Any companies have any studies on THEIR products?

Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  1. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0

    Any companies have any studies on THEIR products?


    To clear up the obvious, I originally started this thread in another board and am moving it over here to create discussion on this board...

    I was just thinking recently and I was wondering:

    I see many companies cite clinical studies but their own products have never been tested (most likely because it is not required by law). Do any of the products talked about on this forum have documented, scientific research to substantiate product claims?

    If I have the choice between going with a company that provides me w/ clinical studies (aka proof) that their product lives up to it's claims vs. a company that makes an identical product but merely cites documented research on the ingredients incorporated into their product but not THEIR specific batch, I'm going to go with the company that has put the time, effort and money (which seems to be a huge issue with these "reputable" companies) into allowing me to rest assured that I'm getting what I'm paying for.

    How else can you tell a product is working 100%? The point of doing such studies is -at least IMO and to mention it again- to have proof that your product does what you're telling the consumers it claims it does. Most supplement consumers could care less about clinical research because not only do they not know any better but no one would think there would be any need for it since one might assume that nutritional supplements are supposed to be derived from FOOD but as well know, even food is something that is becoming questionable with the the way crops are being farmed, harvested and treated w/ many different types of questionably safe chemicals and additional ingredients.

    Thanks for all your responses and I hope for a good discussion!

  2. Registered User
    MakaveliThaDon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    2,781
    Answers
    0


    I thought not too long ago there was a talk of a new law that was trying to be passed by the FDA that would require just that, actual testing of the products that these supplement companies are selling, and then having to prove that they reall do what they say they do.

    I could have dreamed that, or just made it up though, so don't quote me word for word on that.
  3. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0


    Such suggestions as the one you mentioned have come about largely in response to lax practices by some nutritional
    supplement makers. Real nutritional supplements are typically considered food but the fact is that many nutrition companies are considered drug companies. Most companies boast about scientific research and such – if they have a research staff at all – it consists of two or three people.
    •   
       

  4. Registered User
    bearmeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    286
    Answers
    0


    The following products have clinical studies funded by the company:

    Molecular Nutrition's X-Factor
    Ergopharm's 6-OXO (love this stuff)
    Muscletech has clinical studies done but they're bull****.
  5. Recovering AXoholic
    Board Sponsor
    thesinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    10,063
    Answers
    0


    Do you know how much money it would cost to fund a worthwhile study on such a product? On top of this, everyone and their brother would tear it down because the study was funded by the company, which may cause bias to the results. In turn, funding such research would do nothing more than wasting profits to open doors for people to point even more fingers.

    Because of this, really the only studies that would serve as possibly valuable (depending on how well they can be designed with their budget) would be an independently funded study (i.e. some rich f*cker decides to give some scientists enough money to research a product to see if it is worthwhile).

    Because of this and possibly a few other reasons, it is best just to cross-reference from clinical trials.


    Example: Beta-Alanine, works according to clinical trials. If a company makes a beta-alanine product with a few other 'goodies' in it, what would testing their beta-alanine in particular prove other than "Hey, we spent thousands of dollars to prove what we already know."
    Athletic Xtreme Rep
    Bob@athleticxtreme.com
    IFFI
    Ask me about the Athletic Xtreme Product Line
  6. Board Supporter
    BUCKNUTS's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,230
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by MakaveliThaDon View Post
    I thought not too long ago there was a talk of a new law that was trying to be passed by the FDA that would require just that, actual testing of the products that these supplement companies are selling, and then having to prove that they reall do what they say they do.

    I could have dreamed that, or just made it up though, so don't quote me word for word on that.
    If this happens the supplement companies would pass the cost on to you and me, which means I wouldn't be buying the few things that I do.
  7. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    crader's Avatar
    Stats
    5'3"  126 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Age
    40
    Posts
    7,259
    Answers
    0


    I agree with the sinner and bucknuts, damn we Ohio people are intelligent.

    The only way that I would think you need a certificate is for things like hormonals.
  8. Recovering AXoholic
    Board Sponsor
    thesinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    10,063
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by crader View Post
    I agree with the sinner and bucknuts, damn we Ohio people are intelligent.

