question on Bulbine Natalensis

djbombsquad

djbombsquad

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
If rlssupplements is the first to bring it to the market and I have listened to the super human radio that it is from Africa and only Africa where is APS getting there Bulbine Natalensis from and what would be the difference on the two raw ingredients. I am totally confused since APS also claims they were the 1st but it is sorta mis leading because they are the 1st with a certain extraction which could make there claim true. Any help please.
 
djbombsquad

djbombsquad

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
Is the Aps brand the same raw as rls supplements?
 
nattydisaster

nattydisaster

PESCIENCE.com
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
APS is the extracted version of the root i believe, like what is used in the study. The others I have seen are whole plant. It all comes from South Africa, the only place the plant can be grown regularly.
 
BigBlackGuy

BigBlackGuy

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
APS is the extracted version of the root i believe, like what is used in the study. The others I have seen are whole plant. It all comes from South Africa, the only place the plant can be grown regularly.
I haven't seen any studies. The extract is bound to have a better effect, though.
 
Kellyflan1

Kellyflan1

New member
Awards
0
More information on the history at this link. Too much is a bad thing and the right ratio will make or break your success with this product.

www .anthonyroberts.info/2010/bulbine-natalensis-testosterone (.com)

I can't post the link right due to being a noob
 
VaughnTrue

VaughnTrue

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Basically if it isn't ProLensis there is no reason to take it. ProLensis is what was used in the Yakuba studies. A true 100:1 extract would be damn near impossible to dose correctly.
 

ephedroman

New member
Awards
0
If you listen to the super human radio episode where they went into detail about it they said that the extract was grown but wasn't in huge quantity. That reason being is why I'm so skeptical about companies popping up everywhere saying they have "prolensis" when theres not alot around in the first place.

Thats just my opinions but who knows, time will tell.
 
djbombsquad

djbombsquad

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
Exactly. That is why even though APS is a good company imo I am worried too. Can someone chime in from APS.
 
Milas

Milas

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
OP got butt hurt on the promo? Calling out APS now? Didn't get enough gains from the last APS log?

I don't see what's so difficult to understand, bulbine comes from Africa. There are different extracts, ProLensis, the one APS is using, and probably some others.

Pink Magic had "rare herbs" from a "once a year harvest" but there were still copy cats out soon after. Not too difficult to see there are more raws available, no one said they (or is big enough to) bought up all the raws.

Why so concerned with APS' credibility now? You wanted to log it after all... :wtf:
 

southpaw23

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
I have yet to have a bad experience with any APS product and that says a lot. They are among a handful (maybe 3) that I would take a leap of faith with, with respect to ordering a product that's new to the marketplace. And I wouldn't do that with 99.9% of all supplement companies out there, including one that posted in here. =)
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
I have yet to have a bad experience with any APS product and that says a lot. They are among a handful (maybe 3) that I would take a leap of faith with, with respect to ordering a product that's new to the marketplace. And I wouldn't do that with 99.9% of all supplement companies out there, including one that posted in here. =)
i agree-aps has gotten a lot of good rep on their products. i have been shouting from the rooftop how good my results from testatropin/mesomorph/creatine nitrate have been. i just can't see them throwing away all of this goodwill on a bogus product. my money says it will be golden.



results will tell the story!!!
 
djbombsquad

djbombsquad

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
OP got butt hurt on the promo? Calling out APS now? Didn't get enough gains from the last APS log?

I don't see what's so difficult to understand, bulbine comes from Africa. There are different extracts, ProLensis, the one APS is using, and probably some others.

Pink Magic had "rare herbs" from a "once a year harvest" but there were still copy cats out soon after. Not too difficult to see there are more raws available, no one said they (or is big enough to) bought up all the raws.

