results from the FDA supplement tests for the BB.com Raid so far.

GuyverX

GuyverX

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Unfortunately this is a strawman argument... your comparative argument means nothing in todays political environment. The only reason alchohol is legal is because society demanded it, whereas joe down the street could give a **** less if steroids are legal.
I concur.
Practical reasoning does not apply to the modern government machine.
Only dollars.
If crack, blow, meth, and weed dealers paid enough of a regular sum to certain parties connected with the government, all those would be legal as well.
Then again...
 

Mikey851

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
I concur.
Practical reasoning does not apply to the modern government machine.
Only dollars.
If crack, blow, meth, and weed dealers paid enough of a regular sum to certain parties connected with the government, all those would be legal as well.
Then again...
There have been serious talks of legalizing marijuana and taxing it. They can't pinpoint underground/criminal money using GDP calculations but they can estimate it, and obviously it's a huge untapped amount of money.
 
Kristofer68SS

Kristofer68SS

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
The FDA process to get a new drug approved is lengthy and expensive: to the tune of years and multiple-million dollars.
I have actually heard 10 million, not sure that is accurate or not.
 
nomoredex

nomoredex

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
stock up while you can
the fda is making choices for us
thats so unamerican
 
SonicSWOLE

SonicSWOLE

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
stock up while you can
the fda is making choices for us
thats so unamerican

Actually, it is SO American. Remember we live in a Republic (we choose representatives to make decisions on our behalf) NOT a Democracy. Big difference.
 
Kristofer68SS

Kristofer68SS

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Actually, it is SO American. Remember we live in a Republic (we choose representatives to make decisions on our behalf) NOT a Democracy. Big difference.
thanks mr.O

lol, j/k.

Either way, it is actally the USA, LLC. that is making the choices for us. Not our beloved house and senate. Thats just a cover.

:)
 

theyoungblood

Banned
Awards
0
The Redefine Nutrition products listed in the tests have giving some good results to friends of mine. To bad some companies have now been shown to not have the ingredients they claimed. My post is late to this thread but I am just getting past my novice BB phase. Unfortunately this is the latest witch hunt of the past 6 to 8 years. I began working out when deployed to Iraq over a year ago and enjoy the benefits of being in shape.
 

theyoungblood

Banned
Awards
0
There have been serious talks of legalizing marijuana and taxing it. They can't pinpoint underground/criminal money using GDP calculations but they can estimate it, and obviously it's a huge untapped amount of money.

Several states have marijuana taxes on production and/or sale. It does not make a seller legal but if the tax is not paid the person is also eligible to be charged with tax evasion at the state level... Nice to know an illegal product is taxed to generate more revenue and violations of the law...
 

theyoungblood

Banned
Awards
0
Are there more deaths/injuries/suicides relating to drug use
-pills
-alcohol
-drunk driving
-cigarettes
-hardcore street drugs

Than AAS/DS? I dont really get it? If the government can make billions off of a substance no matter how detrimental it is i think they will continue to allow it.
They do not worry about anything else that is currently legal besides AAS/DS because the average person does not care about BB or fitness. We are seen as gym rats to be jealous of, hated or loathed. You are right huge amounts of money are made from these products so no one in government wants to slay the golden egg laying chicken... John Stossel had a great interview years ago about stupid thinking behind why people hate AAS/DS and how there is no true justification for this dislike. Of course the mainstream media never hyped the interview that was contrary to their "beliefs".
 
muller

muller

Member
Awards
0
There have been serious talks of legalizing marijuana and taxing it. They can't pinpoint underground/criminal money using GDP calculations but they can estimate it, and obviously it's a huge untapped amount of money.
Case and point: California; The Epic Failure
 
kingjameskjf

kingjameskjf

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Can't wait to see what the PH industry is left with when all this FDA crap finally settles...
 

SeanyK

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
thanks mr.O

lol, j/k.

Either way, it is actally the USA, LLC. that is making the choices for us. Not our beloved house and senate. Thats just a cover.

:)
I'm glad someone actually knows what the deal is. USA, LLC. has been running the show since the civil war ended. They make and break the rules as they see fit to make a buck (many a bux, actually).

