{"product_id":"harvard-scientist-resigns-from-supplement-company-after-anti-aging-claims-spark-controversy","title":"Harvard Scientist Resigns from Supplement Company After Anti-Aging Claims Spark Controversy","description":"\u003cp\u003eIn late 2008, a prominent Harvard Medical School researcher and anti-aging scientist named Dr. David Sinclair resigned from the scientific advisory board of Shaklee Corp., a dietary-supplement maker, after the Wall Street Journal questioned his apparent endorsement of the company's \"Vivix Cellular Anti-Aging Tonic.\" The controversy centers on the supplement's main ingredient, resveratrol, an antioxidant found in red wine, which has shown lifespan-extending effects in mice but has no proven benefits in humans. Dr. Sinclair claims his name was misused in marketing materials, while Shaklee insists he approved all uses of his name. The story highlights important questions about how scientific research can be — sometimes inaccurately — used to sell consumer products.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch1\u003eHarvard Scientist Resigns from Supplement Company After Anti-Aging Claims Spark Controversy\u003c\/h1\u003e\n\n\u003ch2\u003eTable of Contents\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#ddn-key-points\"\u003eKey Points\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#background\"\u003eBackground: The Anti-Aging Supplement Controversy\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#resveratrol-science\"\u003eThe Science of Resveratrol: The Landmark 2006 Mouse Study\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#key-findings\"\u003eKey Findings: What the Research Really Showed\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#endorsement-dispute\"\u003eThe Endorsement Dispute: Who Said What\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#marketing\"\u003eMarketing Claims vs. Scientific Reality\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#implications\"\u003eClinical Implications: What This Means for Patients\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#limitations\"\u003eLimitations: What the Research Couldn't Prove\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#recommendations\"\u003eRecommendations for Consumers\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#ddn-faq\"\u003eFrequently Asked Questions\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"#source\"\u003eSource Information\u003c\/a\u003e\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e\n\n\u003c!-- ddn:keypoints:start --\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"ddn-key-points\"\u003eKey Points\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eResveratrol extended lifespan by 12% only in overweight mice, not normal-weight mice.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShaklee marketed Vivix with a question about living 25 years longer, but no human proof exists.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDr. Sinclair resigned, saying his name implied endorsement, while Shaklee said he approved all uses.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMulti-level marketing allowed salespeople to make disease claims beyond official company policy.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTalk to your doctor; proven lifestyle habits beat unproven anti-aging supplements.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e\n\u003c!-- ddn:keypoints:end --\u003e\n\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"background\"\u003eBackground: The Anti-Aging Supplement Controversy\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eThe story begins in August 2008, when Dr. David Sinclair, a professor at Harvard Medical School with a Ph.D. in biochemistry and molecular genetics (he is not a medical doctor), joined the Scientific Advisory Board of Shaklee Corp., a dietary-supplement company based in Pleasanton, California. Shaklee markets its products through a vast network of 750,000 \"members\" who earn commissions and recruit other salespeople.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eThe product at the center of the controversy is called \u003cstrong\u003eVivix Cellular Anti-Aging Tonic\u003c\/strong\u003e, a grape-flavored concentrate that costs \u003cstrong\u003e$100 for a month's supply (30 teaspoons)\u003c\/strong\u003e. Shaklee promoted it as \"the world's best anti-aging supplement.\" The drink contains \u003cstrong\u003eresveratrol\u003c\/strong\u003e, a chemical compound found in red wine, along with other grape extracts.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eShaklee's website posed an enticing question to potential customers: \u003cem\u003e\"How would you like to feel 25 years younger and live 25 years longer?\"\u003c\/em\u003e While the company's chief executive, Roger Barnett, says this phrase is \"just a question to engage people in a dialogue\" and that the company doesn't claim Vivix actually extends life, the suggestion clearly caught the attention of researchers and journalists alike.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eDr. Sinclair resigned from the advisory board in December 2008 — roughly six months after joining — following questions from The Wall Street Journal about his seeming endorsement of the product.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eAfter his resignation, Dr. Sinclair stated: \u003cem\u003e\"I have submitted my resignation to Shaklee and exercised my right to terminate my agreement. This decision was prompted in significant part by my recent realization as to how my association with Shaklee and my research have been used contrary to the intents and purposes of my agreement.\"\u003c\/em\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"resveratrol-science\"\u003eThe Science of Resveratrol: The Landmark 2006 Mouse Study\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eTo understand why Shaklee wanted Dr. Sinclair's endorsement, it helps to know about his research. Dr. Sinclair is one of the world's leading experts on resveratrol. In 2006, he led a widely publicized study showing that resveratrol could counteract some of the harmful effects of overfeeding in laboratory mice.