Why so concerned with APS' credibility now? You wanted to log it after all... :wtf:
I just got my blood drawn and I will get my results tomorrow of my test base lines so this would be a perfect chance to see if my levels raise. Plus you have not herd the super human radio on it have you? http://superhumanradio.com/super-human-radio-show/632-supplement-companies-square-off-over-bulbine.html
 
jaydollars

jaydollars

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
More information on the history at this link. Too much is a bad thing and the right ratio will make or break your success with this product.

www .anthonyroberts.info/2010/bulbine-natalensis-testosterone (.com)

I can't post the link right due to being a noob
This^^^^The extract may not be as effective as the raw...
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
For all we know the entire plant is better.
but for all we know it isn't.

you have to consider that this product may blow the other bulbine products out of the water.


results will tell the story.
 
beni182

beni182

New member
Awards
0
This^^^^The extract may not be as effective as the raw...
You really put all your faith in Anthony Roberts?

Was not aware he had disproved the effectiveness of standardized extracts in Bulbine...

Until that study is provided or negative bloods come from the APS bulbine, nothing is for certain. Every year a new product gets brought to the market and every year there is a study that shows that something is ineffective, that was once thought to be the standard...

Just saying don't rush to judge guys.
 
djbombsquad

djbombsquad

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
Also remember in the shr they talked about trying more and had a down play on test so why would more be better? I mean they using the clinically studied raw. If it is better cool but I would like to see blood work or my blood work.
 
Royd The Noyd

Royd The Noyd

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
but for all we know it isn't.

you have to consider that this product may blow the other bulbine products out of the water.


results will tell the story.
It's a consideration, but use the full plant (just as the studies did) and ensure you get at least those benefits (assuming it even translates to humans). Or use the extract and possibly get better, the same, or none. Risk mitigation my friend.
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
You really put all your faith in Anthony Roberts?

Was not aware he had disproved the effectiveness of standardized extracts in Bulbine...

Until that study is provided or negative bloods come from the APS bulbine, nothing is for certain. Every year a new product gets brought to the market and every year there is a study that shows that something is ineffective, that was once thought to be the standard...

Just saying don't rush to judge guys.
I agree with you. I don't trust anything AR says. It seems like a racket to me. He is the one that trademarked the prolensis, but funny thing is that the trademark data base shows no such trademark.
 

Sldge

Super Lab Rat
Awards
1
  • Established
If you listen to the super human radio episode where they went into detail about it they said that the extract was grown but wasn't in huge quantity. That reason being is why I'm so skeptical about companies popping up everywhere saying they have "prolensis" when theres not alot around in the first place.

Thats just my opinions but who knows, time will tell.
Its not in a huge quantity. I also work for the company who is supplying ProLensis so maybe I can give a little back ground to help everyone be aware of what products to stay away from and which ones are ok or even likely ok.

As some of you may or may not know I write for a South African BBing magazine (the same one that AR writes for) and Im the official supp guru for Super Human Radio. What this means is that I have A LOT of connections in SA already and was able to email the researchers who did the Bulbine study right away and start sourcing the raw material.

We got samples pretty quickly and did our own blood work, which is the ONLY blood work done on Bulbine alone, in humans. The dosing we provide for ProLensis is based on our blood work results for our extract only. There is a definite dosing curve which AR talks about in his various blog posts. More is definitely not better. Actually its probably better to be a little on the low side then the high side.

After we confirmed the testing results we purchased ALL of the raw material available in early 2010. And by all I mean our supplier literally put workers in the fields and told them not to come out till they had gotten it all. By the time we got to June in 2010 we had decided that in order to keep a consistent supply we were going to go into business with our supplier and start share cropping with them in order to keep up with what we expected our needs were going to be. We didnt get more then 5kgs of finished ProLensis till Sept of 2010. It took that long from the day we got in touch with them to get enough material that we could cap up more then a few hundred caps at a time. IForce and RLS were the first ones to get ProLensis and between the two of them, they bought ALL the material we had for all of 2010.

You see with SA being in the southern hemisphere their seasons are different then ours and for their summer vacation they basically show up to work once a week for a couple hours. If you didnt get the material before they went on vaca you werent going to get any till their summer vaca was over (which was last week).