Alcohol was brought back not because the people wanted it so bad, but because the resulting black market didn't generate enough cash for the liquor companies as it previously did legally. the resulting blackmarket caused plenty of crime as the war on drugs does today as well. As great an idea it would be to legalize and regulate marijuana on the federal level (think about how many issues you could solve with revenue or products derived from even just non-psychoactive industrial hemp plants; oils, biofuels, foods, plastics, fibers, and on and on), it will never happen because it poses a serious threat to the establishment... that being the long existing alcohol and tobacco (were talkin the 1600's here) industries.

Think about it this way; when joe shmoe the law abiding citizen comes home from work and can choose to kick up on the couch with either a pack of marb reds, a bottle of jack, or a 6pack, he's limited in his choices. add into the mix a finely twisted joint of government regulated sour diesel or some bubbakush, and the alc and tobac industries are gona take a huge **** in their draws. Why? because at the end of the day, tobacco causes cancer, alcohol is hepatoxic and as physically addicting as opiates and benzodiazepines, and thc is known to inhibit tumor growth... that's why. do the math... which seems like the healthier alternative.

the war on drugs is a pathetic joke that can never and will never be won, just like the war on steroids, and just like the war on terror. I can guarantee you that if those in charge really truly wanted to eradicate drug use they would. this is the US, and those at the top can do whatever the sh*t they want. in fact, i'd be very surprised if there is not government involvement. Remember Oliver North and Iran-Contra guys? Ricky Ross? ringin any bells? Pre-9/11 afghan poppy production was at a near nothing. after we took over, production rose by nearly 100%, and today you can wayyy too easily find nearly 90% pure #4 heroin from coast to coast and for dirt f*cking cheap.

sorry the post became so political but the last page of this thread got me heated for a second. the answer is not jailing nonviolent drug offenders and furthering the blackmarket and military-prison-industrial complex; the answer is education, harm reduction, and treatment. addiction IS a disease, and no doctor will tell you otherwise.
 
CaponeCEO

CaponeCEO

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
I dont give a crap about any of the bickering, politics, or other bs. I just liked taking Havoc occasionally. I wish I had stocked up.
 
CaponeCEO

CaponeCEO

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Well since RPN Havoc is discontinued I had to switch to something a little safer. Now I take 1 lip of Skoal mint dip, 2 Newport ciggs in between sets, and a litre of Smirnoff Vodka pre workout. Hope I feel better.
 
Kristofer68SS

Kristofer68SS

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Well since RPN Havoc is discontinued I had to switch to something a little safer. Now I take 1 lip of Skoal mint dip, 2 Newport ciggs in between sets, and a litre of Smirnoff Vodka pre workout. Hope I feel better.
Lol, nice.

Dont forget McPoison PWO.
 
Jasen

Jasen

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
i got a bouddy who jugs down dbol with vodka real story
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Well since RPN Havoc is discontinued I had to switch to something a little safer. Now I take 1 lip of Skoal mint dip, 2 Newport ciggs in between sets, and a litre of Smirnoff Vodka pre workout. Hope I feel better.
Nice contribution to the thread there turbo.
 

Rommel65

Member
Awards
0
I am waiting for my CEL M-Drol to arrive, I ordered a ton of it. P-plex too. Gonna eat em like candy and sail away into the sunset on my gigantic liver. No, not really, but a I do have alot of product on that list en route. Gettin' the M-drol for 21 bucks for 90 caps, why not?
 

h22t88

Member
Awards
0
Someone might have said this already but it doesn't look like they even tested for epi.
 
B5150

B5150

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
just curious - does anyone know what they are basing this warrant on actually? None of these substances (pplex,sdrol,tren xtreme) is illegal. Yeah, DEA wanted to put them on the scheduled list last year and they failed - congress never approved that, I guess they didn't demonstrate it without doubt that these are indeed anabolics. So what are they then using as a reason for this search ?
108th CONGRESS
2d Session

S. 2195

To amend the Controlled Substances Act to clarify the definition of anabolic steroids and to provide for research and education activities relating to steroids and steroid precursors.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

March 11, 2004

Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. HATCH, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. STEVENS, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. NELSON of Florida, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. ALLEN, and Ms. MURKOWSKI) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend the Controlled Substances Act to clarify the definition of anabolic steroids and to provide for research and education activities relating to steroids and steroid precursors.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004'.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT.

