Will superdrol go away with the ban?
- 11-22-2004, 03:44 PM
- 11-22-2004, 03:59 PM
it is not on the banned list
- 11-22-2004, 04:07 PM
Unfortunately, from what I understand about the bill, is that it is very easy for compounds to be added to the law. It wouldn't take a long time to get banned like this bill has taken. No congressmen to vote on it, more like FDA saying its bad, and its gone.
At least that's what I've gotten from it.
Hopefully superdrol turns out to be all as promised.
11-22-2004, 04:18 PM
Yeah, it may or may not be around a year from now, but it's good to go until they put it on the books. Too bad, because it's great stuff, but it might not be around long enough for the price to drop on it. The first batch has got to cost alot because you make it small to see how it sells and then buy big the next time. Know what I mean? Oh well, time for Super2 I guess!
11-22-2004, 07:22 PM
super2? I like the implications.
11-22-2004, 08:32 PM
I wouldnt count on it making it through Jan. It can be added to the list at any point so I will just sell it while I can. If I get the chance to get more done, I will and hopefully the cost on the raws will come down. Only time will tell...
11-23-2004, 09:10 AM
what is the price going to be (roughly) for one full cycle?
11-23-2004, 10:21 AM
testings not done yet so we dont know when gains diminish or if toxicity outweighs gains after x weeks like m1t. we also do not know what dosage yields the greatest gains. after the testing we will have a better take at it. however, i think sledge mentioned presale will be 55-60 bucks a bottle? 10mg caps which will probably have 90 caps in them. some users have been dosing 30mg, if thats enough, a bottle may last a month.
11-23-2004, 10:30 AM
i hope its not more expensive then 60 or else many will not be able to afford it (including me!)
11-23-2004, 10:56 AM
I recall that Sledge said it would be available in a pre-sale for $55, and then after that it would be $60-65. In either case there may be 'freebie' deals (e.g. M4OHN) with the purchase of multiple bottles. If it is $2 a day (30mg) and does what it looks like it is doing, that is not a bad deal - 2-4x as expensive as M1T, but M1T is foul, and requires the addition of 4-AD and substantial liver protection, so those costs have to be factored in.
11-23-2004, 03:06 PM
Very true. Good call, Strat!Originally Posted by Strateg0s
11-23-2004, 06:28 PM
It's my belief that the FDA will be more aggressive in the future in enforcing the DHSEA regs, and until I see evidence to the contrary, my MO will be to buy anything new as quickly as possible.
11-23-2004, 08:05 PM
I'm just hoping that when the media lays off supplements, out of sight out of mind will kick in.
11-23-2004, 08:46 PM
Keep hoping. The FDA ain't going to "sleep on it."
11-24-2004, 07:02 PM
That's not my reading of the bill actually... The Dept of Health & Human Services can review the list and send recommendations about what else should be banned. I don't see where the FDA has the power to arbitrarily ban products without any oversight. The Attorney General has the power to exempt products, but not the power to expand the list.
11-24-2004, 07:25 PM
All supplements sold in the US are regulated under the Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act of 1994, which has specific criteria governing sales conditions.Superdrol. for one, does not meet these criteria. The FDA has announced a future agressive pursuit of the requirements.
This is what Pat Arnold recently wrote at BB. PA is , IMO, a shrewd player in this industry; he knows. That PDF details the DSHEA regs and the FDA enforcement aims. I would also bet money that the Current PH developers like Sledge are on a special doublequick enforcement list.
"You guys are completely missing, or unaware of, the biggest factor that will affect our industry in 2005
and that is the FDA's just announced upcoming aggressive enforcement of DSHEA. This will ultimately weed out and destroy about 75% of sports supplement companies.
this is the great flood and unless you have built your ark, you are f-u-c-k-e-d
now you can ignore me and go on with your fantasy discussion or you can read this
I don't know why that link works at BB and not here,and I can't upload it, what's the deal with that? the BB thread that contains it is
Post #88 on page 3.
Last edited by Rogue Drone; 11-24-2004 at 07:54 PM.
11-24-2004, 07:48 PM
The problem is, the new laws make this more of a DEA thing, than an FDA thing. And the DEA is not an agency you want to mess with.
11-24-2004, 08:03 PM
http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98f...58-bkg0001.pdfOriginally Posted by Rogue Drone
That should work. And if you want to upload a file that's not specified in the allowed files on the uploads page, you need to zip it with something like WinRAR or Winzip--it has to be in ZIP format.
11-24-2004, 08:58 PM
I don't see how this is at odds with what I've said. Are you agreeing with me Rogue?
11-24-2004, 09:15 PM
The prohormone bill's addition process does'nt appear to allow for quick removal, but I think the FDA will use agressive DSHEA enforcement to do so.
11-24-2004, 10:26 PM
I other words, when it comes to removing a new PH/PS from the shelves, the prohormone bill has not given the FDA any new powers. This DSHEA route seems like a separate issue to me and unrelated to the bill.
11-24-2004, 10:59 PM
I don't what the FDA And DEA has planned; can only speculate. I do know that everything we say is avaliable worldwide, there are 11 Google spiders harvesting data here as I type, we need to watch what we type.
11-24-2004, 11:15 PM
Those are my 2 points really. One-- let's shut up about what loopholes may or may not exist. Two-- the prohormone bill does not give the FDA new powers.
11-25-2004, 02:09 PM
But there is a big difference between the FDA sending you a cease and desist order, and the DEA kicking in your door with a warrant for manufacturing / trafficking in controlled substances.
11-27-2004, 01:34 PM
I'm not arguing that the DEA won't act. I'm saying people are wrong to jump to the conclusion that the latest ban gives the FDA new powers for handling products that haven't been banned already. I don't see anything like this in the wording of the bill that was passed.
Similar Forum Threads
- By BigVrunga in forum General ChatReplies: 83Last Post: 01-17-2007, 05:47 PM
- By Fastflight in forum AnabolicsReplies: 9Last Post: 09-05-2004, 09:56 PM
- By Grant in forum IGF-1/GHReplies: 1Last Post: 08-12-2004, 06:29 PM
- By BigRich in forum AnabolicsReplies: 2Last Post: 08-03-2004, 08:37 PM
- By The Conqueror in forum AnabolicsReplies: 23Last Post: 03-25-2004, 09:47 AM