Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
TA-65 Deceptive Marketing Class Action Lawsuit
By Sarah Pierce
A class action lawsuit claims the parties behind the anti-aging pill TA-65 are pushing the non-prescription drug on consumers with bogus claims about its effectiveness and safety, and hides the fact that it can cause tumors and cancer in people who use it.
TA-65 is marketed as an anti-aging “nutraceutical” that works by restoring a user’s telomeres – the protective caps of DNA located at the ends of all chromosomes. Over time, telomeres can wear down and eventually die, leading to physical signs of aging as well as organ degeneration. The longer your telomeres are, the more youthful you appear and feel.
TA-65 is advertised as being able to reverse the clock at a cellular level by rejuvenating these worn-out cells though the enzyme “telomerase,” which is found in the Chinese plant called TAT2.
“TA-65 is an isolated synthetic version of the compound found in extracts of Astragalus membranaceus root, that is not only naturally occurring, but has been extracted and used by traditional medicines all over the world for thousands of years,” the class action lawsuit says. However, since TA-65 is marketed as a nutritional supplement, not a drug, it does not undergo the same review by the Food and Drug Administration as prescription or OTC drugs to prove its safety and efficacy.
“Although Astragalus is used for many conditions, there is presently no reliable and accepted scientific evidence to determine whether or not it is effective for any of them…. Its possible side effects are not well known because Astragalus is generally used in combination with other drugs,” the TA-65 class action lawsuit continues, adding that possible side effects of Astragalus can include drug interactions that suppress the immune system and adverse effects on blood sugar levels and blood pressure.
The manufacturer of TA-65 even goes so far as to claim that “not a single adverse reaction reported by our licensed physicians” and “Not a single diagnosis of cancer has been reported,” the TA-65 class action lawsuit states.
“This statement is knowingly false,” the lawsuit says. The lead Plaintiff in the class action lawsuit says he was diagnosed with prostate cancer after taking TA-65, and reported this to the Defendants.
“Defendants have failed to reasonably warn consumers of the potential dangerous consequences associated with TA-65 telomerase activation and malignant tumor formation,” the TA-65 class action lawsuit says. “Defendants have failed to disclose to the consumer public, including Plaintiffs, that cancer cells have the unique ability to turn on telomerase, and enzyme that elongates telomeres, preventing them from growing shorter and enabling cancer cells to divide and survive indefinitely. In fact, the association between tumor formation and telomerase activation is undisputed – about 90% of tumors rely on telomerase to thrive.”
The Defendants also failed to warn the public that opinions have been expressed in the scientific community that a year of continuous telomerase activation – such as through using TA-65 – could allow pre-malignant lesions in the human body to expand into larger tumors that then could mutate into fatal malignancies on their own, even after the drug is no longer taken.
The TA-65 class action lawsuit is brought on behalf of all persons who purchased, received and/or consumed TA-65 MD or TA-65 in the State of New York. It is seeking statutory damages, court costs, attorney’s fees and more.
A copy of the TA-65 Class Action Lawsuit can be read here.
The case is Brian Egan, et al. v. Telomerase Activation Sciences, Inc., et al., Case No. 652533/2012, Supreme Court of the State of New York (County of New York).
Updated August 8th, 2012
All class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Lawsuit News section of Top Class Actions
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
22 thoughts onTA-65 Deceptive Marketing Class Action Lawsuit
AYE—–I bet you do have a dog in the game! You are probably a reseller, that will tell consumers anything they want to hear.
Carol Greider said there should be major safety studies `completed ` before this product goes on the market.
She also said, if this product TA 65 is so great, why is it being sold as a supplement??
I find your comments flawed, and self serving.
As someone who is very familiar with TA 65 and telomeres, I find the discussion seriously flawed. I reviewed over 2000 articles on telomeres when I lectures about them to over 500 doctors. Here are the facts: people with short telomeres, are at major risk for cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and senility. Carol Greider (nobel 2009 prize winner and developer of the lifelenght telomere test) did not support your argument.
Cancer takes years to develop, and unless you took your supplement for years, it would not have make a difference, and when you stop it, there is no residual effect one way or the other. To say that because chromosomes may be longer it will be a worse cancer (duh-cancer cells are immortal even if the telomeres are very short-they produced their own activation and in some cases do not even use telomeres as their replication mechanism). They is at least one study showing that TA 65 preferentially lengthens the shortest telomeres, and a follow up showing virtually everyone who take TA 65 notes clinical improvement. To someone who has no dog in this fight, the wild speculation and inflammatory charges are just that-a lawyer looking for money.
Google —DR. Michael West article on telomerase activation and your blood will boil. He calls telomerase activation, the equivalent of pouring gasoline on cancer cells. Literally a car, without brakes.
Buyer beware!
There doesn’t appear to be much, apart from anecdotal evidence and one Madrid study, to show TA-65 is helpful. At the current price, people are taking a lot on faith alone. It certainly hasn’t been endorsed by the medical or scientific communities.
I am in medical field 40+ yrs, nrsg practice and education. I am alwys interested in methodolgy and results of any product investigation. What?, nocase studies done or at least not available. Was excited about the possibilities for lmy patients, my family and myself. Improving our livestyle and improving health. BUT, no info, no can take chance after reading Brian’s situation. My best thoughts and prayers go out to you and your ongoing fight for health. Give ’em HELL Brian.
I just bought a 2 month supply. I wish there were more reliable information available. Based on this I am tempted to toss them but they are SO expensive!
Read—– http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/220035.php
interesting link between telomerase activation and cancer?
To TA 65 USER: Malignancies do turn on telomerase in cells so that the cancer cell can immortalize itself, but you don’t increase telomerase in a cell and cause a malignancy. That’s not how it happens, so stop calling other people a dimwit when you don’t understand what’s going on yourself.
Self serving comments no less from a company spokesperson. In 6 yrs, only 10,000 consumers have used product–see http://www.tasciences.com website——–not “hundreds of thousands of consumers as you claim dimwit.
Also, google telomerase activation cancer and see what you find. More important, read Dr. carol Greiders comments. She is a Nobel Winner on telomeres”
It is basically a bogus lawsuit brought by an ex-employee who finds out he has cancer after working for them for a short while and gets terminated for a lack of sales. Cancers can be present for years before being detected and 90% of cancers already produce telomerase naturally, and adding TA65 to several types of cancer cells in labs did not increase their telomerase amounts nor aid them in growing more quickly. Genetically cancers require a number of genetic changes in the cells and TA65 has shown not to cause any of these crucial for cancer in normal human cells. So no claim about TA65 and cancer would stand up in court. A few published studies on TA65 plus hundreds or thousands of people who have taken it and gained benefits should squash any claims that it was just a hoax in the claims.
Anyone can sue over anything but that does not mean they will win or ever see a dime of money from those sued frivolously.