Are you taking in Fermented amino acids?

John Smeton

John Smeton

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
There are several different ways to produce amino acids, and the most common method is a very harsh acid extraction of animal products including duck feathers and human hair. This process, which involves hydrolysis for several hours using high heat and strong acids, creates amino acid hydrolysates that must then be filtered, dried, and refined to make them fit for human consumption. This is the most popular way to produce amino acids due to the abundance of raw materials, lower cost and ease of manufacturing. This process may produce a product that is contaminated with allergens.

The other, less common, and more expensive method of production of amino acids is accomplished through the fermentation of cultures in a pharmaceutical lab. Through this process, no animal products are used as starting materials; and no harsh chemicals or high heat treatments are used to manufacture the aminos. The result is a higher quality, allergen-free, and more efficacious amino acid product. Source: https://www.labrada.com/store/BCAA-Power.html

There are a few companies that sell fermented amino acids. Millennium sport Technologies, Labrada Nutrition, Species Nutrition.

are the amino acids made from hair harmful? I've never had any issue and ive used them since 2002, and started using them heavily in 2009. My point is I feel the fermented ones are healthier, feel better and work better. MST R.P.G.-BCAA™ is my absolute favorite, seems to taste so pure, which are fermented. Gaspari 's aminolast coming in next, dont know if these are fermented.

MySTeek
 
Aleksandar37

Aleksandar37

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Are there any studies that actually show the superiority of one over the other? Honestly, all I see here is Facebook-level scare tactics of "duck feathers" and "strong acids" which can easily sway people that don't understand basic biochemistry. I'd be curious to see data supporting any issues like allergens, etc.
 
justhere4comm

justhere4comm

Banned
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Black Lion Research can be added to the list of fermented Amino Acids but Vegetarian, so even better, and it tastes great!

I've never tasted MST Aminos, but I am quite familiar with their naturally flavored and sweetened Rag.
and have no doubts they are incredible as well.
 
mbonheur

mbonheur

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Not sure either whether one form is superior to another.

Anyways, in Europe basically all the big bulk suppliers are now offering fermented BCAAs.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Can't we just focus on the whole vegan/vegetarian/ethical/etc. aspect that is actually understandable and not easily disproved? As long as the amino acids are what they're supposed to be, and have proper testing/purity/etc. they're good to go from a safety and efficacy standpoint. I can understand if people want something vegan/vegetarian/ethical/etc. but just be honest and don't try to also claim it's somehow more effective, as it's not.
 
MySTeek

MySTeek

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Can't we just focus on the whole vegan/vegetarian/ethical/etc. aspect that is actually understandable and not easily disproved? As long as the amino acids are what they're supposed to be, and have proper testing/purity/etc. they're good to go from a safety and efficacy standpoint. I can understand if people want something vegan/vegetarian/ethical/etc. but just be honest and don't try to also claim it's somehow more effective, as it's not.
Valid. I think the implications are that it is probably healthier and more ethical.
The first study isn't relevant to isolated amino acids, and the second one deals more with the benefits from a production standpoint than an efficacy standpoint for the end-user.
Much of that information went over my head having no scientific background. The information is intriguing none the less.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Valid. I think the implications are that it is probably healthier and more ethical.

Much of that information went over my head having no scientific background. The information is intriguing none the less.
How would it be healthier? As long as it's purely the amino acids, that is as long as there are no impurities or additives, it's going to be the same "health" and effect wise. The ethical/religious/philosophical/environmental/etc issues are all potentially very understandable issues for people, but the health issue really isn't as long as the amino acids are quality.
 
justhere4comm

justhere4comm

Banned
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Is decaf healthier than caffeinated coffee?
 