(a) DEFINITIONS- Section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802) is amended--

(1) in paragraph (41)--

(A) by realigning the margin so as to align with paragraph (40); and

(B) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the following:

`(A) The term `anabolic steroid' means any drug or hormonal substance, chemically and pharmacologically related to testosterone (other than estrogens, progestins, corticosteroids, and dehydroepiandrosterone), and includes--

`(i) androstanediol--

`(I) 3b,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androstane; and

`(II) 3a,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androstane;

`(ii) androstanedione (5a-androstan-3,17-dione);

`(iii) androstenediol--

`(I) 1-androstenediol (3b,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androst-1-ene);

`(II) 1-androstenediol (3a,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androst-1-ene);

`(III) 4-androstenediol (3b,17b-dihydroxy-androst-4-ene); and

`(IV) 5-androstenediol (3b,17b-dihydroxy-androst-5-ene);

`(iv) androstenedione--

`(I) 1-androstenedione ([5a]-androst-1-en-3,17-dione);

`(II) 4-androstenedione (androst-4-en-3,17-dione); and

`(III) 5-androstenedione (androst-5-en-3,17-dione);

`(v) bolasterone (7a,17a-dimethyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one);

`(vi) boldenone (17b-hydroxyandrost-1,4,-diene-3-one);

`(vii) calusterone (7b,17a-dimethyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one);

`(viii) clostebol (4-chloro-17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one);

`(ix) dehydrochloromethyltestosterone (4-chloro-17b-hydroxy-17a-methyl-androst-1,4-dien-3-one);

`(x) *1-dihydrotestosterone (a.k.a. `1-testosterone') (17b-hydroxy-5a-androst-1-en-3-one);

`(xi) 4-dihydrotestosterone (17b-hydroxy-androstan-3-one);

`(xii) drostanolone (17b-hydroxy-2a-methyl-5a-androstan-3-one);

`(xiii) ethylestrenol (17a-ethyl-17b-hydroxyestr-4-ene);

`(xiv) fluoxymesterone (9-fluoro-17a-methyl-11b,17b-dihydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one);

`(xv) formebolone (2-formyl-17a-methyl-11a,17b-dihydroxyandrost-1,4-dien-3-one);

`(xvi) furazabol (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyandrostano[2,3-c]-furazan);

`(xvii) 13a-ethyl-17a-hydroxygon-4-en-3-one;

`(xviii) 4-hydroxytestosterone (4,17b-dihydroxy-androst-4-en-3-one);

`(xix) 4-hydroxy-19-nortestosterone (4,17b-dihydroxy-estr-4-en-3-one);

`(xx) mestanolone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-5a-androstan-3-one);

`(xxi) mesterolone (1a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-[5a]-androstan-3-one);

`(xxii) methandienone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-1,4-dien-3-one);

`(xxiii) methandriol (17a-methyl-3b,17b-dihydroxyandrost-5-ene);

`(xxiv) methenolone (1-methyl-17b-hydroxy-5a-androst-1-en-3-one);

`(xxv) methyltestosterone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one);

`(xxvi) mibolerone (7a,17a-dimethyl-17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one);

`(xxvii) 17a-methyl-*1-dihydrotestosterone (17b-hydroxy-17a-methyl-5a-androst-1-en-3-one) (a.k.a. `17-a-methyl-1-testosterone');

`(xxviii) nandrolone (17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one);

`(xxix) norandrostenediol--

`(I) 19-nor-4-androstenediol (3b, 17b-dihydroxyestr-4-ene);

`(II) 19-nor-4-androstenediol (3a, 17b-dihydroxyestr-4-ene);

`(III) 19-nor-5-androstenediol (3b, 17b-dihydroxyestr-5-ene); and

`(IV) 19-nor-5-androstenediol (3a, 17b-dihydroxyestr-5-ene);

