Topic Title: GNC Brand
| |  "GNC Brand"
, Wed 9 Mar 17:49
Posts: 5 | | Registered: Tue 4 May 2004 0:23 |
| |
| | "Re(1):GNC Brand" , Wed 9 Mar 17:57
Whoops, sorry.
Hi, I am new to the board.
I have been reading through som of the posts here and am concerned to find that the brand GNC has bad reports about it. I have just started to take it about 5 days now. Even though i have read the bad reports i plan to finish the bottle before i change to another brand.
I live in Hong Kong. I take the Herbal Plus Fingerprinted St. John's Wort. Is this the same one that you are talking about?
Any help here would be most appreciated.
Dosage - i read here 900mg is the recommended daily dosage.
each of my capsules contain 500mg and it asks you to take 1-2 pills 3 times a day which would be over that recommedation. i only take 2 a day though. Thanks for the feedback here.
Posts: 6 | | Registered: Tue 4 May 2004 0:23 |
| | | "Re(2):GNC Brand" , Mon 21 Mar 18:51:
Hi Shazlo-
The fingerprinted SJW product from GNC wasn't tested in the ConsumerLab.com tests that are the source of concern. It was GNC's standardized SJW that was tested and failed because of excess levels of cadmium.
Here some other thoughts:
The term "fingerprinted" just means that GNC (supposedly) checked to make sure that the contents are indeed SJW. The fingerprinted products are not standardized. That means that, unlike GNC's standarized SJW and other similar standardized products from other makers, the potency of the active ingredients (or their approximately correlating markers) in the product are not monitored and adjusted to a specific target level. No one knows for certain exactly what component or combination of components in SJW is responsible for the benefits that it gives some people, but almost all standardized SJW products are adjusted to contain a target amount of either HYPERICIN (more common) or HYPERFORIN (less common, but favored by some people). However by taking a product that isn't standardized, one has no idea how much or how little of the active ingredients are in the dose being taken. This is why standardized SJW products are much more reliable than non-standardized ones.
Some people (like myself) respond MUCH better to SJW products that are standadized for HYPERICIN, for example standardized GNC SJW and most other brands that are commonly available. Some other people respond better to SJW products that are standardized for HYPERFORIN, for example Perika brand and Kira brand, which are also widely available in the U.S. Personally if I take hyperforin-standardized SJW (Perika brand), I receive no benefit and my condition quickly becomes horrible and stays horrible, however some people do prefer it. GNC standardized SJW has worked great for me for two years now, and this report of high cadmium is really a bother.
If you're in Hong Kong, another brand that I believe is available there is Blackmore's brand, available at the Watson chain of drugstores. Blackmore's actual product is called Hyperiforte, but if you look at the label it is simply standardized SJW. I am currently also in SE Asia, and Blackmore's was the first brand I used, because it was the only one I could find locally. However, I have not seen it tested by anyone. Blackmore's Hyperiforte is standardized to hypericin and just works as well for me as GNC standardized. The only reason I stopped using it was because the price was quite high in Thailand. Please note that even though the label may say take ONE tablet per day, the standard, most common dosage is THREE tablets per day.
Another thought is that I've read that the level of possible natural contaminants like lead and cadmium in SJW can vary from batch to batch, depending on the soil where the SJW plant grew and even the season in which it grew. So, that just leaves a big question mark. If the GNC batch that was tested by ConsumerLab had too much cadmium, who's to say that the next batch of the same product might not be just fine? And if particular batches of other brands did pass that one test, who's to say that the next batches might not have a higher level of natural contaminants? It's all rather muddlesome. Personally I am still looking for an alternative to GNC standardized, but for the time being I'm still taking it, because it has been very effective for me and the batch-to-batch contaminant levels basically just seem to be a big question mark, unless someone tests every single batch for contaminants.
Blah-blah-blah. Sorry to go on and on. I hope some of the information above is helpful. Best wishes.
-H2Obuffalo
[this message was edited by H2Obuffalo on Mon 21 Mar 19:04]
Posts: 125 | | Registered: Sat 24 May 2003 2:26 |
|
|
Home
email/admin 
SJW home 
forum index
