S 1 FIRST SCANNER 30 MINUTE WARMUP UNIVERSITY

S 1 FIRST SCANNER 30 MINUTE WARMUP UNIVERSITY OF UTAH 15 MINUTE CALIBRATION 10’ X 10’ p. CAL STANDARDS LIQUID NITROGEN REQUIRED 3 MINUTE SCAN 2003 2000 2004 2001 2005 2002

S 2 S 1 5 MINUTE WARMUP 30 MINUTE WARMUP 90 SECOND SCAN 15 MINUTE CALIBRATION ELIMINATE p. CAL WITH EVEREST VERSION 3 MINUTE SCAN LAPTOP AND BARCODE READER REQUIRED p. CAL STANDARDS 2003 2006 2004 2007 2005 2008

S 2 5 MINUTE WARMUP FASTER 90 SECOND SCAN SMALLER ELIMINATE p. CAL WITH EVEREST VERSION LAPTOP AND BARCODE READER REQUIRED PORTABLE DIGITAL 2007 2008 INTRODUCING 2009

S 1 S 2 S 3 3: 00 1: 30 0: 30

7. 5 kg 5. 4 kg 1. 7 kg

EXTENDED BATTERY LIFE 500+ SCANS ON 1 CHARGE. YOU’LL RUN OUT OF ENERGY BEFORE IT DOES. WIRELESS CONNECTIVITY BLUETOOTH LE. NO WIRES NEEDED TO PERFORM A SCAN. i. PAD SCANNER APP IPAD MINI IS USED TO RUN THE SCANNER WIRELESSLY.

DIGITAL SCANS NEW OPTION TO BUY AND USE DIGITAL SCANS ELIMINATES THE NEED FOR PHYSICAL CARDS SCAN CARDS USE OF PHYSICAL SCAN CARDS WILL CONTINUE TO BE AN OPTION

1 3 Scanner Plant Calibrates Scanner Using Same Methods as S 2 2 Scanner Plant Performs QA Inspection on Each Scanner Plant Ships Scanner to Market

4 Upon Receipt, Market Performs QA Check on Every Scanner Before Packaging for Shipment to Distributor—Using Same Criteria as Scanner Plant 5 Scanners that Fail QA Tests in Market Return to Scanner Plant for Rework

LYCOPENE LUTEIN BETA-CAROTENE ASTAXANTHIN ZEAXANTHIN

LYCOPENE LUTEIN BETA-CAROTENE ASTAXANTHIN ZEAXANTHIN The National Academy of Sciences concluded “Tissue concentrations of carotenoids are the best biological markers for consumption of fruit and vegetables. ”

RAMAN SPECTROSCOPY CAROTENOID MEASURING LEVELS AT PARTS PER BILLION 473 nm PHOTONS 510 nm PHOTONS

If we were to liken a carotenoid to a grain of sand, a typical scan session would be like searching for 40 “special” grains of sand in an area covered with 2. 4 trillion grains of normal sand. If you lined up every grain of that sand, then it would cover the Dune of Pilat in France, twice!—with a 1 mm deep layer of sand.

Imagine you have a super-camera that could scan the 2 dunes of sand all at once and a computer in the camera counted the special grains hidden among the 2. 4 trillion other grains. Such a super-camera would not be able to tell you the exact number every time. Instead it would give an estimate of how many of the special grains the computer thinks it sees. So rather than spending your entire life counting the grains, you use your super-camera to take a picture to find the 40 special gains and the computer tells you there are 37 special grains. You decide to take the picture again just to be sure. This time the computer tells you there are 44 grains. Neither score is perfect, but both scores give you a good idea of the true value.

All equipment is subject to variability when performing a measurement. It is not a question of whethere is going to be variation. It is a question of how much variation exists. It can only be reduced and managed through proper usage, maintenance, calibration, and other methods.

QUESTIONS: 1. Is the BPS “more variable” than other similar equipment? 2. Is the S 3 BPS “more variable” than the S 2?

Pharmanex R&D conducted a research project to evaluate S 3 device variability. 3, 600 total scans 10 different S 3 devices 30 scans on each device per session 3 different scan sessions per subject in a 7 day period AVERAGE S 3 TEST RESULT VARIABILITY: 1, 975 POINTS OR 3. 29% 4 different subjects The S 3 is marketed to have an acceptable device variability of 9, 000 points (or 3 ‘color shades’). This is roughly a 15% variability. Testing of the device shows that the S 3 performs at or above this expectation in 85% of all cases. Other experiments have shown the S 3 regularly outperforms this standard.

SOME THINGS THAT CAN GIVE YOU A “BAD READING” High or low temperatures Inconsistent hand placement Improper hand placement S 3 not allowed to acclimate AVERAGE S 3 TEST RESULT VARIABILITY: 1, 975 POINTS OR 3. 29% Improper hand pressure S 3 stored in extreme temperatures Poor posture while scanning Poor arm positioning while scanning

SCAN 10 TIMES 43, 000 39, 000 40, 000 43, 000 45, 000 38, 000 37, 000 41, 000 36, 000 44, 000 THV 41, 000

SCAN 10 TIMES 43, 000 39, 000 40, 000 ONE COLOR SHADE 43, 000 45, 000 38, 000 37, 000 41, 000 36, 000 44, 000 + THV 41, 000 - ONE COLOR SHADE 85% of the Time

60 50 SCORE 40 30 20 10 0 MEASUREMENT NUMBER

Pharmanex R&D conducted a research project to evaluate S 2 device variability. • • AVERAGE S 2 TEST RESULT VARIABILITY: 2, 484 POINTS OR 4. 14% 5 different S 2 devices • 450 total scans 30 scans on each device per session • 3 different scan sessions per subject in a 7 day period The S 2 is marketed to have an acceptable device variability of 9, 000 points (or 3 ‘color shades’). This is roughly a 15% variability. Testing of the device shows that the S 2 performs at or above this expectation in 85% of all cases. Other experiments have shown the S 2 regularly outperforms this standard.