MySTeek

MySTeek

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
How would it be healthier? As long as it's purely the amino acids, that is as long as there are no impurities or additives, it's going to be the same "health" and effect wise. The ethical/religious/philosophical/environmental/etc issues are all potentially very understandable issues for people, but the health issue really isn't as long as the amino acids are quality.
I'm not arguing that it is healthier. I'm considering that it could be healthier. Many people buy organic for peace of mind. It doesn't make them suckers. It makes them cautious. If we buy our beef grain fed, does it make a difference in the long run to grass-fed beef? You are what you eat. You are what you eat eats. I'm not saying I am right and you are wrong. I think the psychology makes sense in the very least.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I'm not arguing that it is healthier. I'm considering that it could be healthier. Many people buy organic for peace of mind. It doesn't make them suckers. It makes them cautious. If we buy our beef grain fed, does it make a difference in the long run to grass-fed beef? You are what you eat. You are what you eat eats. I'm not saying I am right and you are wrong. I think the psychology makes sense in the very least.
Isolated amino acids are vastly different than whole foods in this respect. Isolated leucine should be isolated leucine, unless you believe what you're getting isn't actually isolated leucine, or is somehow contaminated or adulterated. Buying from a legitimate supplier/source/manufacturer, and proper testing, is going to be the major factor in determining that though. Again, I'm not saying that people are wrong to want some "peace of mind," or like it for ethical reasons, but it shouldn't be any different from other quality amino acids.
 
MySTeek

MySTeek

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Isolated amino acids are vastly different than whole foods in this respect. Isolated leucine should be isolated leucine, unless you believe what you're getting isn't actually isolated leucine, or is somehow contaminated or adulterated. Buying from a legitimate supplier/source/manufacturer, and proper testing, is going to be the major factor in determining that though. Again, I'm not saying that people are wrong to want some "peace of mind," or like it for ethical reasons, but it shouldn't be any different from other quality amino acids.
You could be right. It may not matter at all. The only difference may be in the mind's eye, when he's considering the source of his amino acids.
 
Aleksandar37

Aleksandar37

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
I'm not arguing that it is healthier. I'm considering that it could be healthier. Many people buy organic for peace of mind. It doesn't make them suckers. It makes them cautious. If we buy our beef grain fed, does it make a difference in the long run to grass-fed beef? You are what you eat. You are what you eat eats. I'm not saying I am right and you are wrong. I think the psychology makes sense in the very least.
Earlier you stated that it was probably healthier which is different from saying it could be healthier. Just from the start I want to make it clear that I don't think you're twisting words, but the difference there is important. Psychology has nothing to do with making a certain food healthier or less healthy. Psychology is abused often in the food industry (and others) especially when it comes to terms like organic, GMO, etc. Like I said earlier in this thread, the discussion began using terms that the public could find scary like getting your food from "duck feathers" or "acid". And this so-called "healthier" option is using the word fermentation rather than saying they use bacteria or E coli, because that would frighten people who don't understand the science. This is all marketing, not actual science.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
You could be right. It may not matter at all. The only difference may be in the mind's eye, when he's considering the source but his amino acids.
Yeah, I'm not bashing these amino at all, and I understand why some people would want them (vegan/vegetarian/ethics/environment/etc), but I just don't see the science behind them being "healthier."
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Earlier you stated that it was probably healthier which is different from saying it could be healthier. Just from the start I want to make it clear that I don't think you're twisting words, but the difference there is important. Psychology has nothing to do with making a certain food healthier or less healthy. Psychology is abused often in the food industry (and others) especially when it comes to terms like organic, GMO, etc. Like I said earlier in this thread, the discussion began using terms that the public could find scary like getting your food from "duck feathers" or "acid". And this so-called "healthier" option is using the word fermentation rather than saying they use bacteria or E coli, because that would frighten people who don't understand the science. This is all marketing, not actual science.
Haha, fermentation sounds nice until you read a little about it, then it sound bad, until you know even more about it, then it's good again. It'd be nice if people just stuck to the ethical benefits than trying to scare/make up potential health benefits.
 
