RE:RE:RE:RE: Synthetic avenanthramidea) No your reply didn't say anything about the costs and completely ignored the question.
b) If you think cost isn't a factor in producer and consumer preferences, I don't really even know where to begin on this one. I would probably be wasting time discussing any further.
digitel wrote: "Doesn't answer the question." It more than adequately adresses the question. CZO can make a "natural" claim for its avenanthramide because CZO purifies from real oats. CZO doesn't make a synthetic man-made franken-product. Today's consumer increasingly demands a natural product. CZO also has proprietary PGX which can deliver the bioactive to the deepest layer of the skin, for instance. If you can't deliver the product where it needs to get what is the value? Also, with CoQ10, for instance, CZO required a fraction of the CoQ10 required. CZO also claims the most potent product compared to any synthetic avenanthramide.
digitel wrote:"I wonder how much cheaper it costs to make synthetic
AVN compared to natural extraction from oats."
"Ceapro is the only commercial manufacturer of
commercially available avenanthramides extracted
and purified from oats. Ceapro's standardized
extracts are considerably more potent than any
synthetically synthesized avenanthramides." CZO website
CZO also has proprietary PGX for superior delivery.