`(xxx) norandrostenedione--

`(I) 19-nor-4-androstenedione (estr-4-en-3,17-dione); and

`(II) 19-nor-5-androstenedione (estr-5-en-3,17-dione;

`(xxxi) norbolethone (13b,17a-diethyl-17b-hydroxygon-4-en-3-one);

`(xxxii) norclostebol (4-chloro-17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one);

`(xxxiii) norethandrolone (17a-ethyl-17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one);

`(xxxiv) oxandrolone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-2-oxa-[5a]-androstan-3-one);

`(xxxv) oxymesterone (17a-methyl-4,17b-dihydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one);

`(xxxvi) oxymetholone (17a-methyl-2-hydroxymethylene-17b-hydroxy-[5a]-androstan-3-one);

`(xxxvii) stanozolol (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-[5a]-androst-2-eno[3,2-c]-pyrazole);

`(xxxviii) stenbolone (17b-hydroxy-2-methyl-[5a]-androst-1-en-3-one);

`(xxxix) testolactone (13-hydroxy-3-oxo-13,17-secoandrosta-1,4-dien-17-oic acid lactone);

`(xl) testosterone (17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one);

`(xli) tetrahydrogestrinone (13b,17a-diethyl-17b-hydroxygon-4,9,11-trien-3-one);

`(xlii) trenbolone (17b-hydroxyestr-4,9,11-trien-3-one); and

`(xliii) any salt, ester, or ether of a drug or substance described in this paragraph.'; and

(2) in paragraph (44), by inserting `anabolic steroids,' after `marihuana,'.

(b) AUTHORITY AND CRITERIA FOR CLASSIFICATION- Section 201(g) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 811(g)) is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1), by striking `substance from a schedule if such substance' and inserting `drug which contains a controlled substance from the application of titles II and III of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act (21 U.S.C. 802 et seq.) if such drug'; and

(2) in paragraph (3), by adding at the end the following:

`(C) Upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, a compound, mixture, or preparation which contains any anabolic steroid, which is intended for administration to a human being or an animal, and which, because of its concentration, preparation, formulation or delivery system, does not present any significant potential for abuse.'.

(c) ANABOLIC STEROIDS CONTROL ACT- Section 1903 of the Anabolic Steroids Control Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-647) is amended--

(1) by striking subsection (a); and

(2) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections (a) and (b), respectively.

SEC. 3. SENTENCING COMMISSION GUIDELINES.

The United States Sentencing Commission shall--

(1) review the Federal sentencing guidelines with respect to offenses involving anabolic steroids;

(2) consider amending the Federal sentencing guidelines to provide for increased penalties with respect to offenses involving anabolic steroids in a manner that reflects the seriousness of such offenses and the need to deter anabolic steroid trafficking and use; and

(3) take such other action that the Commission considers necessary to carry out this section.

SEC. 4. PREVENTION AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS.

(a) IN GENERAL- The Secretary of Health and Human Services (referred to in this Act as the `Secretary') shall award grants to public and nonprofit private entities to enable such entities to carry out science-based education programs in elementary and secondary schools to highlight the harmful effects of anabolic steroids.

(b) ELIGIBILITY-

(1) APPLICATION- To be eligible for grants under subsection (a), an entity shall prepare and submit to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require.

(2) PREFERENCE- In awarding grants under subsection (a), the Secretary shall give preference to applicants that intend to use grant funds to carry out programs based on--

(A) the Athletes Training and Learning to Avoid Steroids program;

(B) the Athletes Targeting Healthy Exercise and Nutrition Alternatives program; and

(C) other programs determined to be effective by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

(c) USE OF FUNDS- Amounts received under a grant under subsection (a) shall be used primarily for education programs that will directly communicate with teachers, principals, coaches, as well as elementary and secondary school children concerning the harmful effects of anabolic steroids.

(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section, $15,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2010.

SEC. 5. NATIONAL SURVEY ON DRUG USE AND HEALTH.

(a) IN GENERAL- The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall ensure that the National Survey on Drug Use and Health includes questions concerning the use of anabolic steroids.

(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section, $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2010.

