The Latest Fountain of Youth - Brought To You By Progeria

Medical research can take a bow. And another one. It is over their shoulders the beauty (and food supplements) industry is constantly peering – scouting for ideas, developments, and possible new ingredients they can capitalize on. 

Today's post is a classic example.

It all Started With Sick Children

There is an extremely rare and debilitating disease called progeria that affects 1 in 8 million children. Progeria manifests itself by causing the child to age at an alarming rate, and most die before they reach 20.

What does this tragic disease have to do with the cosmetics and skincare? According to CEO Vincent Bonniol of Prenyl B Cosmetics - everything.  A television program about a breakthrough drug for progeria gave him the idea for his company's anti-aging product 'Neo Stem'. The breakthrough drug contained active ingredients 'Pravastatin' and 'Zoledronic acid'.

"Very quickly, I thought of a cosmetic application that uses in small doses the two active ingredients contained in the (breakthrough) drug", he stated in an interview in 2011.

After adding them to their brand new anti-aging cream, Prenyl B Cosmetics (claims to have) patented the ingredients, dubbing them 'statin-omega' and 'Z-dronate'.

2011?? So why Haven't we Heard of this Product?

Indeed. Prenyl B Cosmetics boasted of skyrocketing sales of Neo-Stem. But that was 2 years ago. I'm still only seeing limited information and articles on it (and I've really been looking for it). 

Could it be that Prenyl B Cosmetics should have waited until there was more information and testing was conclusive? Could it be that they should have gotten more facts and evidence before they started formulating and selling products? 

Or did they just do what everyone else in the cosmetics industry is doing but neglected to spend enough on marketing this particular product?

If You Can't Make, it, Fake it!  

Even though I admittedly only 'travel around the edges' of the cosmetics industry, I've made a few observations over the years about how it works. 

For example:
  1. it's easier (and far cheaper) for cosmetics companies to 'borrow' someones else's research than do their own
  2. If they do their own testing, it's more often than not with a very small group (under 15) for a very limited period of time (2 weeks) 
  3. the industry knows full well most consumers only have time/inclination/desire to 'read the headlines' 
  4. it's easier to sell a product with ad copy that states: 'lab tests have shown'... even when the fine print reads 'in test tubes over a period of 2 weeks'
I could, of course, be dead wrong about all this. 

I just thought I'd share it with you.