4.5 Article

Effect of a novel dietary supplement on skin aging in post-menopausal women

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
卷 60, 期 10, 页码 1201-1206

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602438

关键词

dietary supplementation; clinical study; post-menopause; skin aging; photo aging; imedeen

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of the present study was to quantify the effects on skin in post-menopausal women of a novel dietary supplement (Imedeen Prime Renewal (TM)) that contained soy extract, fish protein polysaccharides, extracts from white tea, grape seed and tomato, vitamins C and E as well as zinc and chamomile extract. Design: The study was a 6-month double blind, placebo controlled, randomized study on healthy post-menopausal females. Setting: The study was performed at a commercial Contract Research Organisation (TJ Stephens & Associates Inc., TX, USA). Interventions: Two tablets of Imedeen Prime Renewal (TM) or placebo were given twice daily for 6 months. Subjects: Thirty-eight (active group) and 42 (placebo group) subjects completed the study out of 100. Results: Clinical grading showed that the active group had a significantly greater improvement (P < 0.05) compared to placebo for the face after 6 months treatment for: forehead, periocular and perioral wrinkles, mottled pigmentation, laxity, sagging, under eye dark circles and overall apperance; skin on the decolletage after 2, 3 and 6 months treatment and skin on the hand after 3 and 6 months treatment. Photo evaluation showed that the active group had a significantly greater improvement (P < 0.05) on the face after 3 and 6 months for several parameters. Ultrasound measurements showed that the active group had a significantly greater improvement (P < 0.0001) for density measurements after 6 months treatment. Conclusion: In summary, this novel dietary supplement, Imedeen Prime Renewal (TM), provides improved condition, structure and firmness of the skin in post-menopausal women after 6 months.

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

4.5
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