Aleksandar37

Aleksandar37

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Haha, fermentation sounds nice until you read a little about it, then it sound bad, until you know even more about it, then it's good again. It'd be nice if people just stuck to the ethical benefits than trying to scare/make up potential health benefits.
I blame Facebook and Netflix documentaries for making my friends who barely made it through high school science into "experts."
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I blame Facebook and Netflix documentaries for making my friends who barely made it through high school science into "experts."
A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing when it gives people the impression that they know it all.
 
MySTeek

MySTeek

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Earlier you stated that it was probably healthier which is different from saying it could be healthier. Just from the start I want to make it clear that I don't think you're twisting words, but the difference there is important. Psychology has nothing to do with making a certain food healthier or less healthy. Psychology is abused often in the food industry (and others) especially when it comes to terms like organic, GMO, etc. Like I said earlier in this thread, the discussion began using terms that the public could find scary like getting your food from "duck feathers" or "acid". And this so-called "healthier" option is using the word fermentation rather than saying they use bacteria or E coli, because that would frighten people who don't understand the science. This is all marketing, not actual science.
You are right. It is inconsistent out of context. "Probably" is the implication though, not my claim.
I blame Facebook and Netflix documentaries for making my friends who barely made it through high school science into "experts."
Everyone's an expert in what they think they know, myself included. It is in definition validity bias. Let's hope new "experts" birth new ideas and change the world!
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Where can you get EAA in bulk.
Depends on what you consider bulk. NOW sells an EAA powder. Sometimes I’ll use that and add some more leucine, since it’s not particularly high in it.
 

Anabaholic

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
The real question is: if our BCAA's are at least partially made of human hair, does that make us cannibals?
 
MySTeek

MySTeek

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Check this one out. Very good read.

Authentication of Pure L-Leucine Products Manufactured in China by Discriminating between Plant and Animal Sources Using Nitrogen Stable Isotope Technique.
Huang, Jingyu. Journal of Food Science Volume: 78 Issue 3 (2013) ISSN: 0022-1147 Online ISSN: 1750-3841

Conclusions:

In China, it is not uncommon to find substandard products or mislabeled products although there are strict penalties for companies and individuals that indulge in this fraudulent act. According to U.S. FDA (2007), some Chinese companies continue to export substandard food products to the United States. It is an indisputable fact that food products from China are exported to most parts of the world. The process involved in the manufacture of L‐leucine products from pure botanical sources is expensive and time‐consuming. Hence, the use of cheap sources that include duck feathers and pig fur in the preparation of this product is mostly adopted by some fraudulent companies. According to Yacoubou (2011), the Vegetarian Resource Group (VRG) on February 2011 received confirmation from major amino acid suppliers and manufacturers as well as from dietary supplement companies that the amino acids leucine, isoleucine, and valine, used today mostly in dietary supplements and nutraceutical products, may be derived from human hair or duck feathers. The author noted that the information was made available based on an official statement from a Chinese supplier. The author further added that customers are starting to ask for nonanimal‐sourced material according to a report by one major manufacturer. Therefore, elucidating the authenticity of food products from this part of the world is extremely imperative to ensure food safety which would eventually address the public health and economic risks of consumers.

The availability of different sources of L‐leucine means that the product could easily be mislabeled or adulterated especially in this part of the world. It was observed that nitrogen stable isotope technique serves as a useful tool in verifying the authenticity of this particular product and thereby would help in fraud detection of any economically motivated adulteration and mislabeling of the product.

The authors can emphatically assert that the range of δ15N composition of L‐leucine derived from pure botanical sources within the study area is –1.000‰ to 3.000‰ whereas the range in animal sources is 4.000‰ to 9.000‰.

It was also identified that trophic enrichment is extremely helpful in elucidating the respective sources using nitrogen stable isotope technique. When this technique is coupled with H and O isotopic techniques, the region‐of‐origin of the detected adulteration can also be traced successfully.