    The only way that I would think you need a certificate is for things like hormonals.
    Unless they manufacture the ingredients in-house (very uncommon), it's common practice for the suppliers to attach a CoA, MSDS, or both as "proof" that you got what you paid for. (not sure if that's what you're referring to with certificate). If you (the customer) are ever really all that concerned, I'm sure you could contact whatever supplement company and ask.

    I think what dannyboy is wondering about is why you can't search studies on something like Xtend or Cell-tech on PubMed.

    I do, of course, have to agree with your first statement: we Ohioans is jeenyusses
    Athletic Xtreme Rep
    Bob@athleticxtreme.com
    IFFI
    Ask me about the Athletic Xtreme Product Line
  9. Registered User
    Polynomial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    364
    Answers
    0


    There costs are certainly prohibitive. Think about it this way: if you want to do a double blind experiment for some supplement that claims to help you put on lean mass, for example, you'd have to find, say, 12 individuals who are willing to adapt their lifestyle (go on a controlled diet, have measurements taken often, etc.) for at least a week or two. And even then your results might be meaningless depending on how advanced the trainees are, what kind of routines they do, etc.,

    This varies by the type of supplement, but people's time is pretty expensive.

    There are published studies that claim that novice body builders don't need more than 0.7g of protein per 1lb body weight for the first month of their training...
  10. NutraPlanet Fanatic
    Board Sponsor
    dsade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Age
    43
    Posts
    21,306
    Answers
    2


    Correct....a halfway decent university study (if you can even get one willing to whore itself out for a private product company) costs anywhere from $10k-$45k depending on how rigorous it is.

    This cost would then be factored into the product cost, which would raise the price anywhere from 30-100 percent.

    Then, of course, as soon as you post your study (one of the reasons X-Factor was willing and able to perform studies is because MN has a patent) 25 companies come out of the woodwork, copy (or almost copy) your formula. Not only that, they will use YOUR study in THEIR marketing, and can charge MUCH less, since the cost of studies did not come from their pockets.

    If the FDA has its way, you will never get to see a new supplement again, and will have to wait for drug companies to release anything.
    Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
    BPS - Where Body meets Performance
    Flawless Skin Couture - We give you the tools to make you Flawless
  11. constant recomp
    Skircus7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,092
    Answers
    0

    Post


    Effects of beta-alanine supplementation on exercise performance during a competitive wrestling season: An 8-week open label study.
    Kern BD, Robinson TL, Manninen AH. Physical Education Department, Center High School, 500 S. Broadway Center, Colorado 81125, USA.Email: bkern@center.k12.co.us

    Abstract
    Background: The goal of wrestlers during a competitive season is to maintain or lose body weight without compromising athletic performance. However, some studies have reported decrements in exercise performance associated with weight loss and/or the strain of a competitive season. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to examine the effects of 8 week beta-alanine (B-ala) supplementation on exercise performance in Division II collegiate wrestlers during a competitive season. Methods: 25 college wrestlers (age 18 to 22 y) volunteered to participate in this study, and 18 subjects (mean BMI 24.7 ? 3.7) completed the study. Each participant ingested 4 g/d of B-ala in an open-label manner during the final eight weeks of their competitive season. The subjects followed a standard training protocol for collegiate wrestling as dictated by the head coach. They were also required to maintain uniform body mass during the entire eight weeks, as per weight bracket allowance during the competitive season. Before and after supplementation, subjects performed a 400 m sprint and 90 degree flexed-arm hang to exhaustion. Immediately prior to and following the pre treatment and post treatment 400 m sprint, subjects blood lactate was taken via finger stick and analyzed to determine lactate increase during the 400 m sprint. Results: The subjects showed significant decrease (p<0.01) in 400 m sprint time (? 3.5 s ? 2.4 s, mean ? superdrol) and significant increase (p<0.01) in 90 degree flexed-arm hang (+ 8.5 s ? 8.35 s, mean ? superdrol). No significant change (p>0.05) in blood lactate values were observed. Conclusion:The results of our study suggest that supplementation of B-ala may improve exercise performance in wrestlers during a competitive season. Because of the design of this experiment, it is impossible to identify exactly how much of the positive effects experienced by the subjects was a direct result of the supplementation. However, due to the large increase in performance and the similarity of results in comparison to other B-ala studies, we feel our study strongly suggests efficacy of B-ala supplementation. The ergogenic effects of B-ala supplementation during a competitive wrestling season needs to be confirmed in placebo-controlled trials.

