He appears to have saved his hair, however, though it is fully gray. I have no idea if he's maintained favorable blood test results. Mike Leake. Durk graduated MIT in , which would indicate he was at least twenty at that time, even allowing for his brilliance. According to an interview published in , they were both fifty-two at that time, which would make them fifty nine today.
Where are Sandy Shaw and Durk Pearson now? Hoffmann Yen-Wei Liu. Reply to author. Report message as abuse. Show original message. Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message.
Hello, As I went to lifeservices. Gene Haywood. Saw a photo of Durk in a newspaper a few months back. These flashbulb photos are never flattering but he looked like a 65 year old probably 10 to 15 years older than his actual age grossly obese man.
You cannot accurately assess the results of a regimen upon a select few and extrapolate this to the whole We cannot know that they would in fact be in even WORSE shape had they not been doing what they do.
Coyote" wrote:. Joann Evans. Richard Steven Hack. Dirk was born in I happen to know both Durk and Sandy. Studied with them in the 80s. If you knew these two very humble kind persons you would not entertain all this negative babble. I have taken their super foods since the 80s and can testify to good health a sharp mind and energy that makes younger constituents marvel. Instead of running these two genuinely honest persons down try having an open mind.
Try the WOW and Inner power. There have been a number of recent commercial speech cases where it has been decided that if speech is truthful and non-misleading, there is no justification for the federal government [to interfere]. But, our point is [that] regardless of the product involved, it is absolutely clear-this has actually been stated extensively in a number of U. Supreme Court decisions-that the government cannot attempt to regulate people's behavior by keeping them ignorant.
In other words, it is true that having access to information might affect people's behavior, but that is not a justification for keeping them from getting information. SS: So, we filed our law suit with the support of other people who were willing to help [take care of some of the] legal bills. They came with us all the way. The FDA is now [concerned as to] how it is going to be able to keep its regulatory empire together, when that empire depends largely upon the control of information.
This is going to have a dramatic effect on FDA regulations. One of the [obstacles] that prevents people from benefitting from. There is a roadblock in the flow of information. DP: Or, as in the case of dietary supplements, the FDA has proposed to redefine the word "disease" to reduce the amount of "structure-function" information that can be provided about a dietary supplement.
It does so despite the congressional mandate to the FDA to increase the information flow to the public. The FDA is not going to be able to control information flow by redefining the word disease to be so broad as to virtually eliminate any statements that could be made about how a product helps a person stay well.
SS: The FDA re-definition of disease was its way of trying to get around the fact that the DSHEA the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act has required that the FDA review and approve health claims for dietary supplements, and that a company may provide information about the structure or function of a supplement that supports health without getting FDA approval. The reason is that many people know that high LDL cholesterol is associated with cardiovascular disease.
So the structure-function information would imply reducing the risk of a disease. DP: On the other hand, the FDA proposed rule says that it is [acceptable] to say that a supplement reduces platelet aggregation because most people do not yet know that platelet aggregation is associated with ischemic heart disease and occlusive strokes. But, of course, as time goes on, more and more people will find out about that and then the FDA [may] no longer allow the communication of such information.
SS: The people that know the most are going to be able to get around the problem of FDA regulation of information simply because they can get the information somewhere else. This hurts people who need the information the most, especially if [their means and education are limited].
In two recent commercial cases, the Supreme Court [stated] that the government cannot regulate speech as a means of manipulation of behavior. That is why we put up a lot of our own money for this FDA suit and why we felt something had to be done about the FDA and the regulation of speech.
Freedom of speech is one of our most basic rights. An awful lot of our medical research is funded by tax money. We certainly are entitled to know the results of our own tax money. Basically, what it comes down to is if the federal government is not bound by rules other than at the political whim of the moment, our lives and liberty can be seriously [jeopardized].
People do not [always] realize that there needs to be some basis in law that restricts what a government can do, otherwise there are no rights. LEM: Getting back to the FDA, why specifically is it so important for people to be supporting your efforts financially?