Now right before they left on vacation our total amount of raw material was over 1 ton. It was everything we could get at that point. No one else had any. I had tried contacting other suppliers hoping to get even more and they had none. You see Bulbine Natalensis (there are other Bulbine plants but the key is it being Natalensis) seems to grow in a specific region where there is enough moisture for these types of plants to grow. As you go more north and inland in Africa it doesnt grow. Anyway we had all that we could get and we had already sold all of it for 2010. they have just come back from vaca and we have just had a large portion of our 1+ton being crated up to be shipped over.

Im not saying that we have absolutely all of it and that no one can grow anymore but for 2010 (which would lead me to think that for at least the first few months of 2011) we had all we could get and we had the money to buy twice as much as we did. I would assume if there was some out there that those people would have wanted to sell it and we were buying.

Ive already gotten 2 price lists from China offering the material, got those samples and it did not match our material. In total we have tested about 6 different samples and none were the same as ours.

No one can use the ProLensis trademark without purchasing the raw through our company.

No hes not. None of the studies have attempted to isolate the extract specific to test increases. For all we know the entire plant is better.
We think it probably is. For anyone to claim they are using something for a specific extract would be hard to believe from my point of view. I have every study done on Bulbine and I also have the original HPLC tests from the researchers. They did not extract for any specific compound so to claim otherwise without any actual scientific data to support that extract seems odd to me. We got blood work in humans on our extract so we know ProLensis works and we know what dose ProLensis works at. For everything else, I have no idea.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
Its not in a huge quantity. I also work for the company who is supplying ProLensis so maybe I can give a little back ground to help everyone be aware of what products to stay away from and which ones are ok or even likely ok.

As some of you may or may not know I write for a South African BBing magazine (the same one that AR writes for) and Im the official supp guru for Super Human Radio. What this means is that I have A LOT of connections in SA already and was able to email the researchers who did the Bulbine study right away and start sourcing the raw material.

We got samples pretty quickly and did our own blood work, which is the ONLY blood work done on Bulbine alone, in humans. The dosing we provide for ProLensis is based on our blood work results for our extract only. There is a definite dosing curve which AR talks about in his various blog posts. More is definitely not better. Actually its probably better to be a little on the low side then the high side.

After we confirmed the testing results we purchased ALL of the raw material available in early 2010. And by all I mean our supplier literally put workers in the fields and told them not to come out till they had gotten it all. By the time we got to June in 2010 we had decided that in order to keep a consistent supply we were going to go into business with our supplier and start share cropping with them in order to keep up with what we expected our needs were going to be. We didnt get more then 5kgs of finished ProLensis till Sept of 2010. It took that long from the day we got in touch with them to get enough material that we could cap up more then a few hundred caps at a time. IForce and RLS were the first ones to get ProLensis and between the two of them, they bought ALL the material we had for all of 2010.

You see with SA being in the southern hemisphere their seasons are different then ours and for their summer vacation they basically show up to work once a week for a couple hours. If you didnt get the material before they went on vaca you werent going to get any till their summer vaca was over (which was last week).

Now right before they left on vacation our total amount of raw material was over 1 ton. It was everything we could get at that point. No one else had any. I had tried contacting other suppliers hoping to get even more and they had none. You see Bulbine Natalensis (there are other Bulbine plants but the key is it being Natalensis) seems to grow in a specific region where there is enough moisture for these types of plants to grow. As you go more north and inland in Africa it doesnt grow. Anyway we had all that we could get and we had already sold all of it for 2010. they have just come back from vaca and we have just had a large portion of our 1+ton being crated up to be shipped over.

Im not saying that we have absolutely all of it and that no one can grow anymore but for 2010 (which would lead me to think that for at least the first few months of 2011) we had all we could get and we had the money to buy twice as much as we did. I would assume if there was some out there that those people would have wanted to sell it and we were buying.