    Acknowledgments:Athletic Edge Nutrition donated the products and ~150 US dollars for lactate measurements. No other funding was received. The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
  12. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by thesinner View Post
    Do you know how much money it would cost to fund a worthwhile study on such a product? On top of this, everyone and their brother would tear it down because the study was funded by the company, which may cause bias to the results. In turn, funding such research would do nothing more than wasting profits to open doors for people to point even more fingers.
    I don't know exact numbers and figures but I know that every marketed, "popular" company complains about the funding (or the evident lack of). I definitely see where you're coming from, it would take a company that actually generates a substantial amount of profit to fund such research and clinical testing. Speaking of "research", most companies like to market themselves by using phrases with the words "science" and "research" or a blend of both to glitter their name up, so to speak. The fact is that most companies - if they have a research staff at all - it consists of two or three people.

    I'm not talking about studies that are done with the possibility of the results being biased or no such thing. I'm talking about products that are clinically tested in randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical tests conducted by independent laboratories such as say... Stanford, Harvard, Scripps Institute, and George Washington University and then, being published in professional, peer-reviewed medical journals such as:
    ♦ Journal of the American Medical Association
    ♦ The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
    ♦ The Journal of the American Dietetic Association
    ♦ The Journal of Applied Physiology
    ♦ The American Journal of Cardiology
    ♦ The Journal of Nutrition

    Cross referencing doesn't mean anything except that you're using information everyone already knows and making a product based on the information that's out there. Now what happens if 3 other companies make a product identical to it? Not like that hasn't happened already anyway. All you have to do is compare the products that circulate this board and at times, the only difference between some products are the amounts of the ingredients that are incorporated into the product - some companies put more, some put less and some even add a few more "goodies" as you mentioned. What then, influences one's decision when choosing between say, 3 of the same type of products? The company that has a better way with words?

    Quote Originally Posted by thesinner View Post
    Example: Beta-Alanine, works according to clinical trials. If a company makes a beta-alanine product with a few other 'goodies' in it, what would testing their beta-alanine in particular prove other than "Hey, we spent thousands of dollars to prove what we already know."
    I understand the concept that the ingredients have been proven and it is true what you're saying. Everyone knows "vitamin C is good for you", yes. That's a given, but if my body isn't utilizing it, how "good" can it be? It's another evident fact that not all vitamin C products, for example, are being utilized properly by the body for many reasons - mainly, all of which point to it being the manufacturing company's fault. Common sense (not to mention ethics) would lead us to assume that all products are created equal but if that were the case, there would be no need for 100 different companies making the same kind of product. As common sense AND realistic thinking correctly allow us to assume: not all products are created equal under any circumstances. What it seems to come down to is the way the product is marketed.

    How can a consumer tell if the supplement - or the "goodies" as you referred to them as- are being absorbed & assimilated into the bloodstream where they are available to the cells?

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynomial View Post
    There costs are certainly prohibitive. Think about it this way: if you want to do a double blind experiment for some supplement that claims to help you put on lean mass, for example, you'd have to find, say, 12 individuals who are willing to adapt their lifestyle (go on a controlled diet, have measurements taken often, etc.) for at least a week or two. And even then your results might be meaningless depending on how advanced the trainees are, what kind of routines they do, etc.,

    This varies by the type of supplement, but people's time is pretty expensive.
    The point of the randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical tests wouldn't be to display results because results will always vary. It's about showing that the product does what it's supposed to do from a biological standpoint. The biological activity is what matters. It's only common sense that there are far too many factors to be able to prove that everybody is going to gain the same spectrum of benefits as far a results go but as long as it does what it's supposed to do, some might gain 12 lbs. with a certain product ,as you mentioned, and others might gain 7. Heck, some might even gain 20. That's why it's misleading, almost a deceitful tactic, when companies claim that a certain product will give you certain results.