END
What far too many fail to get is that manipulating nomenclature or moving a carbon molecule to change the chemical name does not change the fact that these are steroids and controlled substances. Legislature has been put in place that states that steroid manufacture and sale is illegal. Any company that does so is not a nutritional supplement company or manufacturer but rather an illegal steroid manufacturer and distributor.
 

jason79

New member
Awards
0
This is an interesting case. These compounds wouldn't seem to fit the description of dietary supplements. However, whether they are illegal "anabolic steroids" according to current legislation looks like a matter of contention. This is why the FDA has been more the active branch of enforcement as opposed to the DEA. I realize that the DEA has probably done some investigation but they haven't been as active as they would be if this matter involved the trafficing and sale of explicitly scheduled substances. According to the current legislation "anabolic steroids" are defined as drugs or hormonal substances chemically "and" pharmacoligically related to testosterone. What exactly does this mean? Ask any John or Jane Doe and you might get one answer, ask a chemist and you'll likely get another. A chemist knows that even changing one atom can completely change the chemical and pharmacological properties of a molecule. I don't know much at all about anabolic drugs, but I gather that there are currently some that are though to have mechanisms of action and chemical properties different from testosterone. Unlike testosterone, some are known to have very low or even undetectable affinity for the androgen receptor and some have rather high affinity for progestin receptors. If these weren't drugs that were already exhaustively investigated and ultimately scheduled by the DEA, could you say with certainty that they were chemically and pharmacologically related to testosterone? If an unscheduled compound has high affinity for progestin receptors, couldn't we also call it a progestin, thus making it exempt? My point is that the legal definition of an anabolic steroid is not straight forward and requires closer analysis by the responsible authorities in conjunction with the appropriate experts. If these substances were undoubtedly illegal and convictions were a sure thing, there would be many more companies facing arrest and subsequent prosecution. As it stands, it appears that those possibly facing charges were selling products which were reportedly found to contain already scheduled substances such as adrostenedione.
 
marco wolf

marco wolf

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
This is an interesting case. These compounds wouldn't seem to fit the description of dietary supplements. However, whether they are illegal "anabolic steroids" according to current legislation looks like a matter of contention. This is why the FDA has been more the active branch of enforcement as opposed to the DEA. I realize that the DEA has probably done some investigation but they haven't been as active as they would be if this matter involved the trafficing and sale of explicitly scheduled substances. According to the current legislation "anabolic steroids" are defined as drugs or hormonal substances chemically "and" pharmacoligically related to testosterone. What exactly does this mean? Ask any John or Jane Doe and you might get one answer, ask a chemist and you'll likely get another. A chemist knows that even changing one atom can completely change the chemical and pharmacological properties of a molecule. I don't know much at all about anabolic drugs, but I gather that there are currently some that are though to have mechanisms of action and chemical properties different from testosterone. Unlike testosterone, some are known to have very low or even undetectable affinity for the androgen receptor and some have rather high affinity for progestin receptors. If these weren't drugs that were already exhaustively investigated and ultimately scheduled by the DEA, could you say with certainty that they were chemically and pharmacologically related to testosterone? If an unscheduled compound has high affinity for progestin receptors, couldn't we also call it a progestin, thus making it exempt? My point is that the legal definition of an anabolic steroid is not straight forward and requires closer analysis by the responsible authorities in conjunction with the appropriate experts. If these substances were undoubtedly illegal and convictions were a sure thing, there would be many more companies facing arrest and subsequent prosecution. As it stands, it appears that those possibly facing charges were selling products which were reportedly found to contain already scheduled substances such as adrostenedione.
That's all fine and dandy, but all drugs need FDA approval in order to be sold. So, even if you assume that they aren't "illegal" they are still "unapproved".

That's probably why the FDA is involved and not the DEA.
 

hardknock

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Well since RPN Havoc is discontinued I had to switch to something a little safer. Now I take 1 lip of Skoal mint dip, 2 Newport ciggs in between sets, and a litre of Smirnoff Vodka pre workout. Hope I feel better.
Funny that you say that...I was at the gym the other day, i looked out of the front pane window and I swore I spotted a guy drinking a beer before he come in to work out.