Ive already gotten 2 price lists from China offering the material, got those samples and it did not match our material. In total we have tested about 6 different samples and none were the same as ours.

No one can use the ProLensis trademark without purchasing the raw through our company.

We think it probably is. For anyone to claim they are using something for a specific extract would be hard to believe from my point of view. I have every study done on Bulbine and I also have the original HPLC tests from the researchers. They did not extract for any specific compound so to claim otherwise without any actual scientific data to support that extract seems odd to me. We got blood work in humans on our extract so we know ProLensis works and we know what dose ProLensis works at. For everything else, I have no idea.
results will tell the story......what happens if the aps version turns out to be as good as they say......
 
VaughnTrue

VaughnTrue

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
results will tell the story......what happens if the aps version turns out to be as good as they say......
as good as they say? you mean 100x more potent than ProLensis?


people will have test levels in the 300,000,000 range...



:lmao:
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
as good as they say? you mean 100x more potent than ProLensis?


people will have test levels in the 300,000,000 range...



:lmao:
well, how about better than the other bulbine products....i guess we will have to wait and see......


laugh all you want, i still say wait for the results-then we will see whose laughing.:poke:
 
morry

morry

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
well, how about better than the other bulbine products....i guess we will have to wait and see......


laugh all you want, i still say wait for the results-then we will see whose laughing.:poke:
So what's the recommendation? I wanted to use this as my test booster for PCT (along with the regular stuff and some extra goodies), but now I'm not so sure. Maybe I should stick to a more proven test booster?

Is there a board sponser that carries legit bulbine natelieus or whatever?
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
So what's the recommendation? I wanted to use this as my test booster for PCT (along with the regular stuff and some extra goodies), but now I'm not so sure. Maybe I should stick to a more proven test booster?

Is there a board sponser that carries legit bulbine natelieus or whatever?
aps has a promo for a chance to log a free bottle going on now-put in an app. :biggthumpup:
 

Sldge

Super Lab Rat
Awards
1
  • Established
results will tell the story......what happens if the aps version turns out to be as good as they say......
If you read my post youll see that I said Im talking about ProLensis and only ProLensis. I have no idea what is or isnt being claimed by anyone else. If it works then thats great, ProLensis works which is all that I care about.

Keep in mind that when you use a product with ProLensis in it, you know ahead of time that the extract in that product works. Instead of having to try it out first for other companies.

I don't trust AR either. He doesn't have a very good track record...
.
You dont have to. He has nothing to do with ProLensis, he does not own the trademark and does not work for the company that sells ProLensis.

The ProLensis trademark is owned by Sports Nutrition Research.
 
bdcc

bdcc

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
I may have missed something. If you are involved with ProLensis and it is effective, why don't DS have a bulbine natalensis product out?
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
You dont have to. He has nothing to do with ProLensis, he does not own the trademark and does work for the company that sells ProLensis.

The ProLensis trademark is owned by Sports Nutrition Research.
Why is this whole trademark thing thrown around? Here is the trademark database search engine. This is a database of all trademarks out there. Now search in there for ProLensis. Just so you all know this isn't just BS, search for ForsLean

http://tess2.uspto.gov/

The results are that there is no such trademark. Shoot, I can go register the trademark now and sue everyone using it.

I tried finding Sports Nutrition Research as well and there are no filings for a Form D as well for this, so not incorporated, LLCed, or anything. I even used LexisNexus to find any filings for such a company and am coming up empty.

So while I believe your bulbine probably works, I believe the whole ProLensis racket was started to discredit other companies like this thread is sporting.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
Why is this whole trademark thing thrown around? Here is the trademark database search engine. This is a database of all trademarks out there. Now search in there for ProLensis. Just so you all know this isn't just BS, search for ForsLean

http://tess2.uspto.gov/

The results are that there is no such trademark. Shoot, I can go register the trademark now and sue everyone using it.