    Now, if we were talking about a Sustained Release Vitamin C product for example and the claim was that supplementing with a specific brand of Sustained Release Vitamin C would create the biological activity equivalent to eating 1 1/2 oranges every hour for five hours, I would want to see some proof of those claims.
  13. Registered User
    jjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    6,539
    Answers
    0


    Our product is supported by valid studies.
  14. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0


    Are you talking about X-Factor?

    Is it clinically tested in a randomized, double-blind [placebo controlled] clinical tests?
  15. Registered User
    haiz69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    1,920
    Answers
    0


    Gaspari has some.
  16. Recovering AXoholic
    Board Sponsor
    thesinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    10,063
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    Are you talking about X-Factor?

    Is it clinically tested in a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical tests?
    double-blind studies are placebo controlled.
    Athletic Xtreme Rep
    Bob@athleticxtreme.com
    IFFI
    Ask me about the Athletic Xtreme Product Line
  17. Registered User
    jjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    6,539
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    Are you talking about X-Factor?

    Is it clinically tested in a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical tests?
    Double blind placebo controlled.
  18. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by thesinner View Post
    double-blind studies are placebo controlled.
    Good point. Thank you for your contribution to the thread thesinner.

    (Not being sarcastic, I know you said that because it might have seemed like I didn't know what you said to be true but I did. I know you had good intentions so no sweat)
  19. Registered User
    jjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    6,539
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by thesinner View Post
    double-blind studies are placebo controlled.
    Indeed
  20. Recovering AXoholic
    Board Sponsor
    thesinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    10,063
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    Good point. Thank you for your contribution to the thread thesinner.

    (not being sarcastic, I know you said that because it might have seemed like I didn't know what you said to be true but I did....)
    I think I might try to put up a thread reviewing research methods (provided I get some free time). I kind of want to clear up some things with the differences in different studies, what all the different study jargons mean, and the value held by 'beta-testing'.

    And to put a blatant answer to why supp companies don't do such research on their supplements, here it is:

    They can sell plenty of products without the research.
    Athletic Xtreme Rep
    Bob@athleticxtreme.com
    IFFI
    Ask me about the Athletic Xtreme Product Line
  21. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by thesinner View Post
    I think I might try to put up a thread reviewing research methods (provided I get some free time). I kind of want to clear up some things with the differences in different studies, what all the different study jargons mean, and the value held by 'beta-testing'.
    Sounds like a great idea ts. Most companies think they can get away with very general statements like that they have published studies or backed by science, etc. Putting together a thread like the one you have in mind will educate the consumers and allow them to know the right questions to ask and what answers they should expect.

    Quote Originally Posted by thesinner View Post
    And to put a blatant answer to why supp companies don't do such research on their supplements, here it is:

    They can sell plenty of products without the research.
    You're saying more than necessary. Even the companies themselves wouldn't put that much thought and effort into answering a question like that. All you/they have to say is this:

    Quote Originally Posted by thesinner View Post
    And to put a blatant answer to why supp companies don't do such research on their supplements, here it is:

    Because they can
    They might even save some money and put B/c in place of the "because". They might not even capitalize the 'b' because that would cost some more money.....

    Gosh....so stingy.
  22. Recovering AXoholic
    Board Sponsor
    thesinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    10,063
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    Gosh....so stingy.
    It can come off as stingy, but you also have to remember that passing on info to the consumer is also passing on info to "the enemy".

    As dsade had mentioned earlier, it's super easy for a competator to come along, read your companies write-up and research, copy it, and sell it for $10 cheaper. And there you have it, all that hard work and all you're left with is other companies banking off it.

    A company is only going to pass on enough info to get just enough people to buy it. Skeptics ain't worth their dolla.

