Would you ever use a supplement if you knew nothing about its safety/mechanism?

DeerDeer

DeerDeer

Registered User
Would you ever consider purchasing a supplement, specifically an alledged hormone modulator, without knowing anyhting about its safety, efficacy or ANY studies whatsoever?

What if the company states it is safe but then refuses to release studies substantiating their claim, would you still show the same reluctance to purchase the product or go solely by logs they sponsor/provide?

Wouldn't a company provide the studies to tout their product and make the sonsumer more comfortable with their purchase? As wary consumers we should have some of the data made available!

Your thoughts/experiences!
 
I definitely see your position, especially as it pertains to the recent climate of the supplement industry. However, a very contradictory dynamic is inferred upon this industry; one on hand companies seek to employ innovative extraction and research techniques to bring the consumer the best product possible; on the other, they also must protect their intellectual property as their is little to no protection in this industry.

The resulting effect is supplements being produced and released with little evidence as to the efficacy and safety of said product beyond that of anecdotal evidence. However unfavourable from a consumership standpoint, this is the supplement industry.

As to your question, of course. I would venture 95% of the products on the supplement market are such products, and, moreover, 95% of consumers have purchased exactly those kind of products.

All coyness of this thread aside, I imagine this is in direct relation to AX's MassFX? As per the following thread:

Invalid Link Removed

The fact, albeit unfortunately, remains that the product market for our passion is very unregulated. Both from a material, and intellectual standpoint. However, I also feel more tact should be used in alotting companies the time necessary to compile a worthy write-up complete with studies.
 
DeerDeer you ask such a question yet the medical field has had many eff ups as of late !!! Really how many people just take their docs word for it and take what is prescribed to them???

Case in point, my mother was prescribed neurontin for no apprent reason as she has arthritis. Nuerontin is not prescribed for arthritis pain!!! As a previous Mental health worker I know what it is used for and pain relief was its last use listed!!! Now as users of supplements we as a company have test logs similar to those of medical trials whereas we do not often get blood work we do get info and results. And even with these trial how trustworthy are they you know if you took any research methods design class one can skew through variances, or through the number used in a study. I mean DD you are really beating a dead horse, and the ****storm, you and others are trying to cause is really making me wonder why you come to our forums is for general knowledge or to prove how smart you are.

Yet you are not trying to bash... Right.....

Also I dare you to ask your general practitoner how Creatine works... And see if he will tell you its a steroid or scare you from it...
 
We can take cissus for instance - it has been well studied, deemed by most standards as a "safe" product.

References were provided and it was discussed ad nauseum with of course questions remaining (no one will ever be COMPLETELY satisfied with the answers).

What remains proprietary and under wraps is the extraction process which should only offer a positive benefit, cleaner, more concentrated product.

Seems like USP could have gone the route of calling the product CQa-1 or something and offered no information - but I am certain it would have impacted the sales of the product as well as the company's reputation negatively.

personally, I liked the route USP took with that product - seems to be split down the middle what companies are willing to share.

Mulletsoldier said:
I definitely see your position, especially as it pertains to the recent climate of the supplement industry. However, a very contradictory dynamic is inferred upon this industry; one on hand companies seek to employ innovative extraction and research techniques to bring the consumer the best product possible; on the other, they also must protect their intellectual property as their is little to no protection in this industry.

The resulting effect is supplements being produced and released with little evidence as to the efficacy and safety of said product beyond that of anecdotal evidence. However unfavourable from a consumership standpoint, this is the supplement industry.

As to your question, of course. I would venture 95% of the products on the supplement market are such products, and, moreover, 95% of consumers have purchased exactly those kind of products.

All coyness of this thread aside, I imagine this is in direct relation to AX's MassFX? As per the following thread:

Invalid Link Removed

The fact, albeit unfortunately, remains that the product market for our passion is very unregulated. Both from a material, and intellectual standpoint. However, I also feel more tact should be used in alotting companies the time necessary to compile a worthy write-up complete with studies.
Click to expand...
 
DeerDeer said:
We can take cissus for instance - it has been well studied, deemed by most standards as a "safe" product.

References were provided and it was discussed ad nauseum with of course questions remaining (no one will ever be COMPLETELY satisfied with the answers).

What remains proprietary and under wraps is the extraction process which should only offer a positive benefit, cleaner, more concentrated product.

Seems like USP could have gone the route of calling the product CQa-1 or something and offered no information - but I am certain it would have impacted the sales of the product as well as the company's reputation negatively.

personally, I liked the route USP took with that product - seems to be split down the middle what companies are willing to share.
Click to expand...

