primetime video fro m 2005 as their primary marketing tool for at least 8 years now. I've been told that ABC has stopped LifeVantage from using it on its website. I haven't been able to verify this (it would be private a conversation between ABC and LifeVantage), but it makes sense as you won't see it there. Instead you see distributors spreading it on YouTube and coaching people to use it as a sales tool.

They often don't mention the details that one should consider. Here are a pile of them.

1. It is not disclosed that McCord makes millions from promoting the product. It would have been very easy for ABC PrimeTime to look up and realize that McCord declared himself at least a 10% owner in the company back in 2004. This financial relationship is not disclosed.

2. TBARS are measured, but the test was not run by an independent lab. It was run by McCord, which is particular important due to the financial bias and the fact that there is prior evidence of data rigging in the Protandim human clinical trial.

3. TBAR levels can be influenced by exercise, the placebo effect, or even drinking a glass of juice or taking a vitamin supplement. That's why TBARS is an unreliable test of oxidative stress.

4. Lowered TBAR levels have not been shown to result in any health benefit, and is not a definitive measurement of oxidative stress.

5. ABC has never done a follow-up piece. They also haven't reran the original piece to the best of my knowledge. If they were really the first to report this “fountain of youth,” breakthrough product they would be crowing about it reminding us during commercials of Dancing with the Stars that it's coverage beats the other networks. Instead they appear to have stopped LifeVantage from spreading it tacitly admitting that it was sub-par work.

6. You would think a “medical breakthrough” would be getting front page news and not need to rely on a video from 8 years ago. Why hasn't USA Today, Time, NY Times, Washington Post, etc. covered it?

At the end of the day, a smart consumer needs to realize that news outlets put together these puff pieces all the time. Why? Because people enjoy them and its good for ratings. You've seen it before with acai, resveratrol, garlic, hoodia, etc. ABC may have thought they were getting in early on a trend in 2005, but the other news organizations knew better and stayed away.

Furthermore, at the time ABC didn't know that LifeVantage and Dr. Joe McCord were Lying about the Creation of Protandim. They also didn't know that McCord would illegally say that Protandim is about cancer prevention. Back in 2005, Protandim was just being put together and this information simply wasn't known or in the last example, hadn't happened.

If anyone is pitching you an ABC video from 2005, tell then you have a Palm Treo smartphone to sell them. After it does the web!

Many thanks to Lisarob for putting together many of the points in this article.

Originally posted 2013-09-04 17:12:50.

I was just mentioning how LiveVantage’s Policies and Procedures contradicts itself to a friend. She made an additional point that I missed. As of September 13, 2011, Section 8.11.2 of LifeVantage's Policies and Procedures (PDF) reads:

"An Independent Distributor that provides a product experience testimonial in any medium should use care to disclose their affiliation with LifeVantage ('LifeVantage Independent Distributor'), be honest in their testimonial personal experience, and assert that they are not claiming that their experience is the typical result experienced by consumers."

On the surface this sounds pretty responsible. However, as was previously pointed out in the aforementioned article, is no typical result experienced by consumers so Independent Distributors can make no claims.

What I had missed, though, is that the Independent Distributor can't even make the claim WHILE disclosing that it is not typical. The FTC's Endorsement Guidelines read:

"Example 1: A brochure for a baldness treatment consists entirely of testimonials from satisfied customers who say that after using the product, they had amazing hair growth and their hair is as thick and strong as it was when they were teenagers. The advertiser must have competent and reliable scientific evidence that its product is effective in producing
new hair growth.

The ad will also likely communicate that the endorsers’ experiences are representative of what new users of the product can generally expect. Therefore, even if the advertiser includes a disclaimer such as, “Notice: These testimonials do not prove our product works. You should not expect to have similar results,” the ad is likely to be deceptive unless the advertiser has adequate substantiation that new users typically will experience results similar to those experienced by the testimonialists."

The FTC clarified this point in another FAQ about the Revised Guidelines with another example:

"In our ads we want to feature endorsements from consumers who achieved the best results with our product. Can we do that under the revised Guides?

Testimonials claiming specific results usually will be interpreted to mean that the endorser’s experience is what others can expect. Statements like “Results not typical” or “Individual results may vary” won’t change that interpretation. That leaves advertisers with two choices:

• Have adequate proof to back up the claim that the results shown in the ad are typical, or
• Clearly and conspicuously disclose the generally expected performance in the circumstances shown in the ad

How would this principle apply in a real ad?

The revised Guides include a lot of examples with practical advice for marketers. Suppose an ad features an endorsement from 'Mary G.' who says, 'I lost 50 pounds in 6 months with WeightAway.' This ad likely conveys that Mary G.'s experience is typical of what consumers will achieve by using the product. If consumers can’t expect to get those results, the ad likely would mislead consumers unless it makes clear what consumers can expect to lose in similar circumstances – for example, 'Most women who use WeightAway for six months lose at least 15 pounds.'"

By suggesting that Independent Distributors disclose that the results aren't typical ignores the FTC Guidelines that they either need to be able to back up the claim with adequate proof (which doesn't exist for any Protandim claim on humans) or that they disclose the general expected performance (which is no expected change for the customer of the product).