Therefore, the results obtained in our study can serve as a guide to food regulatory bodies, retailers of this product, consumers, and the general public at large. These are important issues for economic, legal, religious, and allergic reaction cases.

The authors recommend that future studies should be performed to ascertain the specific health implications of consuming adulterated L‐leucine from the animal source materials described in the present study as well as other sources like yeast.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Check this one out. Very good read.

Authentication of Pure L-Leucine Products Manufactured in China by Discriminating between Plant and Animal Sources Using Nitrogen Stable Isotope Technique.
Huang, Jingyu. Journal of Food Science Volume: 78 Issue 3 (2013) ISSN: 0022-1147 Online ISSN: 1750-3841
Again, this deals with adulterated amino acids, which I touched on already. Proper QA/QC should prevent this from happening, and they even mention it can be a problem with yeast-derived amino acids.

I don’t see what is being argued. You can have adulterated/impure amino acids from any source. The key to prevent this is to buy from a reputable manufacturer and properly test it. QA/QC.

This in no way even hints that unadulterated animal-derived amino acids are unhealthy or less healthy than fermented aminos, or that fermented amino acids can’t also be adulterated.
 
MySTeek

MySTeek

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
I don’t see what is being argued.
I haven't argued that it is healthier. I'm not clear how any of my comments have come off as disagreeable. I haven't stated and I am not stating that is in fact healthier.

This in no way even hints that unadulterated animal-derived amino acids are unhealthy or less healthy than fermented aminos, or that fermented amino acids can’t also be adulterated.
Totally agree. Please see the bolded text of the quoted conclusion. I am not trying to convince you it's healthier. I agreed with your view on ethics right away and still do. My stance is it COULD be healthier, as I'm sure many people more than likely believe it is healthier than amino acids extracted from hair. Heck! My wife thinks I'm killing myself eating organ meats because America thinks it's icky.

Disclaimer: not arguing with your stance on health implications. Not looking for a debate. Just sharing and hopefully learning. I am a Netflix documentary watcher.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I haven't argued that it is healthier. I'm not clear how any of my comments have come off as disagreeable. I haven't stated and I am not stating that is healthier.



Totally agree. Please see the bolded text of the quoted conclusion. I am not trying to convince you it's healthier. I agreed with your view on ethics right away and still do. My stance is it COULD be healthier, as I'm sure many people more than likely believe it is healthier than amino acids extracted from hair. Heck! My wife thinks I'm killing myself eating organ meats because America thinks it's icky.

Disclaimer: not arguing with your stance on health implications. Not looking for a debate. Just sharing and hopefully learning. I am a Netflix documentary watcher.
People can THINK it’s healthier, but that doesn’t mean it is, or even that it MAY or COULD be. The only way it would be healthier is if the animal derived amino acids are adulterated, but fermentation derived amino acids can be adulterated too, so we’re talking about nothing now. So people bring ignorant trumps science?

You say it COULD be healthier. I ask how. People thinking it is doesn’t mean it is, or that it can be. People can think CEE works, that doesn’t mean it does, or even that it can/could/may.

Your wife thinks organ meats are killing you, so that means they COULD be?
 
justhere4comm

justhere4comm

Banned
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Decaffeinated coffee is often processed with solvents, but there is a water based method used more commonly with organic coffee. Decaf itself is considered to be less healthy than Caffeinated as well, but not because of the solvent process.

I was drawing a logical pairing based on process. I don't feel like searching for studies, as this is from memory, and though I do prefer caffeinated coffee, I'm not at the moment partial to how the beans are processed, as long as it's strong. Relating back to aminos, the only conclusion I can draw definitively is they are healthy(er) for vegetarians to take. I do like the idea of vegetarian better from the standpoint of conservation, much like I do think Krill Oil is better than Fish Oil.