Yes, but Cissus Q. is a direct transistion from Medical assays to our application. As a result, it had an extensive body of work behind it because of its lineage in aryuvedic medicine.

Many of the herbals contained in Pro-Hormonal, Pro-Anabolic, compounds are not direct applications, they are contextualized for the company's specific purpose.

What comes to mind, for example, is the Low-GI vs High-GI debate. All reserach surrounding that topic is in overweight diabetics, not 205lb 8% BF bodybuilders, so the best we can do at this point is make inferences using our physiological knowledge. Quite the same process is happening in the supplement industry. Foreign Universities are not conducting studies on many of these herbals so they may be produced as consumer pro-anabolics.

I see your point, I would even go as far as to say I agree with it.
 
I am not disagreeing with you, yes, the medical field has had some mess ups as has the supplement industry - it is mutual.

Neurontin is typically used for neuralgias, with Lyrica being the better albeit more costly drug used on the market today that offers symptomatic relief usually after a few doses, neuronting needs to be titrated up with no real certainty of helping out.

THe good thing is that you can CHOOSE you doctor, and thankfully you are educated enough to see that her physician may have mistreated her. You saw beyond that, you sought more knowledge which enabled you to say "hey, that was wrong!". Sadly there are still physicians out there that mess up, but it is universal in all fields, people mess up, make mistakes. As consumers of these services we have to be wary. It is this level of awareness that helps us make the right decisions, helps us knwo when something is not being done correctly, help us know whther it is okay to put something into our bodies, no matter where it's from (just realized how dirty that sounded after I typed it, but we can all have our minds int he gutter sometime)

Logs are sponsered, they are baised, the consumer automatically feel sobligated to offer some sort of positive results for the said free product. I hate them but heck, I look at them, they may not be perfect but they do in fact offer info. Better than nothing for the most part.

Think about this - clinical trials go under RIGOROUS testing, they are tightly regulated involving very well educated physicians AND scientists -- YET there are STILL some medications that make it to market and are deeemed unsafe! It is unbelievable!

That is why many are wary when a NEW compound is introduced that did not go under nearly as much rigourous testing with similar medical & scientific boards as well as financial backing.

When you approach a family practice physician and when you approach and othropaedic surgeon/sports medicine doctor, the answers regarding creatine will vary. You as a patient have a choice - go to who will be best equipped to answer your question. So don't ask an orthopaedic surgeon how to treat your sinus infection - the family paractitioner should be able to figure that out for you without a hitch!

I'm not bashing, I'm not by any means trying to prove "how smart" I am. I feel like I am asking alot of the right questions and really not getting any answers. There are alot of people looking for answers. Throw us a bone! :-)


Apowerz6 said:
DeerDeer you ask such a question yet the medical field has had many eff ups as of late !!! Really how many people just take their docs word for it and take what is prescribed to them???

Case in point, my mother was prescribed neurontin for no apprent reason as she has arthritis. Nuerontin is not prescribed for arthritis pain!!! As a previous Mental health worker I know what it is used for and pain relief was its last use listed!!! Now as users of supplements we as a company have test logs similar to those of medical trials whereas we do not often get blood work we do get info and results. And even with these trial how trustworthy are they you know if you took any research methods design class one can skew through variances, or through the number used in a study. I mean DD you are really beating a dead horse, and the ****storm, you and others are trying to cause is really making me wonder why you come to our forums is for general knowledge or to prove how smart you are.

Yet you are not trying to bash... Right.....

Also I dare you to ask your general practitoner how Creatine works... And see if he will tell you its a steroid or scare you from it...
Click to expand...
 
These studies provide reassurance - the give the consumer confidence that there has been a body of work performed on the supplement. There is some data that confers credibility and eliminates some of the ambiguitiy.

I appreciate the reply!

Cheers!

Mulletsoldier said:
Yes, but Cissus Q. is a direct transistion from Medical assays to our application. As a result, it had an extensive body of work behind it because of its lineage in aryuvedic medicine.

Many of the herbals contained in Pro-Hormonal, Pro-Anabolic, compounds are not direct applications, they are contextualized for the company's specific purpose.

What comes to mind, for example, is the Low-GI vs High-GI debate. All reserach surrounding that topic is in overweight diabetics, not 205lb 8% BF bodybuilders, so the best we can do at this point is make inferences using our physiological knowledge. Quite the same process is happening in the supplement industry. Foreign Universities are not conducting studies on many of these herbals so they may be produced as consumer pro-anabolics.