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eThis was a significant scientific finding. The study, which was published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, showed that a specific benefit of resveratrol was extending the lives of overweight mice. Specifically:\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cul\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eOverweight mice given resveratrol lived about \u003cstrong\u003e114 weeks on average\u003c\/strong\u003e\n\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eOverweight mice not given the chemical lived about \u003cstrong\u003e102 weeks on average\u003c\/strong\u003e\n\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eThis represents a \u003cstrong\u003e12% increase\u003c\/strong\u003e in average lifespan\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, a crucial detail often gets lost in translation: \u003cstrong\u003enormal-weight mice did not live longer, even when given a huge dose of resveratrol\u003c\/strong\u003e. The benefits appeared to apply only to animals whose health was compromised by excess weight.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"key-findings\"\u003eKey Findings: What the Research Really Showed\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eThe conflict arose when Dr. Sinclair appeared on a Florida radio program in November 2008 alongside Shaklee's chief doctor to promote Vivix. During the interview, he told the host: \u003cem\u003e\"Based on the mouse studies, we are seeing a lifespan extension of about 20-30%. That's in animals that are eating an American, unhealthy diet.\"\u003c\/em\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eAccording to the Wall Street Journal's analysis, that statement \u003cstrong\u003eappears to overstate the science\u003c\/strong\u003e. Here's why:\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cul\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eThe 2006 study showed overfed mice lived \u003cstrong\u003e12% longer\u003c\/strong\u003e on average with resveratrol — not 20% to 30% longer\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eNormal mice gained \u003cstrong\u003eno lifespan benefit\u003c\/strong\u003e at all\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eThe Journal's calculation uses the standard method of measuring total average lifespan\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eDr. Sinclair defended his radio statement by explaining that he was referring to the portion of the mice's lifespan \u003cstrong\u003eafter they reached one year of age\u003c\/strong\u003e, a measurement method used in his scientific papers. This alternative calculation method increases the relative percentage because it excludes the first year of life from the denominator, making the drug's benefit appear larger.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eThe difference matters: a 12% increase in total lifespan is a very different claim than a 20-30% increase, especially when the promise of \"living 25 years longer\" is being dangled before consumers.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"endorsement-dispute\"\u003eThe Endorsement Dispute: Who Said What\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eAt the heart of the controversy is a dispute over whether Dr. Sinclair knowingly endorsed Vivix or whether his reputation was misused.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDr. Sinclair's position:\u003c\/strong\u003e He says his name was used in ways that implied endorsement of Vivix, contrary to his agreement with Shaklee. In his emailed statement, he wrote: \u003cem\u003e\"To my dismay I have found numerous uses of my name and reputation on the Web and in other media that implies endorsement by me of Shaklee's Vivix product. I have engaged counsel to deal with this matter and have demanded that Shaklee cease using my name.\"\u003c\/em\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eShaklee's position:\u003c\/strong\u003e The company disputes Dr. Sinclair's characterization, stating that \u003cem\u003e\"every implied product endorsement was in Dr. Sinclair's own words and every Shaklee use of his name — whether in print or video — was pre-approved by him in keeping with our agreement.\"\u003c\/em\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eShaklee also declined to disclose how much it paid Dr. Sinclair for his advisory board role, though both sides confirmed he received no royalties from Vivix sales.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eThe controversy extended to Harvard Medical School itself. A spokesman confirmed that the school was reviewing Shaklee's use of Dr. Sinclair's name and his Harvard affiliation, which had appeared on the company's website and in promotional videos.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eNotably, Dr. Sinclair had appeared at an August sales conference in New Orleans, where he enthusiastically introduced Vivix to Shaklee's sales force. In a video of the event posted online, he told salespeople: \u003cem\u003e\"Over a year ago, we set out together to do this, to make a product that you could actually activate these genetic pathways that can slow down aging... Together, as part of the Shaklee family...we can take this technology right now, to our friends, to our family, and really have the benefits of this new technology right now, within our lifetimes, and you'll learn more about the Vivix product later.\"\u003c\/em\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"marketing\"\u003eMarketing Claims vs. Scientific Reality\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eOne of the most concerning aspects of this story is how the product was marketed by Shaklee's independent salespeople. The company uses a multi-level marketing model, meaning its 750,000 members work for commissions and recruit other salespeople — and handle their own marketing.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eThe Wall Street Journal found that Dr. Sinclair's picture graced the front page of \u003cem\u003ewww.live25yearslonger.com\u003c\/em\u003e, a website run by a Shaklee salesperson, where Vivix was described as a product that could:\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cul\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eRepair skin injuries\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eErase age spots\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eQuell tremors\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eEliminate leg cramps\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eThese are disease- and symptom-related claims. Shaklee says it forbids salespeople from claiming Vivix affects any disease and that noncompliant salespeople are referred for \"disciplinary action,\" which can include terminating their contracts. Chief executive Roger Barnett said, \u003cem\u003e\"The vast, vast majority of them are very circumspect.