Re: Wrong Sutherlandia!

Not very well studied by mainstream sources.

Toxicity studies in monkey very encouraging. No change in blood, liver, kidneys, bone marrow functions inspite of dosing 8x recommended dose.

Active ingredients, not very well analyzed yet. Does contain polyphenols and saponins.

The polyphenols are suspected in potentiating Krebs cycle.

What is a saponin?

Well, several botanical analysis state that it is an antioxidant, lipid, and that it has an "OXYGEN RICH," side chain.


Hmmmm! Try not to grin.

Do we see a familiar theme to most of these alternative substances that are not only touted as therapeutic for cancer, but also several other illnesses like viruses, anaerobic bacterium, autoimmunes?

Again we see anti oxidants, (polphenols) possible oxygen donors once again.

Why is this such a reoccurring theme with alternatives that treat several vastly different diseases?

Ask yourselves, why all these different diseases cross treat such large list of ailments. Sometimes the list of ailments appear copied and paisted they are so similar. What is going on here? Could it be all of these alternatives offer the exact same mechanism of action?

Down side?

Again, as with any alternative treatements using crude/raw material, dosing is subjective, not scientific, and a matter of trial and error. This still is the case with Sutherlandia.

Thank God we are seeing more and more toxicity trials, (in humans,) on these substances so maximum dosing can be achieved and not a matter of guess work, subjective analysis, or hearsay, (or cost)

Here is the first toxicity study for Sutherlandia.


http://www.sahealthinfo.org/traditionalmeds/firststudy.htm


Here is chemical description and analysis of saponins:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saponin


Note how similar these molecules are to other polyphenols, lipopolysacharides associated with alternative treatments.

Bret Tweet