    I hope I don't have to re-educate AM on the first law of thermodynamics (everything functions at minimal energy/effort).
    Athletic Xtreme Rep
    Bob@athleticxtreme.com
    IFFI
    Ask me about the Athletic Xtreme Product Line
  23. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0


    Passing on what "info"? All the clinical testing is proving is that a product does what it's supposed to do. No company has come out with anything innovative or "new", so to speak, because there's nothing "new" out on the market. The "fad ingredients" most of these companies try to market haven't been deemed safe for long-term use and there's still on-going research with many of these ingredients. The stuff that has been proven already (vitamins, minerals, anti-oxidants, herbs, etc.) are the foundation of 99.9% of the products circulating the market - again, nothing new. What I'm proposing is that companies start doing some clinical testing on their products in specific, to display their efficacy, nothing more and nothing less.

    If a company is worried about the competitor copying a formula or something along those lines, get a patent on your formula. Otherwise, it just proves that a product isn't really all that the company is trying to make it out to be. A great, intellectual company has patents on their stuff, otherwise it's really no different than the other products out on the market sitting right next to them at the shelves of the stores.

    Thermodynamics is the name of the game with many companies it seems. You're right, nice diction
  24. Registered User
    jjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    6,539
    Answers
    0


    Do you have an idea of the cost of the patent? This is outrageous, and some still copy the formulas anyways.
  25. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by jjohn View Post
    Do you have an idea of the cost of the patent? This is outrageous, and some still copy the formulas anyways.
    LOL!

    That's obviously not something Molecular Nutrition going to be doing anytime soon. Too much money? That says a lot about just how much money MN really makes....

    Anyway, You can't copy formula if it's patented if I'm not mistaken....correct me if I'm wrong though. I'm here to learn just like everyone else so don't hold back my brother.
  26. Recovering AXoholic
    Board Sponsor
    thesinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    10,063
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    LOL!

    That's obviously not something Molecular Nutrition going to be doing anytime soon. Too much money? That says a lot about just how much money MN really makes....

    Anyway, You can't copy formula if it's patented if I'm not mistaken....correct me if I'm wrong though. I'm here to learn just like everyone else so don't hold back my brother.
    Molecular Nutrition has multiple patents.
    Athletic Xtreme Rep
    Bob@athleticxtreme.com
    IFFI
    Ask me about the Athletic Xtreme Product Line
  27. Registered User
    jjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    6,539
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    LOL!

    That's obviously not something Molecular Nutrition going to be doing anytime soon. Too much money? That says a lot about just how much money MN really makes....

    Anyway, You can't copy formula if it's patented if I'm not mistaken....correct me if I'm wrong though. I'm here to learn just like everyone else so don't hold back my brother.
    This is call a long term investment. Most don't want to do this, and prefer a quick buck. That doesn't mean you make tons of money, that means you invest tons of money.

    You cannot legally copy a product for it's claims, but some just do it anyways.
  28. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by thesinner View Post
    Molecular Nutrition has multiple patents.
    I meant something MN isn't going to be doing [again] anytime soon.
  29. NutraPlanet Fanatic
    Board Sponsor
    dsade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Age
    43
    Posts
    21,306
    Answers
    2


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    Passing on what "info"? All the clinical testing is proving is that a product does what it's supposed to do. No company has come out with anything innovative or "new", so to speak, because there's nothing "new" out on the market. The "fad ingredients" most of these companies try to market haven't been deemed safe for long-term use and there's still on-going research with many of these ingredients. The stuff that has been proven already (vitamins, minerals, anti-oxidants, herbs, etc.) are the foundation of 99.9% of the products circulating the market - again, nothing new. What I'm proposing is that companies start doing some clinical testing on their products in specific, to display their efficacy, nothing more and nothing less.

    If a company is worried about the competitor copying a formula or something along those lines, get a patent on your formula. Otherwise, it just proves that a product isn't really all that the company is trying to make it out to be. A great, intellectual company has patents on their stuff, otherwise it's really no different than the other products out on the market sitting right next to them at the shelves of the stores.