\"\u003c\/em\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eDespite the controversy, Shaklee reported that \u003cstrong\u003emore than 100,000 people purchased Vivix\u003c\/strong\u003e since its August introduction, and orders were backlogged at the time of reporting.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eFor context, Dr. Sinclair also held a paid position as co-chief adviser to \u003cstrong\u003eSirtris Pharmaceuticals\u003c\/strong\u003e, a company studying resveratrol as a potential drug, which had been acquired by GlaxoSmithKline PLC. He received \u003cstrong\u003emore than $8 million\u003c\/strong\u003e from the acquisition and continued to be paid \u003cstrong\u003e$297,000 per year\u003c\/strong\u003e as a consultant.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"implications\"\u003eClinical Implications: What This Means for Patients\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eFor patients and consumers, this story carries an important message about supplements and anti-aging products:\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003col\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eAnimal studies don't always translate to humans.\u003c\/strong\u003e The resveratrol findings that generated so much excitement were demonstrated in mice, not people. As Dr. Matthew Kaeberlein, a University of Washington pathologist and former labmate of Dr. Sinclair's at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told the Journal: \u003cem\u003e\"I don't think there's any data that resveratrol is going to be beneficial for slowing aging...in people.\"\u003c\/em\u003e\n\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eSupplement claims are frequently overstated.\u003c\/strong\u003e Even a respected researcher's radio comment about a 20-30% lifespan extension was contradicted by the actual published study data, which showed 12% — and only in overweight mice.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eFinancial conflicts of interest may influence endorsements.\u003c\/strong\u003e Dr. Sinclair's paid positions with both Shaklee and Sirtris Pharmaceuticals mean he stood to benefit financially from enthusiasm about resveratrol.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eMulti-level marketing amplifies risk.\u003c\/strong\u003e With 750,000 independent salespeople creating their own marketing materials, claims can easily go far beyond what the company officially endorses — as the \"live25yearslonger\" website demonstrated.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eThe placebo effect is not health.\u003c\/strong\u003e A $100-per-month supplement tonic that makes people feel like they're taking control of their aging process may provide psychological comfort, but that's not the same as a proven biological anti-aging effect.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ol\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"limitations\"\u003eLimitations: What the Research Couldn't Prove\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eIt's important to understand what this 2006 mouse study could not demonstrate:\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cul\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eIt did not show that resveratrol extends human lifespan\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eIt did not show benefits for normal-weight individuals (only overweight mice experienced lifespan gains)\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eIt did not prove that resveratrol can repair skin injuries, erase age spots, quell tremors, eliminate leg cramps, or produce the other benefits claimed by the salesperson's website\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eIt provided no basis for the \"25 years longer\" suggestion posed in Shaklee's marketing question\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003eThe study's findings were limited to a specific animal model on a specific diet — findings that may not apply to people eating a balanced diet or taking supplements in liquid form\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eAlso worth noting: the 12% vs. 20-30% discrepancy in how the data was presented demonstrates that the interpretation of scientific results can vary dramatically depending on the measurement method used. When a claim sounds too good to be true, it's worth asking how the numbers were calculated.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"recommendations\"\u003eRecommendations for Consumers\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eThe controversy offers practical lessons for anyone considering dietary supplements, particularly those promising anti-aging benefits:\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003col\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eCheck the evidence.\u003c\/strong\u003e Ask whether a supplement's benefits have been proven in human clinical trials, not just in mice or test tubes. If the only studies are animal-based, that's a significant limitation.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eRead the fine print on statistics.\u003c\/strong\u003e When a product claims a certain percentage improvement, ask whether the measurement method is standard or carefully selected to make the numbers look more impressive.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eLook for red flags in marketing.\u003c\/strong\u003e Claims like \"feel 25 years younger and live 25 years longer\" — even when the company insists they're \"rhetorical\" — are designed to sell products, not to educate you.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eBe aware of financial incentives.\u003c\/strong\u003e A researcher paid by a supplement company or holding stock in it may have a conflict of interest. Check whether funding sources have been disclosed.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eTalk to your doctor.\u003c\/strong\u003e Before spending money on supplements with unproven claims, discuss them with your healthcare provider, who can help you evaluate the evidence.\u003c\/li\u003e\n  \u003cli\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eRemember that proven health habits matter most.\u003c\/strong\u003e A balanced diet, regular exercise, adequate sleep, and not smoking are all interventions with far more robust evidence for extending healthspan than any supplement currently on the market.