Nothing that will keep me up at night, and I'm thinking this is a pretty cool thread. I look forward to following it. I don't think relying on aminos are that important, but they fill a gap, and are nice to haves, but not needed. Coffee + Name your poison = Pre-workout for the proletariat.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Decaffeinated coffee is often processed with solvents, but there is a water based method used more commonly with organic coffee. Decaf itself is considered to be less healthy than Caffeinated as well, but not because of the solvent process.

I was drawing a logical pairing based on process. I don't feel like searching for studies, as this is from memory, and though I do prefer caffeinated coffee, I'm not at the moment partial to how the beans are processed, as long as it's strong. Relating back to aminos, the only conclusion I can draw definitively is they are healthy(er) for vegetarians to take. I do like the idea of vegetarian better from the standpoint of conservation, much like I do think Krill Oil is better than Fish Oil.

Nothing that will keep me up at night, and I'm thinking this is a pretty cool thread. I look forward to following it.
This really depends on what you define as healthy, the subject population, and the intended benefits. Some people get benefits from the caffeine, and some get benefits from other compounds in coffee that are present in caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee. Some people shouldn’t have caffeine, etc. It’s quite a complicated question haha. The ethical/environmental/etc issues are certainly understandable though.
 
MySTeek

MySTeek

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
People can THINK it’s healthier, but that doesn’t mean it is, or even that it MAY or COULD be. The only way it would be healthier is if the animal derived amino acids are adulterated, but fermentation derived amino acids can be adulterated too, so we’re talking about nothing now. So people bring ignorant trumps science?

You say it COULD be healthier. I ask how. People thinking it is doesn’t mean it is, or that it can be. People can think CEE works, that doesn’t mean it does, or even that it can/could/may.

Your wife thinks organ meats are killing you, so that means they COULD be?
I ask how it could be healthier too lol. That is the question posed in this thread. It is not yet answered by anyone. Though, it is implied that it could be given many manufacturers are or were getting it from China adulterated (regardless of animal or plant). Are the made in America brands using the same techniques? How do we know if it's adulterated or not? Not my point. My point is that I understand why consumers think it. My view is the same with organic being healthier. Organic isn't proven to be healthier or unhealthier but it provides people with peace of mind. Using aminos made from fermented plants could be. It could also not be. We don't know until the data tells us.

I think this is a case of misunderstanding. If it makes you feel any better, I believe you are right about the ethics and potentially animal aminos still being safe, given more data.
 
Aleksandar37

Aleksandar37

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Decaffeinated coffee is often processed with solvents, but there is a water based method used more commonly with organic coffee. Decaf itself is considered to be less healthy than Caffeinated as well, but not because of the solvent process.

I was drawing a logical pairing based on process. I don't feel like searching for studies, as this is from memory, and though I do prefer caffeinated coffee, I'm not at the moment partial to how the beans are processed, as long as it's strong. Relating back to aminos, the only conclusion I can draw definitively is they are healthy(er) for vegetarians to take. I do like the idea of vegetarian better from the standpoint of conservation, much like I do think Krill Oil is better than Fish Oil.

Nothing that will keep me up at night, and I'm thinking this is a pretty cool thread. I look forward to following it. I don't think relying on aminos are that important, but they fill a gap, and are nice to haves, but not needed. Coffee + Name your poison = Pre-workout for the proletariat.
You're comparing too different end products (decaffeinated coffee and regular coffee) though which isn't the case with aminos since the end product should be the same whichever path you use to get there. Solvents is another ambiguous word that people use to scare people as if saying solvents or chemicals automatically makes it unhealthy or dangerous.
 
John Smeton

John Smeton

Legend
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
That first post was written by Lee Labrada, as I referenced .

Ive been around the supplement industry a long time, over, sixteen years on consistent use of supplements, bcaa's. Are Bcaas made from human hair and duck feathers less effective than fermented Bcaa's? I didnt say that. Simply put, I do feel safer, they seem to taste purer,and I feel more at peace with the fermented. . I'm not saying they work better and are more effective . Ive used bcaa's a long time and in contest prep stages ive used 10 scoops a day of recoverpro when I was with AI Sports.