I tried finding Sports Nutrition Research as well and there are no filings for a Form D as well for this, so not incorporated, LLCed, or anything. I even used LexisNexus to find any filings for such a company and am coming up empty.

So while I believe your bulbine probably works, I believe the whole ProLensis racket was started to discredit other companies like this thread is sporting.
wow...
 
Royd The Noyd

Royd The Noyd

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Why is this whole trademark thing thrown around? Here is the trademark database search engine. This is a database of all trademarks out there. Now search in there for ProLensis. Just so you all know this isn't just BS, search for ForsLean

http://tess2.uspto.gov/

The results are that there is no such trademark. Shoot, I can go register the trademark now and sue everyone using it.

I tried finding Sports Nutrition Research as well and there are no filings for a Form D as well for this, so not incorporated, LLCed, or anything. I even used LexisNexus to find any filings for such a company and am coming up empty.

So while I believe your bulbine probably works, I believe the whole ProLensis racket was started to discredit other companies like this thread is sporting.
Disregarding the trademark issue...would you rather use the brands that incorporate the full herb similar to the published (and I stress published) studies or an extract that may our may not do anything?

APS claims there is research on their extract, and I believe them, unfortunately it is not published or even available to the public....so until then its a pretty easy decision for me...
 
Royd The Noyd

Royd The Noyd

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
I may have missed something. If you are involved with ProLensis and it is effective, why don't DS have a bulbine natalensis product out?
Product sourcers and formulators often work for multiple companies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mw1
nattydisaster

nattydisaster

PESCIENCE.com
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Disregarding the trademark issue...would you rather use the brands that incorporate the full herb similar to the published (and I stress published) studies or an extract that may our may not do anything?

APS claims there is research on their extract, and I believe them, unfortunately it is not published or even available to the public....so until then its a pretty easy decision for me...
The published study on bulbine natalensis is done on the extract from the root. Gives the full extractions process and everything in the full text. Pretty easy extraction too. It's not done on the whole plant or even the whole root.

20g of whole ROOT (not plant) yields 5g of extract in the study. Its all in there word for word. Then the EXTRACT is what the study is on.

Im not choosing sides...because hell the other product hasn't even been released. I am just stating the facts on the study
 
Royd The Noyd

Royd The Noyd

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
The published study is on bulbine natalensis is done on the extract from the root. Gives the full extractions process and everything in the full text. Pretty easy extraction too. It's not done on the whole plant or even the whole root.

20g of whole ROOT (not plant) yields 5g of extract in the study. Its all in there word for word. Then the EXTRACT is what the study is on.

Im not choosing sides...because hell the other product hasn't even been released. I am just stating the facts on the study
You are likely right, I read them months ago but I have a summary of the studies posted somewhere on this forum.

Is the aps extract only part of the root? That was my understanding...
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
The published study on bulbine natalensis is done on the extract from the root. Gives the full extractions process and everything in the full text. Pretty easy extraction too. It's not done on the whole plant or even the whole root.

20g of whole ROOT (not plant) yields 5g of extract in the study. Its all in there word for word. Then the EXTRACT is what the study is on.

Im not choosing sides...because hell the other product hasn't even been released. I am just stating the facts on the study
Beat me to it.

Like I said, the whole Bulbine thing sounds like a racket to me, and to discount another's extract because it doesn't have an untrademarked trademark is incessant. Let the products play out and then see which is better or right. I am 100% positive we will see blood work on all these products from unsponsored people.
 
nattydisaster

nattydisaster

PESCIENCE.com
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
You are likely right, I read them months ago but I have a summary of the studies posted somewhere on this forum.

Is the aps extract only part of the root? That was my understanding...
I have no idea what theirs is...the most ive read about it is in this thread lol. An extract from whole plant would yield a different result in final product than that done in the study. Its a water extraction so many polar compounds will be in the extract.

I dont think anyone has sold extract from the root only like the study uses. But I could be wrong. I dont know what ProLensis is either.

