- 01-25-2009, 09:56 PM
- 01-25-2009, 10:21 PM
01-26-2009, 08:09 AM
01-26-2009, 08:29 AM
Hey Jakell, thanks for the reps yesterday btw, much appreciated. Got my bottle of Restore today is well funny enough...I'll maybe post a final review up in the forum somewhere once im done with it.
If im not wrong, there seems to be 2 versions of Restore? One old one with a white/creamy label and a new Red bottle. I've found 2 sets of ingredients, one set is an older looking formula with Clary Sage Extract in there, and another with the 6-bromo and other goodies...
Just wondering if the mislabelling issue was with the older formulation? I dont recall from logs i've come across people reporting being shut down from it. In any case i'll report my experiences on this in a month or so. Looks solid.
01-26-2009, 09:19 AM
What I know of restore.
PA said it contained 1-ad, 4-ad and andro.
This is after 1 lab test. He never tested it twice. These are his words off of BaBiesdotcom.
Reps for starting this thread jake.
I have one bottle that is not red, the bromo profile.
01-26-2009, 10:56 AM
With all due respect to P.A., has he ever tested ANYTHING that didnt' have something supposedly crazy in it? It's a bit looney toons for me.
"There's d-bol in your gatorade sir, that's why it's a great intra workout drink. We tested it, and found the secret ingredient."
01-26-2009, 11:16 AM
01-26-2009, 02:22 PM
For all your reading enjoyment I have this older post from 2/2008 from MD forums, which is all now deleted as they do not have a forum on there any longer. I have more of these as I was email subscribed to this thread but here is one post from ALR addressing the issue. However no one ever heard anything else. I do however still have some Restore with this very lot number ......
Author L. Rea has just replied to a thread you have subscribed to entitled - Problems with Restore now too? - in the ALR Industries forum of Muscular Development Forums.
This thread is located at:
Here is the message that has just been posted:
One thing that always frustrates me more than a woman you are sleeping with not being in the mood is the assumption that the industry is not heavily regulated. Small companies that run a single or two product on the Internet can fly under the radar but we spend about the cost of a VERY nice in Calif house yearly just following FDA bag and tag procedures.
For us (or any of the larger on radar companies..) this means that: Every raw, every run (called a "lot") is required to have in a tagged bag 2 bottles of the finished product with the pre-run C of A's in them for each raw, and the post run C of A as well. This is the FDA's rule and the procedure our legal team set up. We do this for each raw, each run, each product. This includes testing for contamination. This is a VERY small part and we pay the bills for all the testing, R and D as well of course. We are also required to run in certified facilities who are also checked monthly by the FDA. And by the way, every time PA or someone else bashes us we get an additional visit from the FDA (the second Restore bag and tag is on Raven's desk waiting for the FDA now) asking for one of our bag and tags so they too can go test it and validate what has been proven two to three times. I am cool with that but that no one knows this stuff really pisses me off as it allows cross bashing !
by companies to run crazy that creates media hysteria and ill feelings forever in consumers minds. I could think of several for issues for most but pretending to be a consumer watch dog while owning a competing company is just embarrassing IMO so I will pass.
BTW PA....the FDA did come by months ago to pick up one of the bag and tags for Jungle Warfare...obviously there was no issues but no one will forget your error claims on that one. I did take your advice though and brought a full time attorney on whom specializes in such things. We have been perfecting labels and procedures since. Thanks, this has really been a good thing overall IMO.
With that said...
PA finally gave up the lot number of the Restore run in question. Easy to spot as it had the old style (ugly IMO) label on it. 41922 which was completed on 6/28/06 (yes, about 20 months ago). We located our sealed production bag and tag (took a while as it was in one of the really old lockers....we run ever other month) and sent it off to SR Labs for re-testing.
I say re-testing because the C of A's from the tests done almost 2 years ago were good as expected (truth is we only got big enough to test every run 3 years ago) but we are _re-testing_ and posting the results once received. Unfortunately the bitch is that we have standards (a pure sample of a compound used to compare another to for validation) for all of the compounds PA said "appear" to be in there but have to have another standard made for 6-Bromoandrostenedione (we used mixed alpha and beta analogs at that time so need to do both). But nonetheless, the question of it "appearing" to contain 4-androstenedione, 1,4,6 and 4,6 analogs will be answered likely by next week I would assume.
Dr. D: If you read this hit me up as you may have a 6-bromo mixed isomer already!
I always believe what I see only, so rather than making some stupid ass promise of the out come I will simply say it like it is and always will be: If it comes back as it did in the before and after run tests back in '06 then PA has some serious issues to deal with, sadly enough.
If it comes back that there are beyond trace amounts we will do a recall and foot the bill with an apology plus deal with any legal issues then go after our testing labs pretty tough. And of course I will thank PA for being my favorite lad. lol
BTW: As to having more controls on the industry? Those in favor already got their way. 2010 it is very possible that many can say good bye to most affordable and effective supplements. Sad, we all already had the ability to opt NOT to use a product, now there will be few choices left so the few can choose for the many. WTF...I have to admit that I do love the challenges! SO count us in.
Thanks....off the soap box now.
Author L. Rea
PS: BB.com, I would have posted this there as well so no one had to come copy and paste it but I am blocked there for some reason.
01-26-2009, 02:31 PM
Thank you FNF. Much appreciated. Although that information leaves alot to be desired. It is something.
My lot number is not the lot number in question. Mine is numbered #070807, expires 6/09
However, I am still worried if i should run it as a PH or as a Testbooster/PCT?
If you were in my shoes, FNF. What would you do?
01-26-2009, 02:34 PM
01-26-2009, 02:38 PM
01-26-2009, 02:44 PM
My concern was with Venom as I was a user of that product and the FDA has produced a recall and unfortunately enough I had several of the sides from the supposed ingredients in it. Chalked it up to other problems during that time causing them... Guess we can never be too careful.
01-26-2009, 02:45 PM
01-26-2009, 03:13 PM
01-26-2009, 03:17 PM
01-26-2009, 05:18 PM
01-26-2009, 10:51 PM
"Although it is the company's opinion that trace amounts of sibutramine are not harmful to healthy individuals, in an abundance of caution, ALR Industries is initiating this recall."
01-27-2009, 04:15 PM
01-27-2009, 04:33 PM
01-27-2009, 05:35 PM
restore+clom****bad as$ pct...i dont care what pa says....my real world experience with this product has been good...but the venom thing was shady though...
Similar Forum Threads
- By CEDeoudes59 in forum Cycle InfoReplies: 63Last Post: 06-08-2009, 09:12 AM
- By Zombie in forum AnabolicsReplies: 59Last Post: 06-30-2006, 02:37 PM
- By McBurly in forum IGF-1/GHReplies: 4Last Post: 11-23-2005, 09:07 PM