Now a days, I take both MST RPG-BCAA™ at home, thought the night, when I awake first thing before cardio, first thing when I awake before I meditate for twenty minutes then breakfast, pre training. Having said that, I use Gaspari Aminolast intra training because its in my gym bag. Do what you think is best for you
 
MySTeek

MySTeek

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
the end product should be the same whichever path you use to get there. Solvents is another ambiguous word that people use to scare people as if saying solvents or chemicals automatically makes it unhealthy or dangerous.
Are you able to offer more info on this? I'd like to read opposing evidence from a credible source. I've only ever read the opposite. Here is a report from Monona Rossol, Health and Safety Officer for United Scenic Artists, Local USA 829, published in 1995 and revised in 2006.

http://www.usa829.org/portals/0/documents/health-and-safety/safety-library/solvents.pdf

HOW DO SOLVENTS AFFECT US?
There are no “safe” solvents. All solvents, natural or synthetic, are toxic. Contact either with liquid solvents or inhalation of the vapors they emit into the air are hazardous. In general, solvents can irritate and damage the skin, eyes, and respiratory tract, cause a narcotic effect on the nervous system, and damage internal organs such as the liver and kidneys. These kinds of damage can be acute (from single heavy exposures) or chronic (from repeated low dose exposures over months or years). In addition, some solvents are especially hazardous to specific organs or can cause specific diseases such as cancer.

To be clear, I am neither opposing your comment nor challenging it. You sound like you may know something that could be educational to me and many others, given some guidance. I'd genuinely appreciate some guidance with some information contrary to my current understanding.
 

carguy123

Active member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
How do supplement companies know they are actually getting fermented amino acids and not just the same old duck feather versions? AFAIK there is no way to test for this, and after talking with McCandless about this in the past he stated that most on the market were not actually fermented even though they claimed to be.
 
mbonheur

mbonheur

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
How do supplement companies know they are actually getting fermented amino acids and not just the same old duck feather versions? AFAIK there is no way to test for this, and after talking with McCandless about this in the past he stated that most on the market were not actually fermented even though they claimed to be.
Well that is the kind of destiny for this whole industry. Many herbal extracts are concerned by the exact same problem.

We just have to keep the faith
 
cheftepesh1

cheftepesh1

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
The real question is: if our BCAA's are at least partially made of human hair, does that make us cannibals?
I think there is a mental disorder for people who eat human hair.
 

carguy123

Active member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Well that is the kind of destiny for this whole industry. Many herbal extracts are concerned by the exact same problem.

We just have to keep the faith
But there are ways to verify most substances (not saying most do this but it is possible). For example, if you order bulk DMAA you can test this to see if it is in fact DMAA. But how do you verify fermented amino acids? Regardless of the extraction process a amino acid is a amino acid.
 
MySTeek

MySTeek

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
How do supplement companies know they are actually getting fermented amino acids and not just the same old duck feather versions? AFAIK there is no way to test for this, and after talking with McCandless about this in the past he stated that most on the market were not actually fermented even though they claimed to be.
I think that is a fantastic question. I'll see if there is a COA of any sorts and get back to you. Until then, here is what we do know (regarding only MST's practice): ProtoAmino is the company used in MST's RPG (amino acids). From here we can see they are a subsidiary of STAUBER PERFORMANCE INGREDIENTS, INC. From there, we can view their site's info on quality assurance here.

The STAUBER New York manufacturing facility is cGMP, HACCP, certified by NSF for dietary supplements and organic certified. Our on-site quality lab supports many testing methods and analysis requirements utilizing state-of-the-art equipment – UPLC, Atomic Absorption, FTIR Spectroscopy, UV/VIS, CPC Titration and Karl Fischer Titration. The microbiology lab highlights our high focus on premiere quality.