    Thermodynamics is the name of the game with many companies it seems. You're right, nice diction
    So be honest, you would really have no problem at all paying $150 for 100 grams of Creatine Monohydrate, and eliminating most of the other product formulas on the market (xtend, etc) due to cost prohibition, if it meant having 2-3 studies on each particular brand?

    Oh, and most herbals and naturally occurring compounds cannot be patented.
    Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
    BPS - Where Body meets Performance
    Flawless Skin Couture - We give you the tools to make you Flawless
  30. Recovering AXoholic
    Board Sponsor
    thesinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    10,063
    Answers
    0


    Let's also not forget that 99% any research done on any potential supplement CANNOT prove anything. Effects of body composition, athletic performance, etc. are studied through correlation because other underlying variables (i.e. experience, genetics, etc.) can only be controlled to a certain degree. You will soon become familiar with the words
    Research suggests......
    Fact of the matter is, it is yet to be proven that cigarettes cause cancer. Through correlation there is a definite link between the two, and "research suggests" cigarette smoke can lead to lung cancer or other diseases.
    Athletic Xtreme Rep
    Bob@athleticxtreme.com
    IFFI
    Ask me about the Athletic Xtreme Product Line
  31. Recovering AXoholic
    Board Sponsor
    thesinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    10,063
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by jjohn View Post
    This is call a long term investment. Most don't want to do this, and prefer a quick buck. That doesn't mean you make tons of money, that means you invest tons of money.

    You cannot legally copy a product for it's claims, but some just do it anyways.
    It's not so much a quick buck, but for most supplements, the ends wouldn't justify the means.

    It takes a lot of time and money to get a patent. There's no sense going after it unless you are 100% certain the product will (1) Be able to continue great sales for the protection period (2) Will be approved. Granted there's some stupid patents that get handed out (*cough* cordless jumprope), there's also a fair number of good ideas that have been rejected. (3) Can afford to apply for the patent

    There's probably some other things I can't think of off the top of my head. But yeah, a patent is a lot of work that's often times unnecessary.
    Athletic Xtreme Rep
    Bob@athleticxtreme.com
    IFFI
    Ask me about the Athletic Xtreme Product Line
  32. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dsade View Post
    So be honest, you would really have no problem at all paying $150 for 100 grams of Creatine Monohydrate, and eliminating most of the other product formulas on the market (xtend, etc) due to cost prohibition, if it meant having 2-3 studies on each particular brand?
    Why would I have to pay more because a company does studies on their product? How cheap of a company are we talking about?

    If a company does clinical testing on their studies to prove it's true efficacy (basically, that it does what it's supposed to do once you ingest it), that's not going to knock the rest of the products off the market, just make them look inferior. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Quote Originally Posted by dsade View Post
    Oh, and most herbals and naturally occurring compounds cannot be patented.
    You can't patent the ingredients, you can patent formulas. Basically, the proportions in which the ingredients are blended together to make a product -that can be patented. Good point.
  33. NutraPlanet Fanatic
    Board Sponsor
    dsade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Age
    43
    Posts
    21,306
    Answers
    2


    All costs are passed on to the consumer in order to maintain an acceptable margin.
    Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
    BPS - Where Body meets Performance
    Flawless Skin Couture - We give you the tools to make you Flawless
  34. Recovering AXoholic
    Board Sponsor
    thesinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    10,063
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    Why would I have to pay more because a company does studies on their product? How cheap of a company are we talking about?

    If a company does clinical testing on their studies to prove it's true efficacy (basically, that it does what it's supposed to do once you ingest it), that's not going to knock the rest of the products off the market, just make them look inferior. Nothing more, nothing less.
    Sinner Nutrition (fictitious company) is going to make a creatine product. This product consists of Creatine Monohydrate, Dextrose, and BCAA's. So SN decides to take your advice and conduct clinical University testing. They spend $20k for a randomized triple blind study on the effects of their creatine product, SinnerCrea. Testing shows that SinnerCrea was 300% more effective than the placebo group.