But the study is done on an extract from the root only.
 
bdcc

bdcc

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Product sourcers and formulators often work for multiple companies.
I am not sure if this answers my question or not. If he is involved in the sourcing why would he not formulate a product with it?

I am sure I am missing something because it seems the obvious thing to do. Just hoping someone can enlighten me to satisfy my curiosity.
 
mw1

mw1

Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
After we confirmed the testing results we purchased ALL of the raw material available in early 2010. And by all I mean our supplier literally put workers in the fields and told them not to come out till they had gotten it all. By the time we got to June in 2010 we had decided that in order to keep a consistent supply we were going to go into business with our supplier and start share cropping with them in order to keep up with what we expected our needs were going to be. We didnt get more then 5kgs of finished ProLensis till Sept of 2010. .
Sounds like you are selling "blood bulbine":aargh:
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
Beat me to it.

Like I said, the whole Bulbine thing sounds like a racket to me, and to discount another's extract because it doesn't have an untrademarked trademark is incessant. Let the products play out and then see which is better or right. I am 100% positive we will see blood work on all these products from unsponsored people.
this-


the results will do the talking. aps is still taking apps to log the new product, looks like a great chance to try it out.
 
djbombsquad

djbombsquad

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
Im not trying to discredit aps as I liked there products I have used but since there product ectraction has not been clinically tested in the study that is available more actually shut you down and that's what I'm concerned with.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
6
  • Best Answer
  • The BigT Award
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
Im not trying to discredit aps as I liked there products I have used but since there product ectraction has not been clinically tested in the study that is available more actually shut you down and that's what I'm concerned with.
everyone who has tried mesomorph/creatine nitrate, and tesatropin knows that aps knows how to formulate a product, if you have concerns then don't buy it. easy!!!
 

