Thursday, March 16, 2017 7:52:39 PM
In fact the referenced double blinded placebo controlled study (level 1 evidence) conducted where Sucanon outperformed Glyburide, and that along with preclinical results I have referenced below, were reviewed by Mexican and Peruvian authorities, resulting in approval of Sucanon sale in Mexico and approval in Peru. Note that these studies, reviews, and actions were prior to involvement of any individuals repeatedly referred to as 'scammers' (Irving, Hall, etc). From a scientific standpoint, the overwhelming majority of medical treatments by most people's doctors here in the USA, are not based on level 1 evidence, or even level 2 or 3 for that matter. Most is based on expert opinion developed through approved training in the profession. While controlled studies are desirable, they are not a prerequisite to established standards of medical care, as has been falsely implied. Summary details of the earlier studies are included below. It is all publicly verifiable information which the FDA referred to as "substantial clinical investigations"
Preclinical in vitro tests of Sucanon (then diab2) in rat muscle showed an up regulation of insulin receptors
Sucanon outperformed biguanides (Metformin) and sulfonylureas (Glucotrol, Micronase, Amaryl) in rat models
Pharmacokinetics showed dose response relationship, peak response 2-4 hours, no effect by 10 hours
Toxicity: none at dosing 2000x therapeutic levels in dogs and rats with therapeutic index > 10,000, no carcinogenicity, teratogenicity, or mutagenicity in mice
Clinical studies: randomized double blind placebo controlled study in 370 adult type 2 diabetics, 6 months (1 month screening, 4 months treatment, 1 month post treatment) Sucanon outperformed Glyburide in control of fasting blood sugar levels, urinary glucose excretion, and glucose tolerance testing
(All above results done under management of Bob Rieveley, Biotech holdings, before involvement of FROI or ROTH current individuals)
So your statement is definitively false. Logically, if it were true, there would be no reason to modify a Consumrr Reports article in post 4477 to falsely imply Sucanon as being the subject of an FDA warning, or claim "no active ingredients" or many other definitively false statements
Endexx Corporation (EDXC) Leverages Global Market Trends and Legislative Reforms to Spearhead Growth in the Cannabis and Plant-Based Wellness Sectors • EDXC • Mar 27, 2024 3:01 PM
Applied UV, Inc. Announces Pricing of $2.76 Million Registered Direct and Private Placement Priced at the Market Under Nasdaq Rules • AUVI • Mar 27, 2024 2:51 PM
POET and MultiLane Collaborate to Develop High-Speed Pluggable Transceivers for AI Networks • POET • Mar 27, 2024 10:52 AM
Maybacks Global Entertainment Opens 23 More Stations in Important Major Cities • AHRO • Mar 27, 2024 9:00 AM
NxGen Brands Inc. Forecast to Deliver 140% Growth in Q1 2024 • NXGB • Mar 27, 2024 7:30 AM
Kona Gold Beverages, Inc. Strategic Advancements: Covert LLC Introduces Federally Legal D9 Gummies and Revamps Innovative eCommerce Platform, Propelling Toward $12 Million Annual Revenue Goal • KGKG • Mar 26, 2024 8:30 AM