|
Glyconutrients / Mannatech product and Transfer Factor
Posted by Fonzie on January 06, 2003 at 03:24:15:
http://www.mlmwatch.org/04C/Mannatech/mannatech00.html
http://www.masmith.inspired.net.au/docs/mannatec.htm
http://www.americanutra.com/jana-abstracts-vol2-no1.html#AnInVitro
Mike, I saw your comments about this issue on Darryl See's CV. I accept some
of the arguments, but I'm not totally convinced. The whole process around
the study was far too messy, and the fact that he worked for guys like Mannatech's
President is bad news.
You are very experienced in this field, so please explain this to me: how
is it possible to adopt TF's core marketing study from someone who, when
you type his name on search engines the first thing that comes up is related
to fraudulent activities in the MLM industry?
Also, according to the second article, "See claimed that out of a large range
of popular supplements and herbal remedies, ONLY aloe, garlic and three multiple-ingredient
products containing glyconutrients (Mannatech products containing the Ambrotose
formula) had been shown by his lab tests to be safe and effective". Also,
"his study had shown that glyconutrients increase the numbers of Natural
Killer cells by 400% in CFS sufferers".
So where does that leave TF? Isn't this the same study that 4-life uses to conclude that TF is the best natural immune product?
---
Posted by Mike Akins on January 06, 2003 at 12:16:01:
In Reply to: Darryl See & Mannatech posted by Fonzie on January 06, 2003 at 03:24:15:
Hi Fonzie,
Thanks for the questions. Dr. See's study is only one of many to report the
effectiveness of TF & TF+. Have you read the abstracts from the Russian
studies or the work done by Dr. Bock? We use one of the tests by Dr. See
as a main advertising tool because it is concise and because he did the tests
on the other nutrients.
Dr. See is a very respected researcher in many scientific arenas. Recently,
one of Dr. See’s studies was printed in a peer reviewed journal, Immunol
Invest 2002 May;31(2):137-53. His peers didn’t have a problem approving one
of his studies. His credentials far exceed the credibility of the reporter
or scam sites that discredit him. Dr. See has many more believers in his
credibility that there is against it. It hasn’t been a problem in our growth
or exposure. I would like for you to point me to the actual study that showed
glyconutrients increasing NK Cell count 400%. I don’t believe Dr. See did
that study.
As far as Dr. See working with "guys like Mannatech’s president" I disagree
with the conclusion. Whatever type of person Mannatech’s president is would
not be an issue with a scientist that believes in the effectiveness of a
product. A scientist would not know anything about what a segment of an industry
believes about a company or official of that company. From an outside point
of view, Mannatech would appear very legitimate. Dr. See still believes in
the effectiveness of glyconutrients and so do I. Transfer factors just opened
another doorway to good health.
Many scientists experience the effectiveness of a product and go to the source
of the product to get the product and many times in the interests of spreading
good news about an avenue to good health, endorse a product. We have researched
Dr. See’s background and the various rumors and have concluded there is no
true basis for the accusations. We are very proud to have Dr. See’s endorsements.
If someone has a challenge with Dr. See, they should not consider his tests
or endorsements. There is enough information on transfer factors, in general,
and on our particular transfer factor products to validate its viability.
Thanks again for sharing.
Mike
--------------------------------------
Posted by Fonzie on January 06, 2003 at 18:58:36:
I agree with you Mike, I was wrong to say that about that Dr. See and Mannatech's
president. I was just angry because I had just found that whole information
and the odds were pointing to a scam. Anyway, according to what I read there
isn't a real issue concerning the validity of the results since the study
was backed up by other investigators... is that true?
About the 400% NK increase with glyconutrients, here it goes:
http://www.peacevalleyhouse.com/nutraceuticals/aids.html#1
In this interview he said:
"When doing the same test by adding glyconutrients in the test tube to the
blood of healthy, as well as sick people, we saw an increase in natural killer
cell function of 50% in normal people, and up to 400% in sick people..."
"...Glyconutrients are the only product that I have found that takes care
of the immune system dysfunction without disbalancing the immune system in
those diseases."