    Dsade Incorporated (another fictitious company with no relation to the dsade of AM....as far as I know ) comes along, and mixes Creatine Monohydrate, Dextrose, and BCAA's to make TheSamething. DI's product is 60% cheaper because they didn't have to pay for the research. So tell me, what the heck is the difference between SinnerCrea and TheSamething that would purport the consumer to buy SinnerCrea over TheSamething? SinnerCrea is has been clinically tested for it's effects in correspondence with placebo (mind you this does not 'prove' anything), but TheSamething is...well....the same thing. It also costs 60% less money, and has received great anecdotal feedback.


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    You can't patent the ingredients, you can patent formulas. Basically, the proportions in which the ingredients are blended together to make a product -that can be patented. Good point.
    Proprietary blends are a joke (sinner hates proprietary blends). It withholds important information from the customer, and the likelyhood of them being patented is not very likely. The ones that say "patent pending"....yeah, they're not getting a patent.
    Athletic Xtreme Rep
    Bob@athleticxtreme.com
    IFFI
    Ask me about the Athletic Xtreme Product Line
  35. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    Eric Potratz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,831
    Answers
    0


    We don’t do full blown placebo controlled, double blind clinical studies, (Most sup companies don’t have the backing to fund $50k plus clinical studies) but we do gather in-house testers to run saliva and blood hormone levels…

    http://www.primordialperformance.com/results.cfm

    -Pp
  36. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dsade View Post
    All costs are passed on to the consumer in order to maintain an acceptable margin.
    In Layman's Terms, that means:

    To make up for the lack of funds a company has, they charge the consumer to make up for it by increasing the price of their products, right?


    Quote Originally Posted by thesinner View Post
    Proprietary blends are a joke (sinner hates proprietary blends). It withholds important information from the customer, and the likelyhood of them being patented is not very likely. The ones that say "patent pending"....yeah, they're not getting a patent.
    I agree with you on that one. I don't deal with proprietary blends, I prefer patented blends.

    The clinical testing is not for anything else but to know if the supplements you are taking are being absorbed and assimilated into the bloodstream where they are available to the cells.

    Are your supplements creating any biological activity and if so, is it the corresponding biological activity related to that specific supplement?


    How do you know that?
    Have you done blood work?

    There's no other way to know unless the company is proving you with the clinical tests I'm talking about.

    Every company should have peer reviewed research on their products. The key word here is peer reviewed. That means it is unbiased, legitimate research vs. advertising research where you pay someone to publish your research in what looks like a legitimate journal. Otherwise, I'm taking a company's word for it that their stuff is being utilized efficiently by my body - I know I'm trustworthy but I don't know about these companies...
  37. NutraPlanet Fanatic
    Board Sponsor
    dsade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Age
    43
    Posts
    21,306
    Answers
    2


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    In Layman's Terms, that means:

    To make up for the lack of funds a company has, they charge the consumer to make up for it by increasing the price of their products, right?


    No. I would highly recommend you take some business and economics courses.

    What I mean is that all costs are factored into the retail price, and adding an addition $20k WILL be factored into the price of the product you are trying to buy.
    Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
    BPS - Where Body meets Performance
    Flawless Skin Couture - We give you the tools to make you Flawless
  38. Recovering AXoholic
    Board Sponsor
    thesinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    10,063
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    In Layman's Terms, that means:

    To make up for costs to fund such research, they pass the expenses consumer to make up for it by increasing the price of their products, right?
    Fixed your post. And in order to make a profit (I'm sorry but without a profit, there's no point in selling a supplement), it has to be done this way.

    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    I agree with you on that one. I don't deal with proprietary blends, I prefer patented blends.
    What patented blends are you referring to? The only one I can think of off the top of my head is Kre-alkalyn, and that's barely worth my dime: it's just Creatine Monohydrate with some buffering salts (to maintain a pH of 12). I really don't think this was as 'groundbreaking' as the creator convinced the patent offices it was. He just bridged off effervesent creatine (creatine + alka seltzer).

    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    The clinical testing is not for anything else but to know if the supplements you are taking are being absorbed and assimilated into the bloodstream where they are available to the cells.
    Probiotics aren't absorbed into the bloodstream. They aren't absorbed at all. (extreme case, of course)

    Very rarely are studies done on whether or not the supplement is absorbed into the bloodstream because, quite frankly, no one really cares. If you look at products like HMB and glutamine, there's buttloads of research showing that they do get absorbed into the bloodstream, and into cells. There's also a buttload of research suggesting that all this is worth jack squat because clinical studies have seen very little evidence that they have any use for trained athletes.

    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    Are your supplements creating any biological activity and if so, is it the corresponding biological activity related to that specific supplement?

    How do you know that?
    Have you done blood work?

    There's no other way to know unless the company is proving you with the clinical tests I'm talking about.

    Every company should have peer reviewed research on their products. The key word here is peer reviewed. That means it is unbiased, legitimate research vs. advertising research where you pay someone to publish your research in what looks like a legitimate journal. Otherwise, I'm taking a company's word for it that their stuff is being utilized efficiently by my body - I know I'm trustworthy but I don't know about these companies...
    Is it illegal to cross-reference clinical studies utilizing the exact same compound through the exact same method of administration? Because that's what a lot of companies do. I agree, if you're going to cite data, you need proper citation. But most companies do that anyhow.

    Next weeks lesson: What can be considered "Common Knowledge"
    Athletic Xtreme Rep
    Bob@athleticxtreme.com
    IFFI
    Ask me about the Athletic Xtreme Product Line
  39. Banned
    dannyboy9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    320
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dsade View Post
    I would highly recommend you take some business and economics courses.
    Unnecessary statement, regardless of whether it's true or not. Considering that I'm currently in college, I believe those courses will be taken in due time. I subtly requested to be spoken to in Layman's terms (regarding this matter anyway but you seemed to have missed my subtle request anyway) because as I mentioned: I'm here to learn. Thanks for pointing out the evident though, I appreciate it. I'm sure you meant well.

    Quote Originally Posted by dsade View Post
    What I mean is that all costs are factored into the retail price, and adding an addition $20k WILL be factored into the price of the product you are trying to buy.
    Right...what did I say. Since the company lacks the funds to be able to do the clinical research on their own without having to compensate for it because they spend all their money on advertising and marketing *inhale/exhale*, then they pass the expense on to the customer. And what you said about "adding an addition $20k WILL be factored into the price of the product you are trying to buy".... I'm assuming you meant the fact that about $20k was spent to do such research is going to be factored into the final outcome of how much the prices will increase, correct?

    You said exactly what I said but the way I put was in it's raw form. You decided to use business and economics terms.

    I prefer you K.I.S.S. (I don't mean the "stupid" part)
  40. Recovering AXoholic
    Board Sponsor
    thesinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    10,063
    Answers
    0


    Quote Originally Posted by dannyboy9 View Post
    Unnecessary statement, regardless of whether it's true or not. Considering that I'm currently in college, I believe those courses will be taken in due time. I subtly requested to be spoken to in Layman's terms (regarding this matter anyway but you seemed to have missed my subtle request anyway) because as I mentioned: I'm here to learn. Thanks for pointing out the evident though, I appreciate it. I'm sure you meant well.
    I'm sure dsade meant well. It's just that we're starting to delve into things that go past layman, and it gets hard to explain without him having to teach you complex business/economics principles. I'm sure once you've taken some courses, and whatnot, you'll see how the business world works (it's a crazy place).
    Athletic Xtreme Rep
    Bob@athleticxtreme.com
    IFFI
    Ask me about the Athletic Xtreme Product Line
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-06-2010, 10:23 AM
  2. Any one have any experience of iForce Adipoxil?
    By saggy321 in forum Supplements
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-12-2010, 08:22 PM
  3. Any one have any feedback on MHP's Dark Matter?
    By matic22 in forum Supplements
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 09-19-2008, 12:03 PM
  4. Does Minoxidil have any affect on androgen levels?
    By Jeff Rippe in forum Cycle Info
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-27-2003, 03:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in