4.6 Article

trans-Resveratrol in Nutraceuticals: Issues in Retail Quality and Effectiveness

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 17, 期 10, 页码 12393-12405

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules171012393

关键词

resveratrol; food supplements; dietary supplements; nutraceuticals; quality control

资金

  1. FP7 European Project THALAMOSS (THALAssaemia MOdular Stratification System for personalized therapy of beta-thalassemia)
  2. Telethon [GGP10124]
  3. CIB (Consorzio Interuniversitario di Biotecnologie)
  4. Fondazione CARIPARO
  5. Associazione Veneta per la Lotta alla Talassemia (AVLT)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fourteen brands of resveratrol-containing nutraceuticals were evaluated in order to verify their actual resveratrol content and to control if their health-promoting properties are related to manufacturing quality. Products included pure resveratrol capsules or multi-ingredient formulations with standardized amounts of resveratrol and other phytochemicals. Samples were analyzed for total trans-resveratrol, flavonoids, procyanidin, polyphenol content and the results were compared with the content declared on-label. Only five out of 14 brands had near label values, compliant with Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) requirements (95-105% content of active constituent), four products were slightly out of this range (83-111%) and three were in the 8-64% range. Two samples were below the limit of detection. The greater the difference between actual and labeled resveratrol content, the lower was the antioxidant and antiproliferative activity strength. Dietary supplements containing pure trans-resveratrol exhibited a greater induction of differentiation towards human leukemic K562 cells when compared to multicomponent products. Great differences currently exist among resveratrol food supplements commercially available and GMP-grade quality should not be taken for granted. On the other side, dosages suggested by most pure, high-dosage supplements may allow a supplementation level adequate to obtain some of the purported health benefits.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据