Good point. So I hit them up. Compressing the last two down into my reply:
-----------------------------
Comments inline below.
> I have temporaily pulled the quote from the website, pending your
> assessment of the following proposed replacement. CereMedix used
> to be housed at Northeastern University and it was Northeastern
> that actually released the original source information through a
> university news article. I would agree that most press is quite
> premature and very possibly just "hype." However the case here
> was that the host university was the initiator of the released
> info. Newspapers and other media picked up on Northeastern's
> release and reported accordingly. That being the case would the
> entire quote with the following clarification be ok, or would you
> prefer for us to just leave out the quote altogether? We
> certainly understand the need to protect reputation in this
> market that is filled with missleading or downright fraudulent
> product claims, and would again like to leave the decision to you.
> _______
>
> I'm normally wary of anti-aging drug announcements with good
> reason, since most are worthless but this one looks legitimate
> (found via KurzweilAI.net). Northeastern University is reporting
> on research that claims remarkable success in an anti-oxidant
> related drug. The claims sound a little too good to be true, so
> we should definitely wait for peer review of the science before
> getting excited. Press announcements before peer review are
> usually a bad sign in this and most other scientific endeavors."
>
> (Company clarification: please note that Northeastern released
> the original source information, not CereMedix or Lifeline.)
> ________
This is fine; you are welcome to use this full quote.
> Reason, it is true, however, that Lifeline has issued a couple of
> press releases since that time. Unfortunately, in this day and
> age, many legitimate companies also have to rely on pre-market
> exposure in order to help facilitate the attainment of the
> additional financing required to bring their products to market.
> Many potential investors look at press exposure as a validation
> of the credibility and worth of the technology. In our case for
> instance, we are close to finishing a $2 million private
> placement - the amount of funds that we estimated would be
> required to take CMX-1152 through human clinical trials and to
> market. It's quite an expensive proposition and these are hard
> monies to attain given the more difficult investor environment
> created by the "anti-aging yahoos" out there. So, press is
> sometime a necessary evil in order to realize the monies required
> to bring the product to the point of a more critical
> corroboration and peer review.
If I might be so bold as to suggest a use for a few of those dollars; have a look at the Methuselah Mouse organization (
http://www.methuselahmouse.org). I'm currently assisting their CEO, Dave Gobel, in putting together a $15,000 challenge grant for the next stage in fund growth (we're about a third of the way there since starting two weeks ago, and expect to wrap it up fairly soon). A token donation couldn't hurt, and would associate your name with this worthy, well-regarded enterprise in the next round of press releases and beyond.
Beyond this, it strikes me that entering the prize competition might be a natural extension of some of the work you or Ceremedix (or Northeastern University, depending on the strength of your ties) would have to do anyway. The principal goal of the research prize is to draw attention to this area of legitimate research -- said attention will also focus on competing teams and their technologies. (For a current and very relevant analogy, look at the 7-year-old X Prize (www.xprize.org) and the media attention there -- that started as a $10,000 prize also, and a few of the same names are involved with the Methuselah Mouse effort). The Methuselah Mouse guys have been getting a fair amount of press attention since the kickoff (
http://www.methusela...e.org/press.htm for a few selections), and this will only grow.
Let me know if you are interested in finding out more, and I can put you in touch with Dave Gobel or Dr. Aubrey de Grey.
> Thanks for your wishes regarding further press exposure. We do
> indeed hope to attain even more coverage for the CMX-1152 product
> candidate, but will always endeavor to be responsible in how we
> promote it. Obviously a little "marketing" is always necessary,
> but we hope that the product's main newsworthiness and attraction
> comes from its scientific support and endorsement by the
> sceitntific and healthcare communities.
I certainly hope to see good, working products driving out the snake oil, without detracting from the next steps in healthy life extension research. We'll see how it all pans out, but publicly expressing the line above can't hurt: it's a good differentiator. A sizable proportion of non-mainstream supplement purchasers are - like me - jaded, cynical, self-educated in the intricacies of the marketplace, and accustomed to research.
Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme
reason@longevitymeme.org
http://www.longevitymeme.org----------------------------------------
We'll see how that goes.
Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme
reason@longevitymeme.org
http://www.longevitymeme.org