This is another interview (June 28, 1999, about 1 month before the whole controversy with Mannatech went public):
http://www.northcountypress.com/I99-7-5/a0000005.htm
"How do these eight simple sugars, or glyconutrients work? With the addition
of glyconutrients, Dr. Darryl See MD, a California immunologist, found that
the immune system of a well person can increase by as much as 50%, and sick
people can enjoy an increase of as much as 400%! In his opinion, this is
one of the greatest discoveries of all time, ranked with penicillin, vaccines
and insulin. In a study partially funded by the National Institutes of Health
(J. Am.Nutraceutical Assoc.) that ranks 200 natural herbs and supplements
for toxicity and efficacy, these glyconutrient supplements are among the
top 5. He says, "There is no other natural supplement, vitamin, mineral or
drug that even comes close to accomplishing (what glyconutrients do).""
But then when I check the "physicians say..." in immunewise.com, he says:
"There is no other product in a nutritional substance, NOR a drug, that has
this kind of power and ability to affect our immune system. With the increase
of killer viruses, mutated germs, super-resistant germs, and food contaminations,
our only hope and defense, must lie within our own immune system."
Hmm... so in June 1999 he says glyconutrients are the best, but one month
before (11/5/99) he published a study saying TF was the best? And he gives
testimonials saying TF is the best?
-------------------
In Reply to: Re: Darryl See & Mannatech posted by Fonzie on January 06, 2003 at 18:58:36:
Hi Fonzie,
I apologize for taking so long to respond to your posts. I have a number
of things that I am doing. I will respond to the various points that you
made. I believe all of your questions are honest and responsible. When you
do not have a great deal of information, it is easy to develop the concerns
that you have.
1. You mention the timing of when Dr. See said that glyconutrients was the
best NK Cell booster and one month later he says TF+ was the best.
Answer: I was the individual that contracted with Dr. See to test TF+. I
got a hold of Dr. Rob and ask him to be my spokesman. Up until that time
Dr. See didn't know about TF+. TF+ was relatively new on the market. Dr.
See was so excited he ran the test twice. The one month between statements
is just the sequence of events as they happened. With every discovery there
is a day that new knowledge replaces old knowledge.
2. When Dr. See talked about the boostering ability of glyconutrients he
mentioned 50% and said in sick people as much as 400%. He later restates
that and mentions that particular person had a extremely low or damaged immune
system. If a person has a count of 2, it isn't so difficult to boost it to
8. We have a copy of the study. The 49% represented an average as did the
248% with TF+. In all of the studies you will have occassional increases
of 4 or 5 times normal when you use immune system cells that are almost non-existent.
When you first mentioned the 400%, I thought you were saying that was the
average on the composite study with glyconutrients. After reading what you
said more carefully, you did quote it "as much as." The study that Dr. See
had published in the JANA, he shows glyconutrients as averaging 49%.
3. As far as the article on CFS in which Dr. See mentions only glyconutrients
that is not a problem with me. When a individual is invited to write or speak
about a specific condition and treatment, it is common for that individual
to write within the boundaries given them. Glyconutrients do well with CFS.
I don't see that article as a conflict with what Dr. See has to say about
transfer factors and the many things it can do.
Dr. See is still a great promoter of glyconutrients and so am I. It cannot
compare to transfer factors. Glyconutrients assist the immune cells in completing
communications among other things. It cannot bring new experience knowledge
into the equation. Glyconutrients are more of a functional or mechanical
natural while transfer factors are more involved in experience and active
knowledge. Also, transfer factors are a source regulation while glyconutrients
are supporting cells and factors that are already in a process. They are
not the source of the process. The immune system needs both of these nutrients
along with a host of others.
If I had to choose one over the other, I would choose transfer factors. We
do pick up glyconutrients in our diet while you cannot pick up transfer factors
in what you eat.
Mike
MGN-3 vs Transfer Factor
In Reply to: Question for Pro-Net requested ref: MGN-3 vs. TF+/ ASAP Thanks posted by Alan on February 07, 2000 at 16:12:36:
Hi Alan,
Yes we are very aware of MGN-3. MGN-3 appears to be a very good product.
We have extensively reviewed the studies on MGN-3. The answer to your first
question, we find no reason you couldn't consume MGN-3 along with Transfer
Factor without any negative interaction.
The answer to your second question MGN-3 as a product was not among the 196
products tested. This product was not available commercially at the time.
Several of the ingredients were tested individually or in other combinations.
Since then it has been tested.
There are significant differences between Transfer Factor Plus and MGN-3.
First of all I would like to address the test results for the two products.
In order to compare "apples to apples", you must reduce the test results
to the same "common denominators."
(It is important to keep in mind that nether product directly cures or prevents
any disease. Both products have an effect on structural factors in our immune
system. The immune system is what actually effects the disease or condition.