So, when I left, I just casually walked past his truck and took a quick peek inside as I jolted by....yep, a beer, empty Budweiser can....lol

I see people smoking cigarettes all the time before coming in to work out but that was first time I spotted someone drinking a beer, damn.
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
This is an interesting case. These compounds wouldn't seem to fit the description of dietary supplements. However, whether they are illegal "anabolic steroids" according to current legislation looks like a matter of contention. This is why the FDA has been more the active branch of enforcement as opposed to the DEA. I realize that the DEA has probably done some investigation but they haven't been as active as they would be if this matter involved the trafficing and sale of explicitly scheduled substances. According to the current legislation "anabolic steroids" are defined as drugs or hormonal substances chemically "and" pharmacoligically related to testosterone. What exactly does this mean? Ask any John or Jane Doe and you might get one answer, ask a chemist and you'll likely get another. A chemist knows that even changing one atom can completely change the chemical and pharmacological properties of a molecule. I don't know much at all about anabolic drugs, but I gather that there are currently some that are though to have mechanisms of action and chemical properties different from testosterone. Unlike testosterone, some are known to have very low or even undetectable affinity for the androgen receptor and some have rather high affinity for progestin receptors. If these weren't drugs that were already exhaustively investigated and ultimately scheduled by the DEA, could you say with certainty that they were chemically and pharmacologically related to testosterone? If an unscheduled compound has high affinity for progestin receptors, couldn't we also call it a progestin, thus making it exempt? My point is that the legal definition of an anabolic steroid is not straight forward and requires closer analysis by the responsible authorities in conjunction with the appropriate experts. If these substances were undoubtedly illegal and convictions were a sure thing, there would be many more companies facing arrest and subsequent prosecution. As it stands, it appears that those possibly facing charges were selling products which were reportedly found to contain already scheduled substances such as adrostenedione.
Unfortunately, this is totally irrelevant. Bodybuilding.com and its associated vendors were not charged with distributing "steroids" - or more broadly, scheduled substances - but rather, for the production, distribution and sale of unapproved drugs across state lines.
 
n8te

n8te

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
That's all fine and dandy, but all drugs need FDA approval in order to be sold. So, even if you assume that they aren't "illegal" they are still "unapproved".

That's probably why the FDA is involved and not the DEA.
The DEA is involved. This involved the sale and production of "illegal substances" across state lines. That's their territory.

Funny that you say that...I was at the gym the other day, i looked out of the front pane window and I swore I spotted a guy drinking a beer before he come in to work out.

So, when I left, I just casually walked past his truck and took a quick peek inside as I jolted by....yep, a beer, empty Budweiser can....lol

I see people smoking cigarettes all the time before coming in to work out but that was first time I spotted someone drinking a beer, damn.
Yea I've got a buddy that smokes right after leaving the gym. He's a beast but still, its no good.

Unfortunately, this is totally irrelevant. Bodybuilding.com and its associated vendors were not charged with distributing "steroids" - or more broadly, scheduled substances - but rather, for the production, distribution and sale of unapproved drugs across state lines.
I have nothing to say to you except good quote in your sig. :)
 
HarryManback

HarryManback

Member
Awards
0
So the only issue here is being unapproved? If that's the case then all this will blow over. As far as I have read no one else has had any raids or anything. BB.com was a huge site so the easiest to make an example of. Also I havn't been able to find anything recent on any legislature designed to BAN anything. So all this fuss seems a little silly. Caution certainly, but companies like CEL stopping all PH products for good? Just seems premature and a little disappointing.
 
B5150

B5150

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
So the only issue here is being unapproved? If that's the case then all this will blow over. As far as I have read no one else has had any raids or anything. BB.com was a huge site so the easiest to make an example of. Also I havn't been able to find anything recent on any legislature designed to BAN anything. So all this fuss seems a little silly. Caution certainly, but companies like CEL stopping all PH products for good? Just seems premature and a little disappointing.
As Mullet stated this is a case of the production, distribution and sale of unapproved drugs across state lines. When they discover or uncover what their actives are, which are indeed steroids, they will then be classified as controlled substance, and therefore it would be illegal to continue to proceed with their production, distribution and sale.

