yeah, I remember commenting on the really light color of the LJ100. The real stuff is said to be very dark and gets a little messy when touched, since it reacts w/ the oils on your fingertips.
NP assured that it was legit, so let's hope they weren't scammed, themselves. I can't see how 20:1 is better than 100:1, but if it's legit, it's legit. I just noticed the change as i was browsing the site.
20:1 may be superior to 100:1
This was taken from,
Long Jack Question? - Mind and Muscle Forumswhere Matt Palada from CNW said...
I honestly do not know what source is best...and to further complicate the issues, here is the explanation a vendor gave me as to why their 20:1 extract was better than the 100:1 extracts on the market.
LJ100 is a Eurycoma product that is a 100:1 water extract. They recently have standardized their product based on Europeptide. They had a patent application filed on that. I have read carefully the patent application (US 2004/0087493). I am not convinced that the peptide they identified, 36 amino acids, 4.3KD is responsible for the biological activity for the following reason:
A) The only biological test they did in the patent application was using a Fr3 fraction by size-exclusive column. This faction contains many things, among them the 36 amino acids, 4.3KD peptide. Based on my many year’s experience in drug-based screening, unless you purify the peptide or synthesis the peptide and use it for the biological testing, you can not conclude at all that the peptide is responsible for the effect. IN fact, 98% of the cases it is not responsible.
Based on my experience, peptide normally elute at 20-40 mins range. 9 mins elute is too early for peptide, which makes me skeptical.
C) If you look at the HPLC graph on Figure 3 of the patent application, there are many different components there. Unless they specifically tested the peptide (which did not show in the patent), they can not conclude that the peptide is responsible for the biological effect.
Unless they have direct data, Europeptide is misleading to me.
2) Lab Analysis
If they believe that it is the glycoprotein that is responsible, our product has high content of glycoprotein, even at a 20:1 ratio. Here is the result of our LongJax versus LJ 100 done at the same independent lab:
Based on the Glycoprotein level, our product provides 10 fold more value compared to LJ100 since their product is 5 times more concentrated. This is conceivable because optimal extraction concentration will likely retain more useful ingredients.
3) Human Studies:
The optimum test of the biological function is, of course, the effectiveness in human. We have also carried a small human test, and fortunately, used the same method as done by LJ100. Thus it can be used as a comparison.
1) LJ100 study (copied from Website)
Saliva Testosterone Test of 9 Individuals 26-52 years of Age
¢Dosage 2x2(50mg/capsules) morning & evening for 10 days
¢Normal range for athlete 800 = 150ng/dl of blood
Volunteer age pre treatment after treatment %
ng/dl blood ng/dl blood Increase
1 26 860 = 30 1,650 = 50 91.86%
2 28 580 = 30 985 = 35 69.83%
3 35 875 = 40 1, 576 = 60 80.11%
4 24 950 = 45 2,210 = 55 132.63%
5 29 755 = 30 1,345 = 35 78.15%
6 48 650 = 20 875 = 30 34.62%
7 52 450 = 25 765 = 35 70.00%
8 50 585 = 25 875 = 35 49.57%
9 42 350 = 30 480 = 35 37.14%
Data – preliminary data - more work to be carried out
Volunteers 1-5 are athletes - data are an average of 3 different studies at different times
Volunteers 6-9 do not exercise on a regular basis
2) Longjax study
Testosterone Saliva Test
(Dosage 800mg/day for 5 days)
Volunteer Age Pre-treatment After-treatment % increase
(ng/dl) (ng/dl)
__________________________________________________________
1 61 49.9 130.9 150%
2 40 147 274 86%
3 25 181 334 85%
__________________________________________________________
*Tests were done in the US by medical clinical labs.
*Samples were collected same time every morning.
*Preliminary data
* Volunteers do not exercise on a regular basis.
Notice that in normal individuals, LJ100 at 200mg/day (100:1 extract) increased T on an average 47.83% in four individuals. Longjax, on the other hand, increased T on an average 107% in three individuals at a dosage of 800mg/day (20:1 extract). Thus, LongJax is 2-fold effective in human tests even at a lower dosage as compared to LJ100.
4) Safety Issue:
Longjax has a LD50 of greater than 5g/kg (the highest people normally test). We spent more money to have the test done in Japan to insure quality.
5) Other Quality Advantages of Longjax
A. We set internal quality control standards. We take steps to make sure our quality is consistent. B. We do studies in the US to assure accuracy.
C. LongJaX is reprocessed in the US. As a result, it offers the following three advantages.
a) Free flowing and friendly for manufacturing.
The eurycoma extract tends to be clumpy when stored over a period of time. The capsule may not look the same as the new ones. LongJaX can store much longer without the same issue. Your capsules can maintain its original form over time.
c) The eurycoma extract can have high yeast and mould. The reprocessing process will help control yeast and mould.
d).Our material is made of roots. There are inferior materials on the market that are made of trunk. Such extract may have low potency and high toxic ingredients.
:bruce1:
