Letter from Senator regarding PH ban
- 01-25-2003, 11:49 AM
Letter from Senetor regarding PH ban
I sent my state representatives an email regarding my support against the PH ban. I received a letter back from Senetor Nick Smith. I will retype it here word for word.
Thank you for cantacting me regarding H.R. 5564, which would have defined substances that are chemically similar to anabolic steroids as controlled substances.
As you may know, this legislation did not pass before the 107th Congress adjourned. However, I will keep your views in mind as this issue is discussed over the next two years in the House of Representatives.
Thanks again for writing me.
That's what the letter said word for word. So from what I get out of this letter is that we have at least another two years of pro-hormones. Which is good news.
Just thought everyone might like to know.
- 01-25-2003, 01:57 PM
I was just going to ask anyone if they'd heard anything on the ph/ps ban. I guess it didnt pass. Well thank god, heres to the next two years and hopefully more. We should still keep fighting this thing now though and shoot for a total retraction of the bill. Thanks for the info metacat.
01-25-2003, 02:06 PM
I don't know if it didn't pass... or Congress didn't have time to get to that bill before they adjourned..
Either way it looks like we have a bit more time to stock up on pro-hormones before they are banned.
01-25-2003, 02:47 PM
Do you think he was meaning that the bill wouldn't get out of Congress for another 2 years, or is it that his term expires in another 2 years, so he will keep your opinion in mind while he remains in office?
I more suspect the second. I doubt anyone can really predict how long it may take for the bill to get out of Congress if ever.
01-25-2003, 08:05 PM
I addressed some of this in a thread called PH Ban in the homebrews - prohormones section. You can look there to find some of the most recent info I found. Congress has been adjourned for the past 2 weeks and will reconvene on Monday I believe then we will all see where the ph ban is going to go from there. There is no news on any legislation on it yet except they want to reintroduce it.
01-27-2003, 07:35 PM
To clarify, there are two bills present now that would ban prohormones, and they have not been voted on yet.
01-29-2003, 11:27 PM
Anyone have any updates on this? I know that Pat A. was doing some work with a lawyer named Collins, but
I havn't heard anything yet.
01-30-2003, 02:35 AM
I recieved a letter from a Senator yesterday in my state whom I knew a few years ago. He said he would keep my opinion in mind since he realizes that many Americans use dietary supplements to improve their health. He said he understood my concerns about the legislation in regard to vitamins and dietary supplements. He understands the problem with access problems as well. I hope he understands it doesn't involve vitamins but I hope it doesn't come to the point in this nation where even they will be under the microscope. Where did this nation make a wrong turn?
01-30-2003, 05:59 AM
More people trying to restrict PHs:
Found this on Medscape.
Androstenedione May Have Adverse and Beneficial Effect in Postmenopausal Women
By Karla Gale
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Jan 17 - A single dose of oral androstenedione increases testosterone levels, and to a lesser extent estrone levels, in postmenopausal women, according to a new study. "If these hormonal effects are sustained during long-term administration, regular use of this supplement by postmenopausal women could thus cause both beneficial and adverse effects," the researchers conclude.
Women, as well as men, are known to use over-the-counter androstenedione for its perceived effects on strength, libido, well-being and quality of life, Dr. Benjamin Z. Leder and his research team note in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism for December.
Dr. Leder, of Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and colleagues randomized 30 healthy postmenopausal women, ages 47 to 64, to each of three groups. The women received one oral 50-mg or 100-mg dose of androstenedione, or placebo. The researchers then measured sex hormone levels hourly for the next 12 hours.
Serum levels of estradiol remained stable, the report indicates. However, the mean change in serum androstenedione area under the curve (AUC) was 79% at 50 mg and 242% at 100 mg. For estrone, mean changes in serum AUC were 108% and 116% at 50 mg and 100 mg, respectively. Serum testosterone increased 185% for the lower dose and 457% for the higher dose of androstenedione.
The authors note that hormone levels tended to peak after 2 hours and returned toward baseline by the end of the 12 hours.
These findings differ from those observed in men, who experienced increases serum estradiol concentrations but not in testosterone levels following androstenedione administration. This could be due to higher baseline serum testosterone levels obscuring increases, the group suggests, or pathways of metabolism may differ between genders.
"It's possible" that androstenedione supplementation added to conventional hormone replacement therapy could be of benefit to postmenopausal women, Dr. Leder told Reuters Health. However, such a recommendation would require "a lot more study of physiological effects and fine tuning of doses," he added.
Problems with virilizing side effects could actually be increased in this age group, he added, because of lower counterbalancing levels of estrogen. Furthermore, androstenedione has the potential to lower levels of high-density lipoprotein.
Even though androstenedione "may meet legal criteria as a dietary supplement," Dr. Leder stressed, "it is unwise to allow unregulated, over-the-counter use of a steroid hormone that is converted to even more potent steroid hormones."
J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2002;87:5449-5454.
01-30-2003, 11:25 AM
interesting thread. i sent a letter to the two senators from my state and my representative. havent heard a peep. but i figure if the do i'll get some kinda of bs answer with no statement of their position.
01-30-2003, 01:15 PM
I am still tracking this and apparently the "new" bill is the old one rolled over into a new bill number for the new session. Either way, the fact that they did not vote last session does delay for at least awhile the passing of the Bill.
01-30-2003, 03:31 PM
Pat A over on Avantlabs.com just wrote that some Aids groups are trying to stop the ban. And that some of the commitee members are gay friendly.
02-12-2003, 04:16 AM
Another good starting point to contact all them SOB's that think they have our "best" interest at heart. Some general instructions on how to write them a formal letter also, going to sit down and write this weekend. Can check on current legislation for each day and other stuff they hide from the general public as well. It ain't over til its over!
02-15-2003, 04:42 PM
If you know anything about politics or are able to read in between the lines, you will know that politicians rarely have anyone's best interests in mind. They just want to look good and rake in some easy cash from interest groups and corps.
Similar Forum Threads
- By phonefool in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 12-18-2009, 01:11 AM
- By windwords7 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 7Last Post: 02-21-2003, 11:18 PM
- By YellowJacket in forum AnabolicsReplies: 19Last Post: 01-16-2003, 05:03 PM
- By Richie in forum AnabolicsReplies: 17Last Post: 01-13-2003, 06:44 AM
- By pjorstad in forum General ChatReplies: 1Last Post: 12-30-2002, 03:58 PM