As I have stated multiple times, companies, under the guise of nutrition supplement manufacturers, continue to change nomenclature, move atoms and or otherwise manipulate compounds to jump through loopholes in order to sell steroids. These are not nutritional supplement companies but rather profiteers who are exploiting the consumer and the loopholes in the laws. They, and they alone, are the reason that ALL of this will be shut down. The Government, DEA, FDA or any other legislative body that is in this will not be mocked and you and I will witness the control of ALL substances, hormonal, nutritional, synthetic, natural or otherwise because of them. Mark my words.
 
Kristofer68SS

Kristofer68SS

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
As Mullet stated this is a case of the production, distribution and sale of unapproved drugs across state lines. When they discover or uncover what their actives are, which are indeed steroids, they will then be classified as controlled substance, and therefore it would be illegal to continue to proceed with their production, distribution and sale.

As I have stated multiple times, companies, under the guise of nutrition supplement manufacturers, continue to change nomenclature, move atoms and or otherwise manipulate compounds to jump through loopholes in order to sell steroids. These are not nutritional supplement companies but rather profiteers who are exploiting the consumer and the loopholes in the laws. They, and they alone, are the reason that ALL of this will be shut down. The Government, DEA, FDA or any other legislative body that is in this will not be mocked and you and I will witness the control of ALL substances, hormonal, nutritional, synthetic, natural or otherwise because of them. Mark my words.

Dont sugar coat man, tells us how you really feel. lol

Control the whole vitamin and supplement industry? Nah. Too much money in it......Right now the hands are out for payday. Things will be shaken a bit, but in the end it will be business as usual.
 
HarryManback

HarryManback

Member
Awards
0
The supplement industry needs regulation without a doubt. Half the stuff ive bought over the years has been a "lets see what happens" kind of thing. I just think the panic has gotten out of hand is all. Its a good ploy to sell a bunch of PH's, and then when its all over with be like "our bad, its really nothin". Im just pissed CEL is out of the game really. Damnit!
 
Kristofer68SS

Kristofer68SS

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
This is a billion dollar industry........It's NOT going anywhere.

There might be some loose control on it, at best.
 

hardknock

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
The supplement industry needs regulation without a doubt. Half the stuff ive bought over the years has been a "lets see what happens" kind of thing. I just think the panic has gotten out of hand is all. Its a good ploy to sell a bunch of PH's, and then when its all over with be like "our bad, its really nothin". Im just pissed CEL is out of the game really. Damnit!
Couple that "let's see what happens" with , "now that I look back, only 8% of the things I've taken the past 15 years has actually worked"
 

doclegion

New member
Awards
0
Now what? how do we order em?? gotta wait for something new?
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
I should have known this guy would have something to say. Havent you dug your hole deep enough "turbo"?
Please explain this hole. Your reading comprehension must be on par with your forethought.
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
I wont say the industry will NEVER be controlled, i just dont see it happening in the foreseeable future.
With the blatant disregard to the DSHEA, and proverbially spitting in the face of the FDA, I can see that being repealed and the whole supplement industry falling under the FDA. People thought the same thing about tobacco, and now look at that.
 
muller

muller

Member
Awards
0
Dont sugar coat man, tells us how you really feel. lol

Control the whole vitamin and supplement industry? Nah. Too much money in it......Right now the hands are out for payday. Things will be shaken a bit, but in the end it will be business as usual.
Not as much money as the pharmaceutical industry, whose lobbyist's run DC and would like nothing more than FDA regulations on vitamins and such... Remember the proposed vitamin B ban?? What do you honestly think that was about?
 
Kristofer68SS

Kristofer68SS

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
With the blatant disregard to the DSHEA, and proverbially spitting in the face of the FDA, I can see that being repealed and the whole supplement industry falling under the FDA. People thought the same thing about tobacco, and now look at that.
Too many small business' effected. Enforcement would be a challenge as well. Seriously, would be a detriment to the economy. Wont happen for awhile.

Not as much money as the pharmaceutical industry, whose lobbyist's run DC and would like nothing more than FDA regulations on vitamins and such... Remember the proposed vitamin B ban?? What do you honestly think that was about?

