|  Limu
Plus vs. Original Limu
A Research Summary
Due to recent publishing’s of research, hypothecations,
and misinformation regarding both the “Original Limu”
and “Limu Plus” branded products, our company
was contracted to provide third party investigative analytical
documentation evidencing the elemental and active content
of these two nutritional supplements.
Reportedly a polysaccharide known as “Fucoidan”
is a key, essential nutrient naturally occurring within Limu
Moui Extract. Limu Moui Extract originates from an angel hair
style algae popular in the Republic of Tonga and related regions.
This wild-crafted algae, in its extracted form, has shown
great benefit as a nutritional supplement. The nutritional
results of the extract have been marketed over time as a Fucoidan-containing
food concentrate and a natural food source of a multitude
of aquatic nutrients.
 Globally,
there are very few companies that have the equipment, knowledge,
and technologies available to accurately test and measure
these finite nutritive compounds. We located and employed
the services of North Texas Research Laboratory (a division
of North Texas Medical Associates) and requested Dr. Danhof
(Ph.D, M.D.) to perform a nutritional analysis focusing its
emphasis on Fucoidans.
On May 19, 2004, a bench chemist by the name of R.H. Molony
published his microscopic examination, product comparison,
and comments on the two brands using a test procedure referred
to in his report “Methylene Blue precipitation.”
This test, when published in the 1930’s, was the best
method available at the time; with today’s advances
in science and technology – and using researchers with
advanced knowledge, capabilities, and degrees specifically
in this type of research – a more accurate and reliable
platform of information is attainable and defendable.
The attached Certificates of Analysis accurately validate
the existence and potency of Fucoidans in both brands. First,
it is important to note that both brands have a substantially
higher level of Fucoidan using “Size-Exclusion Chromatography”
than that found on the May 19 report from Molab Ltd. Second,
the verified confirmation of the Polysaccharide Fucoidan in
the two brands, as well as the raw material extract from Tonga
are as follows:
Sample Fucoidan Content |
| Limu Plus |
1.82% |
| Original Limu |
1.68% |
| [Limu Moui Raw Material
Extract] 2.20% |
Third, the final content comparison of Fucoidan shows the
Limu Plus brand to be 8.6% higher than the Original Limu brand.
And last, this comparison identifies identical molecular structure
in size and characteristic to all three test groups.
This evidence discredits the opinion that one brand is in
an insoluble form (as commented on by Molab), or that there
may be a bioavailability difference between the two brands.
The bioavailability is identical, yet the bioactivity of the
Limu Plus brand is 8.6% higher.
Furthermore, these tests prove the unreliability and limitations
of archaic testing methodologies and that advanced nutritional
properties require advanced nutritional testing technologies.
In closing, there is a variety of other pertinent information
published in Dr. Danhof’s (Ph.D, M.D.) tests that also
shows higher contents and nutritional values in the Limu Plus
brand. It is important to note that adaptogenic activity was
not tested as the Original Limu label does not report its
inclusion and other nutritional values and compounds were
not tested at this time. This test was performed at the direct
response to the May 19 circular to help alleviate any possible
confusion or misunderstanding.
|
Thank you for your inquiry.
Vitarich Laboratories, Inc.
Manufacturer of Limu Plus, and
Importer of Original Tongan Limu
July 12, 2004
|
|
|