Also, remember the science behind any "effect" by medicine or nutrients is
more complex than what short-term studies can conclude. All we can do as
individuals is to access the information and make the best conclusion that
we can.)
Now lets compare the two products. The first thing we must do is consider
the protocol involved in the test. The type of cancer cells used in each
test is important because cancer cells have different pathways by which they
use to grow and survive. For example one of Dr. Ghoneum's test which involved
24 cancer patients, reported 130%-150% increase in NK activity after 16 hours.
In another test on 27 patients we have different percentages were derived.
On Leukemia cells, after two weeks, MGN-3 increased NK cell activity by only
100%-240%. These type of cancer cells are more difficult to kill.
In the test involving Transfer Factor Plus, Leukemia cells were used. TF
Plus produced an increasein NK cell activity by 248% in the first few hours
compared with MGN-3's 100%-240% after 16 hours. The TF influence on NK cell
activity was more consistent in several tests. As with MGN-3, the longer
TF is used the greater increase in the percentage increase in its influence
on NK cells.
TF is more consistent in its results. The reason for this is that, although
MGN-3 does a decent job in boosting the immune system it doesn't assist the
immune system in evading the defenses that the cancer creates in order to
stay alive. You have to remember that cancer cells of your cells out of control.
They have the same instinctive drive to survive. The cancer cells can hide
in fibrin proteins, flood the system with false markers or put the NK cells
to sleep, in a matter of speaking. TF+ adds a complimentary factor to the
equation, assisting the immune system deliver the death blow to the cancer
cells.
MGN-3 is a more or less a building material to various cells within the immune
system. It does not add intelligence to the equation. It adds materials that
improve the function of the innate capabilities of the particular cell. There
are two sides to our immune system, the innate side and the experience side.
The innate side is what we have at birth instinctively. When we are born
we only have the innate, instinctive, side of our immune system to fight
disease.
Infants are very vulnerable to illness in their first few months. As the
immune system experiences "attacks" the immune system becomes educated and
is able to develop more effective strategies against disease. The more educated
the immune system becomes, the more effective it can become in the war against
disease. MGN-3 provides building materials to the immune system to improve
its capabilities.
Transfer Factor Plus, provides both an increase in intelligence and building
materials. The key is transfer factor. We have brought the intelligence of
an animal’s rugged immune system into our own. TF+ can boost the immune system
as does MGN-3 but has other capabilities of pointing out invading pathogens
quickly before the "attacker" can get a foothold. This is very important
from the preventive perspective of the immune system. The immune system's
first responsibility is to prevent illness, and secondarily cure illness.
Transfer Factor Plus effects both functions of the immune system, while MGN-3
only effects the one side of the equation. Another important difference is
the bio-feedback potential of TF. Once the immune system attacks the illness
there must be a bio-feedback mechanism to tell the immune system to back
off and reduce its numbers. If the immune system stays "excited," it can
lead to immune system exhaustion, inflammation, and audo-immune problems.
Communication is the key role here. This is where TF comes in strong.
Transfer factor contains the experience information, the inducer and suppressor
communication, and the bio-feedback mechanisms. Transfer Factor Plus has
a much broader potential effect on all aspects of the immune system.
MGN-3 is a great product but when using TF, it isn't really needed in our
opinion. The cost of the product restricts its impact on the millions of
average Americans. Cost of MGN-3 is $57.95 for 1250 milligrams. The cost
of TF Plus is 94,800 milligrams is $49.95. The difference in price does not
reflect a difference in effectiveness, but reflects the cost of extraction
and desired profit line.
Another factor to keep in mind is the length of time each area of science
has been in research. Sometimes long term research will turn up factors which
could effect the interaction of substances with other medications, substances,
and body functions. As an example is St. John's Wart. St. John's Wart is
a fantastic liver detoxifier. Long term usage has revealed that at certain
amounts, it can remove medical drugs from your body or render them ineffective.
What if you were on a vital heart medicine or some other life saving medicine
and St. John's Wart rendered them useless? You may die.
Don't get me wrong we are not discrediting MGN-3. We are thankful for all
nutrients which can help others. We share this information only from a comparison
perspective. Transfer factor has been in the research process for more than
four decades. Also, TF is exactly the same molecule which is in your body
naturally, except for the intelligence that it carries.
I trust that I have covered the subject thoroughly enough. If you have other
questions, we are in a position to answer them more quickly than we did this
question. Thanks for you participation. Since it took us so long to answer
this question will you please let us know that you read this reply. - Mike
|