Here we go again (arggg): Acacia rigidula

Whacked

Whacked

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
(Graphs removed - click link to read)
There is something fishy about Acacia rigidula supplements
There is something fishy about Acacia rigidula supplements
There's probably a problem with all slimming supplements that contain Acacia rigidula. Almost half of the products containing Acacia rigidula actually contain a synthetic amphetamine analogue that does not occur in nature. And the other half, well…When governments across the world banned the use of Ephedra sinica in slimming supplements, and supplements manufacturers went in search of an alternative, they discovered DMAA. And when governments blacklisted DMAA, the industry discovered Acacia rigidula.
According to an American study done in 1998, extracts of Acacia rigidula contain impressive amounts of stimulants in equally impressive concentrations.[Phytochemistry, Volume 49, Issue 5, 5 November 1998, Pages 1377-1380.] The table below comes from that study


As you can see, the analysis shows that Acacia rigidula contains amphetamine and methamphetamine, both of which are marketed as recreational drugs. The 1998 study, and the increasingly popularity of slimming supplements with Acacia rigidula, prompted researchers at the American FDA to take a closer look atAcacia rigidula. And at supplements containing extracts of this plant of course. The results were published in the Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis.
USA Today, a newspaper that had already had a critical eye on the supplements industry for several months, reported on the publication and it became world news. [USA Today 18-11-2013] Nine diet supplements contain amphetamine-like compound was the title of the article.
The article in USA Today actually doesn't do justice to the content of the publication. The article argues not only that some of the products claiming to contain Acacia rigidula actually contain a synthetic amphetamine analogue, but also that there may something wrong with all supplements claiming to containAcacia rigidula.
The researchers analysed samples of Acacia rigidula. A simplified version of the results is shown below. Click here for the complete table. The researchers found no trace of amphetamines. That's not so surprising: as far as biochemists know, amphetamine is not a substance that occurs in nature. The 1998 study is the only report of analysts having found amphetamine in a natural product.
The FDA researchers did find phenethylamine, tyramine and tryptamine.
The researchers then bought 21 supplements containing Acacia rigidula extracts and analysed them too. At this point they made a number of discoveries. The table below is simplified. Click on it for the complete version.
In 9 of the 21 supplements they examined, the researchers found – mainly substantial – amounts of beta-methylphenethylamine. This is a substance that bears a striking resemblance to amphetamine, and is not found in nature. Going by the amounts, manufacturers must have added it intentionally to the supplement. Someone using supplements 1 and 9, if they were to take the maximum recommended dose, would ingest 146 and 67 mg beta-methylphenethylamine respectively and 148 and 23 mg phenethylamine respectively.
The researchers then trawled the literature for information on the synthetic amphetamine analogue, and found no human studies. They did come across a few animal studies from the first half of the twentieth century. These would suggest that beta-methylphenethylamine is about 30 to 50 percent as effective as good old amphetamine

But the products that don't contain beta-methylphenethylamine are not completely kosher either. The main active ingredient in these is phenethylamine. Phenethylamine is a naturally occurring substance, and is found in Acacia rigidula. But Acacia rigidula contains other substances that are conspicuously absent in the supplements. The same goes for the supplements containing the synthetic beta-methylphenethylamine. The researchers assume therefore that none of the 21 preparations they studied contain any extracts of Acacia rigidula.
It looks as though many Acacia rigidula supplements contain the synthetic phenethylamine. The researchers found high quantities, especially in the supplements that did not contain the amphetamine analogue beta-methylphenethylamine. If you take the maximum recommended dose of supplements 10 and 11, then you'd be consuming 809 and 552 mg phenethylamine daily.
 

tigerbunny

Member
Awards
0
So which ones actually have the analog.. This article kind of blows.
 
xR1pp3Rx

xR1pp3Rx

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
the study was done in 1998??
I doubt there is any of those raws left at this point
 

uubiduu

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
What dos This mean with regards To dexaprine?
 

tigerbunny

Member
Awards
0
After reading a bit more about this i can't find anything to suggest the beta-methyl-PEA actually serves any value recreational or otherwise. it sounds like its just another trash PEA you find in gazillions of supps out there that's just added to the label to make it sound good. USA Today can go **** itself.
 
Geoforce

Geoforce

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
the study was done in 1998??
I doubt there is any of those raws left at this point
Yeah am I missing something? It's 17 years after this. I don't really see how this pertains to products containing it today.
 

De__eB

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Yeah am I missing something? It's 17 years after this. I don't really see how this pertains to products containing it today.
One shady study in 1998 claimed that these compounds were found naturally.

In every single subsequent test since, none of these amphetamine analogues have been found.

Company's cite the 1998 study to try and claim that their synthetic PEA analogues are naturally-occurring and legal.

They are of course full of ****.
 
Afi140

Afi140

Legend
Awards
4
  • Best Answer
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Established
I remember when Iforce switched from dmaa to acacia for their maximize intense. When they initially released it they said it had 3 pea isomers. I hated it anyway. they got their acacia from hi-tech. Not surprised about the results though.
 
JudoJosh

JudoJosh

Pro Virili Parte
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Yeah am I missing something? It's 17 years after this. I don't really see how this pertains to products containing it today.
The question is weather or not these companies are intentionally spiking their products with this analogue. Some suggest it is something in the plant while others think it was intentional spiking.

Ultimately, things like this is what is going to end up costing the supplement industry as a whole.
 

Similar threads


Top