On-Site Labs
Microbial Analysis -TPC, Yeasts & Molds, Coliforms, E. Coli, Salmonella, S. Aureus
Potency, Active Component Analysis
Physical Analysis – Density, Moisture, Particle Size, Consistency, Appearance
PhD’s and Chemists on Staff
Robust Raw Material Documentation System
Vendor Qualification Program

It by no means authenticates anything on it's own but it's a start.
 
mbonheur

mbonheur

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
But there are ways to verify most substances (not saying most do this but it is possible). For example, if you order bulk DMAA you can test this to see if it is in fact DMAA. But how do you verify fermented amino acids? Regardless of the extraction process a amino acid is a amino acid.
I see what you mean and I agree 100%, but for many herbal extracts it is too complicated as well. For instance to verify whether an TA extract is really 100:1 or 200:1. Many companies eventually check the active substances, but even then it is not really accurate. There are many ways to get certain numbers. I worked for a supplement company in Europe and it is hell.

As far as an amino acid is concerned, you can only check the facilities or produce in-house to be sure, and trust. Basically also the same for other products, because testing is not always obvious.

That is also how some companies blindly order stuff from China, put into a bottle and believe that it should work as advertised. The quality of raw materials is very important, that is why I could care less about what some labels say and a private customer has no way to verify what they get in any case. Companies could mix low dosed SARMs or whatever into a herbal muscle builder and nobody would know.

To put it briefly, you are absolutely right
 
Aleksandar37

Aleksandar37

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Are you able to offer more info on this? I'd like to read opposing evidence from a credible source. I've only ever read the opposite. Here is a report from Monona Rossol, Health and Safety Officer for United Scenic Artists, Local USA 829, published in 1995 and revised in 2006.

http://www.usa829.org/portals/0/documents/health-and-safety/safety-library/solvents.pdf




To be clear, I am neither opposing your comment nor challenging it. You sound like you may know something that could be educational to me and many others, given some guidance. I'd genuinely appreciate some guidance with some information contrary to my current understanding.
I'm saying that solvent is a really generic term that can mean a lot of things, but sounds scary or unhealthy. A solvent is simply something (usually a liquid) that dissolves a solute to form a solution. Water can be a solvent, but if somebody says that solvents were used, we don't know if they're saying the product was exposed to something like acetone or was simply soaked in water.

Going back to my original point, there seems to be a trend to use words like solvents or chemicals to signify that something is toxic and words like organic or non-GMO to signify that something is completely healthy. This is where is stops being based on science and is pure marketing. Rewording the original post in this thread, I could easily say that traditional forms of amino acid production rely on time-tested techniques that extract amino acids from natural sources while newer techniques rely on synthesis through microorganisms such as E coli, a bacteria that is associated with food poisoning and death.

Nothing in that statement is a lie, but I clearly twisted things to favor one over the other.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Are you able to offer more info on this? I'd like to read opposing evidence from a credible source. I've only ever read the opposite. Here is a report from Monona Rossol, Health and Safety Officer for United Scenic Artists, Local USA 829, published in 1995 and revised in 2006.

http://www.usa829.org/portals/0/documents/health-and-safety/safety-library/solvents.pdf




To be clear, I am neither opposing your comment nor challenging it. You sound like you may know something that could be educational to me and many others, given some guidance. I'd genuinely appreciate some guidance with some information contrary to my current understanding.
Really? All solvents are toxic? Water is a solvent. Water is now toxic? That article is nothing more than a biased, half-baked, fear-mongering, pseudo-scientific mess. Also, you do know that the letter/article is dealing with PAINTS, right? You're really grasping at straws at this point my friend.
 
djbombsquad

djbombsquad

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
Stick to peptides like salmon peptides . Hydro protein shows better absorption.
 

Similar threads


Top