In other words, it seems every conceivable testimony for Protandim would be considered deceptive by the FTC. LifeVantage, instead of recognizing this and making distributors aware of these guidelines, hides behind the inadequate and antiquated notion of telling distributors to say, "results not typical." That's no longer sufficient according to the FTC.

Originally posted 2011-09-13 23:01:41.

Many have noted that Dr. Dan Royal's past has been ugly. That ugly past is too long for me to recap there, so I suggest you click on the above link and read it.

Now Dan Royal is looking to pull off a new scam. A scam within a scam. How is he looking to do this? Through a LifeVantage Challenge. Let

Here's how it works. Let's see if you can spot the scam:

1. Go to the website: www.royalmedicalclinic.com
2. Fill out patient forms (below) and either fax to (702) 938-5844 or scan and email to droyal@royalmedicalclinic.com:

   a) LFVN Nutritional Assessment;
   b) Patient Information; and
   c) Patient History.

3. Pay Administrative Fee of $100 for Nutritional Assessment or Homeopathic Consultation to Royal Medical Group (“RMG”) by credit card or PayPal, calling (702) 938-5055, faxing (702) 938-5844 or emailing: droyal@royalmedicalclinic.com.
4. Get blood test for MicroNutrient Test:

   a) Physician orders test from SpectraCell;
   b) Test kit is shipped to participant;
   c) Participant has blood drawn and sample shipped to SpectraCell;
   a. Insurance patients must include insurance information and/or copy of their insurance card, along with co-pay of $160;
   and
   b. Cash patients must pay RMG $320 via credit card, PayPal, or check.
   d) Physician receives and reviews test results and provides a copy to participant.

   CIGNA, Medicaid, and Blue Cross/Blue Shield in TX, IL, OK, NM, SC and TN are not billable insurances and cash must be paid.

5. Take Protandim as prescribed by physician.

   a) Participant should obtain Protandim from LFVN Distributor; but
   b) If Participant does not have Distributor, he/she may purchase Protandim at: www.mylifevantage.com/royal.

6. Participant repeats blood test in 3-6 months or as recommended by Physician.

Here's the PDF outlining those instructions.

Did you catch it? Dan Royal collects the $100 administrative fee plus whatever commissions he gets from people buying the product in part 5b. That $100 doesn't sound like that much, does it? Well it also looks like those with insurance have to pay a $160 co-pay to Royal Medical Group and those without pay $320. If you read the summary of the his PowerPoint at LifeVantage Elite he's looking to get 1,000 people to take the test. That's $100,000 in his pocket in administrative fees, and around $160,000 in co-pays, plus the product commissions.

Who else wins in this? Well LifeVantage gets distributors to foot the bill for testing its product. If the test comes out good, they will certain trumpet it as a success. If it comes out to do nothing, it will likely never see the light of day and Dan Royal will quietly end the challenge. One thing is for sure, this test by using people who are likely distributors to begin with will be biased and subject to a very significant placebo effect.

Who is the loser in this? It is the poor victim of the scam, the distributors. It's unlikely that health insurance is going to consider one nutritional assessment a good use of their money, much less two in a 3-6 month span. They are much more likely to suggest that you buy a cheap multivitamin and kick you out of their office. So in reality, the distributor is looking at paying $640 for two tests, $100 for an administrative fee, $300 in 6 months - a total of over $1000. Why pay $1000 to prove that someone else's product works? LifeVantage should be footing the bill, not the distributors.

How else does the distributor lose in this? The distributor has to give up any claim to being a patient. Does your doctor make you do that? If so, I would hope you'd get a new doctor right away. Here's the agreement to participating in the program. It states:

"Guarantees: I acknowledge that RMG has not made any promises or guarantees to me regarding my medical condition(s) and that RMG’s assessment does not constitute a physician-patient relationship."

It doesn't end there. The agreement also requires that you go through binding arbitration instead of suing for damages:

"Arbitration: I agree that any claim or dispute arising out of this Agreement shall be subject to binding arbitration pursuant to the Commercial Rules of the American Arbitration Association (AAA) and conducted by a single AAA arbitrator in Henderson, Nevada. In no event shall either party be entitled to punitive damages."

Finally the non-patient (I don't know what else to call the distributor signing this) receives all care through telephone or email.

"ROYAL MEDICAL GROUP...will perform either a telemedicine nutritional assessment or homeopathic consult via email and/or phone."

An email consultation... that seems to be what the $100 administrative fee gets you.

It seems odd to trust Dan Royal's expertise. In both documents he mentions that Protandim is prescribed by a physician. Next time you visit your doctor ask him to write a prescription for a Protandim and see what he says. Or perhaps if you find yourself at a drug store ask the pharmacists how many prescriptions for Protandim they fill each day.

In seriousness, please don't bother your doctor and pharmacists about Protandim. They are busy enough without having to deal with pranks designed to prove Dan Royal's ignorance.

Originally posted 2011-10-11 01:24:46.