APS NUTRITION

New member
Awards
0
Hey guys sorry took so long to jump in we have been slammed.First off I don't want to get involved in all the bashing and temper tantrums as I don't believe that slamming some other company proves that mine works any better,so if I don't react to much of that it's not because I don't have an answer it's just I don't see how it helps me make you (consumers)better supplements.I think you guys are intelligent enough to process supplement data to determine what may or may not be effective or legit as opposed to the opinions of employees of the very companies selling the product for financial gain.obviously others don't feel you can handle it so instead of showing more data opt to take up that same space trying to discredit anothers product (over even providing more info as to why theirs works) unless maybe there is nothing else to present.Anyway prolensis is in fact from the correct origin (south Africa)as is this material (Botswana to be exact).When formulating testalensis we had opted for this material based solely on all the extensive data and testing (human testing)that was performed on it by a very prominent scientist.This material is only available because this scientist was hired by a pharmaceutical company to develope a standardized extract of bulbine nat to be used in a product intended for aids patients.Naturally many of the studies and data you will see pertain to immune function wich I bring up because at one point there was a question about it's toxicity so rest assured that question will be fully addressed and settled.Aids is also a wasting disease (wich is why they are prescribed steroids and GH to preserve LBM)so naturally the pharmaceutical co would have to prove to the govt that this material would be safe for use in terms of muscle mass preserverence.So he is obviously well aware of how much of this particular material can be taken without ANY risk of lowering testosterone occuring.we could have used either material we just felt that based on the preponderance of impressive human data on this standardized product it would be the better choice.I am not saying nor implying that prolensis is junk at all,in fact when it looked as though it would take longer to get we had decided to use prolensis in testalensis and possibly switch when it became available so I was perfectly comfortable when it looked as though we would use prolensis in our product.
More importantly,the sole focus here seems to be on mg amounts and the role the inverted "u" curve plays.Although an important factor (I am confident has been addressed)my decision was more heavily influenced by his understanding of neutralizing destructive microbial contaminents and proper harvesting in an effort to preserve the very components that make bulbine effective to begin with.Even correctly sourced material can be completely useless if not harvested properly,this is what I believe to be the most important attribute of bulbine.My point is his understanding of bulbine is at very least on par with dr yakubu.Or so it would seem.All I know is we already had prolensis wich is a quality material but to use it would be to pass on an opprotunity to discover what could possibly be a more effective material.Not because it's stronger but because perhapse more preserved or "potent".There is a difference between flat strength and potency.So if everyone plays it safe and doesn't make an effort to advance our supplements you will be using the same stuff three years from now when it is a good possibility you could be using much more effective ingredients.Also I would always prefer to use a standardized herb as you always know what you are getting,it is the same each time and I like that consistency.Plus he has standardized it for those components that he found to be responsible for performance and hormone elevation.there is so much we will discuss after the data is posted so don't want to go on now listing all the reasons why we chose this material.I just wanted to touch base explain the legitimacy of this material and let you know there will be paperwork justifying that decision.
I did not feel that this very reputable chemist would risk his reputation to falsify documents that would ultimately be submitted to a govt agency for review in preparation for release of a product that would benefit aids victims.cause I guess that is what others are insinuating.But they all profit from prolensis in some way so maybe just take with a grain of salt.I said it before,all we are trying to do is get into your hands the most effective supplements we possibly can.we will be straight up with you along the way.will we make mistakes along the way because we don't just re-use the same stuff already out there?Most likely,yes.But will we hit some grand slams and bring a new more effective ingredient to the table or vastly improve an existing ingredient?most likely,yes.But I know you guys would rather I make an educated decision on trying to find you a better ingredient than take the layup and just follow the crowd ensuring no progress will be made.In any event once bulbine is dialed in it will be a huge advancement in testosterone elevation.Am I saying prolensis doesn't work?Not at all,it's the correct (and quality material).I'm just saying based on the clinical data I was presented and the outstanding reputation of the scientist presenting it,I think everyone taking testalensis is gonna be alot bigger and stronger this year.will have you guys a bunch of interesting reading material real soon so you can decide what you think is factual.If I were you I would demand the same from any other company making claims about their bulbine.I think that's only fair.Maybe we should start a bulbine data thread for any clinical data pertaining to a PARTCULAR type of bulbine.I believe a certain scientist might want to come on and have a "think tank" discussion with a few of our self proclaimed American experts who doubt his material.Thanks for all your support guys,sales have been off the charts.