DP: The main problem is that it costs a lot of money to take a constitutional challenge through the courts. Not many people can do that on their own. As we see it, though, if people want to live for a long time, [people should have the ability to] translate research findings into practical products and. If, for example, a supplement can lower LDL [cholesterol] and increase HDL [cholesterol], [the consumer needs] to [have that information] in order to be able to benefit from it.
Most people are not in a position to investigate all these claims by going to a medical library to [review]. SS: And we want [to make it] clear. If the FDA appeals to the U. Supreme Court, we will have to challenge that appeal and that will cost more money. SS: I would also like to mention that the two of us have prepared very extensively before these suits. We did not just decide that, well, something must be done about the FDA or something must be done about the government control of medicine within states.
We have read many complete Supreme Court and lower court decisions to understand the legal issues and the positions of various Supreme Court Justices. DP: [We have become well versed] in certain narrow specific areas, such as the First Amendment, freedom of speech. Of course, we're not practicing law. We do not have law degrees, nor are either of us interested in that, but in order to fight effectively and use our money effectively we realized that we would have to know about what was the state of the law.
By reading court decisions, [we became educated as to] what was the actual understanding of the First Amendment, and we prepared [properly]. Each 35 oz 1 kg bottle contains a usual assortment of vitamins A, B, C, and E.
It contains a number of other ingredients, some of which are added for not much other than flavor. The addition of amino acids like phenylalanine and glycine help deliver energy and nutrients to your mind, breaking through the blood brain barrier, so many people consider WOW to be superior to other caffeinated drinks which lack amino acids.
Some of the unusual looking ingredients are the ones added for flavor. You may recognize sucralose, fructose, and citric acid. A potential side effect is listed as insomnia, especially if you take WOW in the evening. Directions state to start slow, taking in one serving a day for the first week.
This helps your body get used to the potent formula. On the second week you can go to two servings a day. You can take WOW up to four times a day, usually one hour before meals or snacks. Too much vitamin E.
This amount is likely safe, even if you take WOW 4 times a day, but you may experience side effects. High doses can also cause nausea, diarrhea, fatigue, weakness, headache, blurred vision, and more. However, do note that high doses are often used to combat certain ailments, sometimes over IU daily.
Taking it twice a day leads to the jars lasting a little over a month. The price is slightly high for a one month supply of a supplement, although not unreasonable, and this is relatively average for a drink mix. Drink mixes, especially those with a variety of vitamins and minerals like this, tend to be on the expensive side. L-phenylalanine is an essential amino acid found in foods like fish, eggs, and milk products.
Its effectiveness is poorly studied, but may be useful for a wide variety of things. Do note that you should not take anything with phenylalanine if you have certain conditions or take certain medications. Most people seem to be satisfied long term customers who have been buying from Life Enhancement for over a decade. Pearson and Shaw have been working on nutritional formulas for a long time and that work appears to have paid off. Uniquely formulated and using only clinically proven ingredients, HCF works to make your journey towards brain health one you can stick with for the long term.
Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw's WOW Brain Food includes the following ingredients: Vitamin A as beta-carotene , Vitamin C, Vitamin E as dL-alpha tocopheryl acetate , Thiamin vitamin B1 as thiamine hydrochloride , Riboflavin vitamin B2 , Niacin vitamin B3 as niacinamide ascorbate , Vitamin B6 as pyridoxine , Folate as folic acid , Vitamin B12 as cyanocobalamin , Pantothenic acid Vitamin B5 as calcium pantothenate , Zinc as zinc gluconate , Copper as copper gluconate , Chromium as chromium polynicotinate , Fructose, Phenylalanine, Taurine, Glycine, Caffeine, natural citrus flavors, silicon dioxide, malic acid, citric acid, fumaric acid, sucralose.
People speak positively of the energy boosting qualities of WOW and its taste. One reviewer said it's good for people overly sensitive to caffeine because of the formula and how it works.
0コメント