SOME THINGS THAT CAN GIVE YOU A “BAD READING” High or low temperatures Inconsistent hand placement Improper hand placement S 2 not allowed to acclimate AVERAGE S 2 TEST RESULT VARIABILITY: 2, 484 POINTS OR 4. 14% Improper hand pressure S 2 stored in extreme temperatures Poor posture while scanning Poor arm positioning while scanning

Hand Placement An important way to reduce BPS variability is to be as repeatable and consistent as possible in hand placement on the scanner probe. Inconsistent hand placement is a known variable that can increase score fluctuation. The experiment below tests the variability of a subject when moving the hand only 0. 5 cm (5 mm) away from the target hand point for scanning. Hand placement Scan 1 Scan 2 Scan 3 AVERAGE VARIABILITY Proper Placement 1 41, 416 42, 820 42, 202 42, 146 N/A 0. 5 cm left 47, 227 46, 983 49, 737 47, 982 +5, 800 0. 5 cm right 43, 188 41, 608 45, 021 43, 272 +1, 100 0. 5 cm up 54, 701 56, 359 54, 440 55, 167 +13, 000 0. 5 cm down 47, 853 47, 101 47, 117 47, 357 +5, 200 Proper Placement 2 42, 351 43, 196 43, 257 42, 935 +800

Hand Placement An important way to reduce BPS variability is to be as repeatable and consistent as possible in hand placement on the scanner probe. Inconsistent hand placement is a known variable that can increase score fluctuation. The experiment below tests the variability of a subject when moving the hand only 0. 5 cm (5 mm) away from the target hand point for scanning. 60, 000 50, 000 40, 000 30, 000 20, 000 10, 000 Target 01 0. 5 cm left 0. 5 cm right 0. 5 cm up 0. 5 cm down Target 02

Hand Pressure BPS scores can also vary depending on the amount of hand pressure the subject uses while scanning. The experiment below tests how much score can vary when a subject uses ‘light’ hand pressure versus ‘hard’ hand pressure. Light pressure 10 scan average Hard pressure 10 scan average Variation due to hand pressure Subject 1 42, 927. 2 50, 474. 5 +7, 547. 3 Subject 2 34, 932. 8 39, 062. 9 +4, 130. 1 Subject 3 73, 074. 2 74, 882. 9 +1, 808. 7 Subject

Hand Pressure BPS scores can also vary depending on the amount of hand pressure the subject uses while scanning. The experiment below tests how much score can vary when a subject uses ‘light’ hand pressure versus ‘hard’ hand pressure. Higher hand pressure appears to have a tendency to increase scanner scores. However, this effect does not appear to be universal for all subjects. The person with the highest score also had the least amount of pressure variability. Hand pressure is an important variable to manage for some individuals as a means of controlling score variability.

TEMPERATURE The temperature of the BPS, the environment in which the BPS is stored, and the temperature where it is operated can all impact score variability. Experiments have been conducted to measure the effect of temperature on BPS performance. Conditions Scan 1 Scan 2 Scan 3 AVERAGE VARIABILITY Proper Placement 1 41, 416 42, 820 42, 202 42, 146 N/A Proper Placement 2 42, 351 43, 196 43, 257 42, 935 +800 Cold (30 minutes @ 0° F/-18°C) 47, 719 48, 659 48, 804 48, 394 +6, 248 Hot (20 minutes @ 120° F/ 49°C) 45, 247 49, 089 48, 513 47, 616 +5, 470 Proper Placement 3* 44, 525 43, 740 42, 400 43, 555 +1, 409 *After scanner acclimated to normal temperature (75° F)

What to do if someone’s score seems to be “too high” or “too low: 60 50 2. Take an average to determine an estimate for the THV (True Hand Value) 3. Explain the scanner variability SCORE 1. Scan three times or more 40 30 20 10 SINGLE SCAN DISTRIBUTION 3 -SCAN AVERAGE

• Both the S 2 and the S 3 devices have variability levels that are superior or comparable to other similar devices. • There are other existing carotenoid tools which have less variability than the S 2 or S 3. This includes High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC). These tools are considered to fall outside the scope of the S 3 device (laboratory analysis). • The S 3 is not more variable than the S 2. Repeated experiments have shown a tendency for the S 3 to be slightly less variable than the S 2.

Great improvements have been made over the years, making the scanner faster, portable, and more convenient. The S 3, like other devices, is subject to variability which, with proper care, can be managed and also taught to customers. With proper treatment, best practices, and timely calibration, the S 3 can be a very effective tool to assess the amount of carotenoids incorporated in the skin and promote one’s business.