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Hey guys sorry took so long to jump in we have been slammed.First off I don't want to get involved in all the bashing and temper tantrums as I don't believe that slamming some other company proves that mine works any better,so if I don't react to much of that it's not because I don't have an answer it's just I don't see how it helps me make you (consumers)better supplements.I think you guys are intelligent enough to process supplement data to determine what may or may not be effective or legit as opposed to the opinions of employees of the very companies selling the product for financial gain.obviously others don't feel you can handle it so instead of showing more data opt to take up that same space trying to discredit anothers product (over even providing more info as to why theirs works) unless maybe there is nothing else to present.Anyway prolensis is in fact from the correct origin (south Africa)as is this material (Botswana to be exact).When formulating testalensis we had opted for this material based solely on all the extensive data and testing (human testing)that was performed on it by a very prominent scientist.This material is only available because this scientist was hired by a pharmaceutical company to develope a standardized extract of bulbine nat to be used in a product intended for aids patients.Naturally many of the studies and data you will see pertain to immune function wich I bring up because at one point there was a question about it's toxicity so rest assured that question will be fully addressed and settled.Aids is also a wasting disease (wich is why they are prescribed steroids and GH to preserve LBM)so naturally the pharmaceutical co would have to prove to the govt that this material would be safe for use in terms of muscle mass preserverence.So he is obviously well aware of how much of this particular material can be taken without ANY risk of lowering testosterone occuring.we could have used either material we just felt that based on the preponderance of impressive human data on this standardized product it would be the better choice.I am not saying nor implying that prolensis is junk at all,in fact when it looked as though it would take longer to get we had decided to use prolensis in testalensis and possibly switch when it became available so I was perfectly comfortable when it looked as though we would use prolensis in our product.
More importantly,the sole focus here seems to be on mg amounts and the role the inverted "u" curve plays.Although an important factor (I am confident has been addressed)my decision was more heavily influenced by his understanding of neutralizing destructive microbial contaminents and proper harvesting in an effort to preserve the very components that make bulbine effective to begin with.Even correctly sourced material can be completely useless if not harvested properly,this is what I believe to be the most important attribute of bulbine.My point is his understanding of bulbine is at very least on par with dr yakubu.Or so it would seem.All I know is we already had prolensis wich is a quality material but to use it would be to pass on an opprotunity to discover what could possibly be a more effective material.Not because it's stronger but because perhapse more preserved or "potent".There is a difference between flat strength and potency.So if everyone plays it safe and doesn't make an effort to advance our supplements you will be using the same stuff three years from now when it is a good possibility you could be using much more effective ingredients.Also I would always prefer to use a standardized herb as you always know what you are getting,it is the same each time and I like that consistency.Plus he has standardized it for those components that he found to be responsible for performance and hormone elevation.there is so much we will discuss after the data is posted so don't want to go on now listing all the reasons why we chose this material.I just wanted to touch base explain the legitimacy of this material and let you know there will be paperwork justifying that decision.
I did not feel that this very reputable chemist would risk his reputation to falsify documents that would ultimately be submitted to a govt agency for review in preparation for release of a product that would benefit aids victims.cause I guess that is what others are insinuating.But they all profit from prolensis in some way so maybe just take with a grain of salt.I said it before,all we are trying to do is get into your hands the most effective supplements we possibly can.we will be straight up with you along the way.will we make mistakes along the way because we don't just re-use the same stuff already out there?Most likely,yes.But will we hit some grand slams and bring a new more effective ingredient to the table or vastly improve an existing ingredient?most likely,yes.But I know you guys would rather I make an educated decision on trying to find you a better ingredient than take the layup and just follow the crowd ensuring no progress will be made.In any event once bulbine is dialed in it will be a huge advancement in testosterone elevation.Am I saying prolensis doesn't work?Not at all,it's the correct (and quality material).I'm just saying based on the clinical data I was presented and the outstanding reputation of the scientist presenting it,I think everyone taking testalensis is gonna be alot bigger and stronger this year.will have you guys a bunch of interesting reading material real soon so you can decide what you think is factual.If I were you I would demand the same from any other company making claims about their bulbine.I think that's only fair.Maybe we should start a bulbine data thread for any clinical data pertaining to a PARTCULAR type of bulbine.I believe a certain scientist might want to come on and have a "think tank" discussion with a few of our self proclaimed American experts who doubt his material.Thanks for all your support guys,sales have been off the charts.
Dude... Paragraphs or some cliffs.. PLEASE!
 

APS NUTRITION

New member
Awards
0
Dude... Paragraphs or some cliffs.. PLEASE!
LOL.Sorry guys but we are on the road all weekend doing set ups.So while we are in the vehicle I have to do this on my phone so grammer and punctuation are not going to be a top priority until I get to a hotel room.I apologize.
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
LOL.Sorry guys but we are on the road all weekend doing set ups.So while we are in the vehicle I have to do this on my phone so grammer and punctuation are not going to be a top priority until I get to a hotel room.I apologize.
No worries.. I just cannot read one big paragraph. :D
 
nattydisaster

nattydisaster

PESCIENCE.com
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
LOL.Sorry guys but we are on the road all weekend doing set ups.So while we are in the vehicle I have to do this on my phone so grammer and punctuation are not going to be a top priority until I get to a hotel room.I apologize.
That was a phonepost record in size
 

APS NUTRITION

New member
Awards
0
That was a phonepost record in size
Trust me it was not easy goin' trying to type on my phone in a truck going 75 mph down the highway seemingly making sure we hit every pot hole possible.But my board rep felt certain issues had to be addressed sooner than later.LOL.
 

Similar threads


Top