Vitamin B was about a patent, and money. Period. Nothing else but money.

Many pharms sell otc as well.

Excessive and restrictive legislation on 99% of vitamins and supplements just isnt going to happen anytime soon.

Mark those words.
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Too many small business effected. Seriously would be a detriment to the economy. Wont happen for awhile.
Please, if congress cared ANYTHING about small business, this healthcare bill and cap n trade bill would have never made it past the senate floor.

This government does not care anything about the common man regardless of the propaganda spewed. The only thing this government cares about is taking control of more and more of our lives.
 
Kristofer68SS

Kristofer68SS

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Please, if congress cared ANYTHING about small business, this healthcare bill and cap n trade bill would have never made it past the senate floor.

This government does not care anything about the common man regardless of the propaganda spewed. The only thing this government cares about is taking control of more and more of our lives.
Well you make a good argument. That is for sure.

Personally and IMO, I just dont think we will see as much control over the otc supplement industry as you have proposed.

With this government( and past) though, anything is possible. I will give you that. Time will tell. I just hope I am correct.
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Well you make a good argument. That is for sure.

Personally and IMO, I just dont think we will see as much control over the otc supplement industry as you have proposed.

With this government( and past) though, anything is possible. I will give you that. Time will tell. I just hope I am correct.
Same here.. I can only hope... but I also hope companies start some self regulation as well. This whole tainted supplement crap cannot continue. Aspire36 is a big one that comes to mind... a person with a heart condition, and bam... guy is dead.
 
Kristofer68SS

Kristofer68SS

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Same here.. I can only hope... but I also hope companies start some self regulation as well. This whole tainted supplement crap cannot continue. Aspire36 is a big one that comes to mind... a person with a heart condition, and bam... guy is dead.
what was in it? viagra? or clomid?
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
The control being spoken about here will most certainly happen, only its form will be slightly more insidious. The actual compounds themselves will not be rendered "illegal," but rather, the production of compounds as such will be regulated to the point that only a small contingency of producers can adhere adequately to the statutes. It is foolish to overestimate the amount of manufacturing facilities that companies use - to be sure, quite a few companies on this board most likely procure their source material from similar places; and as a result, it is far easier to regulate the producers (how things are produced, in what facilities, etc.,) than it is to regulate what is being produced (specific compounds). Whether or not 'Compound X' is rendered specifically illegal is irrelevant when the standards required to produce it all but eliminate small businesses and firms from producing it. Certain bills have already been put forward in this regard and, not surprisingly, are constitutional insofar as regulating "interstate commerce" - the predominant method of governmental control of commerce in-general.
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
The control being spoken about here will most certainly happen, only its form will be slightly more insidious. The actual compounds themselves will not be rendered "illegal," but rather, the production of compounds as such will be regulated to the point that only a small contingency of producers can adhere adequately to the statutes. It is foolish to overestimate the amount of manufacturing facilities that companies use - to be sure, quite a few companies on this board most likely procure their source material from similar places; and as a result, it is far easier to regulate the producers (how things are produced, in what facilities, etc.,) than it is to regulate what is being produced (specific compounds). Whether or not 'Compound X' is rendered specifically illegal is irrelevant when the standards required to produce it all but eliminate small businesses and firms from producing it. Certain bills have already been put forward in this regard and, not surprisingly, are constitutional insofar as regulating "interstate commerce" - the predominant method of governmental control of commerce in-general.
Interstate commerce is always their bread and butter. Look into gun control. All the cards lie on the interstate commerce bandwagon. Look into the Montana law. They make and sell guns in Montana only made for Montana. The federal government cannot control said state guns, and can be sold in your local grocery store if they wish. In fact the govenor mailed the first gun from the line stamped with made in montana for montana to the head of the ATF... such a beautiful move.
 
n8te

n8te

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Same here.. I can only hope... but I also hope companies start some self regulation as well. This whole tainted supplement crap cannot continue. Aspire36 is a big one that comes to mind... a person with a heart condition, and bam... guy is dead.
Is that a board member that died on AM?

* nevermind. search is my friend.:)
 

Similar threads


Top