Subscribe
Sign in
Sprayable Energy — Welcome to The End of Tired
21
Replies
@intenex it's been a while! I remember when we first met, you were visiting SF to film your Indiegogo campaign.
I was initially impressed with skepticism when I first heard about Sprayable Energy. How are you overcoming that hurdle selling to consumers and distributors/retailers?
@datarade Deven here (ben's cofounder - as ben's away from a pc). Happy to provide as much color on science as you're interested in.
The ars article was primarily about our regulatory status - which is not particularly (or rather at all) related to product effectiveness. In terms of how the product works, will provide a brief overview here, and you can contact us directly (deven@sprayable.co/ben@sprayable.co) for any more color that is probably overkill for a comment thread.
1) Caffeine is naturally transdermal in small doses (due to the fact that is both water and fat soluble). In this respect it is similar to other transdermal compounds like nicotine.
2) Caffeine is not very soluble in liquid (you usually can't get more than 1-2% of caffeine dissolved in any liquid)
3) We increase the solubility using our IP (a patent-pending solubility agent that increases the solubility up to 10x and facilitates caffeine being absorbed through the skin.
4) In terms of testing, we've done in vivo and in vitro testing to determine product efficacy - and also cite numerous peer-reviewed research (happy to send you them directly).
5) In terms of user feedback, over 90% of the hundreds of customers we've surveyed would buy sprayable again and use it regularly.
6) We have just as many (if not more) positive "media" mentions from users that have tried the product including:
http://www.fastcompany.com/30159...
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/this...
So basically we've done blood tests on humans, tested "transdermalness" through pig skin, referenced multiple peer-reviewed and extensively surveyed thousands of customers (which overwhelmingly like and repeat-purchase our product).
Happy to provide more color on any of these points.
Thanks!
@Intenex Thanks for the prompt reply.
1 & 2.) Thanks for defining caffeine.
3.) patent-pending or not is irrelevant.
4.) Sample size? How do you characterize your sample population?
5.) Please be more specific on your survey methodology.
6.) Media mentions do not equate to scientific legitimacy.
You've invented a stimulant in the form of a spray. Nicotine is an odd comparison. It's designed for a longer release.
High doses of caffeine can be deadly. Are you encouraging overdosing by changing the form factor? Usually the liquid is a redundant safeguard against overdosing via bladder size constraint.
I think it's fallacious to claim you can have the benefits of caffeine in your spray without any drawbacks or issues.
I imagine or would at the very least speculate that you're using tyrosine as the transdermal agent that you claim has a 10x throughput on caffeine. In-vivo testing usually works with some sort of fat.....more to come....
@rrhoover in terms of your question on dealing with skepticism - its definitely something we deal with as a new product class - but what tends to work best is letting people try/use the product (cuts through the questions pretty quickly). We also try to be as transparent as (legally) possible in terms of what information we provide customers/resellers are ultra-responsive when questions do get asked, and of course have our 100% return policy for users that aren't satisfied.
[FYI - Deven here, not Ben]
@guygal Thanks! We're definitely open to working with distributors - if you or anyone else is interested, shoot us a message at contact@sprayable.co.
My cofounder Deven takes the lead on distribution, and he's over at deven@sprayable.co (might be able to guess that I'm at ben@sprayable.co). contact@sprayable.co'll go to both of us, so for any given inquiry it'll get appropriately delegated if you send it there.
@Intenex in vivo transdermal caffeine works best with fat or a lipid as it is commonly referred to.
I wonder what Thiel backed scientists would say.
@rrhoover I love producthunt.com but allowing products that don't pass the basic litmus tests of science and logic seems off.
Logic by consensus seems awful.
This is a misleading product for a lot of reasons outlined here:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2...
@intenex I'd like to hear how this product works very specifically and explicitly otherwise I will buy your product, use it, blog about it, and analyze this product in painfully SEO rich scientific detail.
as someone who doesn't drink coffee at all, i'm a bit skeptical as to the health benefits. looks almost too good to be true?
that said, i can see this taking off.
P.S. @intenex and I went to the same high school back in a somewhat small suburb in Chicago.
Woo! :)
We're currently providing working capital and commercial loans for potentials projects in the following sector: Energy, Solar, PV, aviation, agriculture/food production, real estate/property investment, R&D, innovation and other lucrative sectors. So if you/your professional network are interested in this offer, do not hesitate to reach out. Jameshaund@protonmail.com
Lex