\u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ol\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003eThe most reliable approach to healthy aging remains the boring one: lifestyle changes that have withstood the test of rigorous scientific scrutiny. That doesn't mean research into resveratrol is worthless — it means the current evidence doesn't justify the hype.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003c!-- ddn:faq:start --\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"ddn-faq\"\u003eFrequently Asked Questions\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eWhat is resveratrol and what did the 2006 mouse study actually show?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResveratrol is an antioxidant found in red wine and grape extracts. In a 2006 study led by Dr. David Sinclair, overweight laboratory mice given resveratrol lived about 114 weeks on average, versus 102 weeks for overweight mice not receiving it, a 12% increase. Normal-weight mice did not live longer, even with high doses.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eWhy did Dr. David Sinclair resign from Shaklee's advisory board?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDr. Sinclair resigned in December 2008 after the Wall Street Journal questioned his endorsement of Shaklee's Vivix supplement. He said his name and research were used in ways that implied endorsement, contrary to his agreement. Shaklee disputed this, claiming every use of his name was pre-approved and based on his own words.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eWhat was the difference between the 12% and 20-30% lifespan claims?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe published study showed overweight mice lived 12% longer on average with resveratrol. However, Dr. Sinclair on a radio program mentioned 20-30% lifespan extension, a figure based on measuring survival only after mice reached one year of age. This alternative calculation excludes the first year, making the benefit appear larger than the standard total-lifespan method.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eWhy can supplement marketing claims be unreliable, even with a scientist involved?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShaklee used a multi-level marketing model with 750,000 independent salespeople creating their own materials. One sales website described Vivix as repairing skin injuries and eliminating leg cramps, which are disease claims Shaklee officially forbids. Financial conflicts of interest may also influence endorsements, as researchers may hold paid advisory roles or stock in supplement or drug companies.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eWhat should patients consider before buying an anti-aging supplement?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAsk whether benefits are proven in human clinical trials, not just animals. Check how statistics were calculated, since different methods can make results look larger. Be wary of marketing phrases like \"live 25 years longer,\" even if described as rhetorical. Consider whether researchers have financial ties to the company, and talk to your doctor before spending money on unproven products.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eWhat are the proven ways to extend healthspan according to this controversy?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe article notes that proven health habits matter most: a balanced diet, regular exercise, adequate sleep, and not smoking. These have far more robust evidence for extending healthspan than any supplement currently on the market. The most reliable approach to healthy aging remains lifestyle changes that have withstood rigorous scientific scrutiny.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eShould I get a second opinion before taking an anti-aging supplement like Vivix or resveratrol?\u003c\/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore buying a costly anti-aging supplement such as Vivix, a second opinion can clarify that resveratrol's benefits are not proven in humans. In the 2006 mouse study, only overweight mice given resveratrol lived about 12% longer; normal-weight mice gained no lifespan benefit. Human trials are lacking, and symptom-related claims—like repairing skin or erasing age spots—go beyond any published evidence. Financial conflicts of interest can also influence endorsements. An independent expert can help weigh the actual science. Diagnostic Detectives Network provides independent expert second opinions.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003c!-- ddn:faq:end --\u003e\n\n\u003ch2 id=\"source\"\u003eSource Information\u003c\/h2\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOriginal article title:\u003c\/strong\u003e Harvard Anti-Aging Researcher Quits Shaklee Advisory Board - WSJ\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor:\u003c\/strong\u003e Keith J. Winstein\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublication:\u003c\/strong\u003e The Wall Street Journal (WSJ.com)\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublication date:\u003c\/strong\u003e December 26, 2008\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOriginal article URL:\u003c\/strong\u003e https:\/\/www.wsj.com\/articles\/SB123025446150734561\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKey individuals mentioned:\u003c\/strong\u003e Dr. David Sinclair (Harvard Medical School), Roger Barnett (Shaklee CEO), Dr. Matthew Kaeberlein (University of Washington), Keith J. Winstein (WSJ reporter)\u003c\/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote: This patient-friendly article is based on peer-reviewed research and journalistic reporting. The original WSJ article is a news report, and the underlying scientific study referenced (the 2006 resveratrol mouse study) was published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. This article is provided for educational purposes and should not be used as a substitute for professional medical advice.\u003c\/em\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"DiagnosticDetectives.Com","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":47545207062684,"sku":null,"price":0.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"url":"https:\/\/diagnosticdetectives.com\/products\/harvard-scientist-resigns-from-supplement-company-after-anti-aging-claims-spark-controversy","provider":"DiagnosticDetectives.Com","version":"1.0","type":"link"}