I see your point, I would even go as far as to say I agree with it.
Click to expand...
 
Apowerz6 said:
I mean DD you are really beating a dead horse, and the ****storm, you and others are trying to cause is really making me wonder why you come to our forums is for general knowledge or to prove how smart you are.
Click to expand...

The people asking these questions (myself included, obviously, and I believe DD as well) are at this forum for knowledge. I'm not trying to prove how smart I am... I'm trying to become smarter.

The people dodging these questions, refusing to answer, or providing incredibly ambiguous and unsupported answers are at this forum for sales. In order to sell their products, they are making claims shrouded in the credibility of "science" and "research" and "studies". Sometimes these claims are legitimate, but often they are not. When people with actual experience, knowledge, and interest in these fields ask important questions, they are brushed off or fed pseudoscience (or sometimes, if they're persistent, shouted down).
 
TeamSavage said:
The people asking these questions (myself included, obviously, and I believe DD as well) are at this forum for knowledge. I'm not trying to prove how smart I am... I'm trying to become smarter.

The people dodging these questions, refusing to answer, or providing incredibly ambiguous and unsupported answers are at this forum for sales. In order to sell their products, they are making claims shrouded in the credibility of "science" and "research" and "studies". Sometimes these claims are legitimate, but often they are not. When people with actual experience, knowledge, and interest in these fields ask important questions, they are brushed off or fed pseudoscience (or sometimes, if they're persistent, shouted down).
Click to expand...
WE HAVE GIVEN you everything you have asked for except the keys to the kingdom. You have complete access to our chemist to get any question you want answered AS LONG as it does not give out our proprietary info. That is more than 99% of the sports nutrition companies offer.
 
Do I think it's smart to ingest products you have no real proof of what it does? Of course not but I still do it anyways but at least I do my best to keep tabs on my health vitals to make sure if anything goes out of whack I can correct it. You can walk into a wal-mart and see thousands of examples of this though.

My personal opinion is that if you feel uneasy about it then don't use it. I also think that marketing should be a bit more conserative as well though. Don't list studies as proof if you're not going to provide them.
 
Jayhawkk said:
Do I think it's smart to ingest products you have no real proof of what it does? Of course not but I still do it anyways but at least I do my best to keep tabs on my health vitals to make sure if anything goes out of whack I can correct it. You can walk into a wal-mart and see thousands of examples of this though.

My personal opinion is that if you feel uneasy about it then don't use it. I also think that marketing should be a bit more conserative as well though. Don't list studies as proof if you're not going to provide them.
Click to expand...
Done, the word study/studies shall be removed ASAP.
 
Hey BS, don't change anything based off my opinion man. I'm definately not one to take advice from. I'm the guy who's about one bottle of glue away from riding the bus with the flavored windows.
 
Jayhawkk said:
Hey BS, don't change anything based off my opinion man. I'm definately not one to take advice from. I'm the guy who's about one bottle of glue away from riding the bus with the flavored windows.
Click to expand...
Well from a company standpoint the write-up is not really supposed to be marketing. We quickly created to help answer the questions that a few board members have had. I have reviewed the write-up and will pull two instances of the word study. I will however leave the reference to the Russian study since it is common knowledge and does not give away the new base materials.

Invalid Link Removed
 
Well ****...Not anything else I can really say. Too bad this industry is as cutthroat as it is though. I would be willing to bet if your stuff was laid out today there would be generic knock offs in under 2 weeks.
 
Jayhawkk said:
I would be willing to bet if your stuff was laid out today there would be generic knock offs in under 2 weeks.
Click to expand...
Yes our factory reminds us everyday to keep our volume up because they have several requests every day. BK from Gaspari has even notified me that a similar factory claims to have found the synth and is creating it for mass production. Hey when it is everywhere we will have no problem releasing every bit of info we have. But until then the big boss Steve says no.

Edit: I have heard VyoTech is the big customer that is the money behind the other factories synth on the compound.
 
Well if it makes any difference you guys have my loyalty. You've treated me well and i've had nothing but excellent results from the products i've used. Here's to a great new year for you all.
 
BigSmith said:
WE HAVE GIVEN you everything you have asked for except the keys to the kingdom. You have complete access to our chemist to get any question you want answered AS LONG as it does not give out our proprietary info. That is more than 99% of the sports nutrition companies offer.
Click to expand...

I wasn't really referring to AX specifically, just to the situation in general. DeerDeer's point was about the often wide gap between claims and actual evidence, and it is an important one that is too often overlooked.

Just to clarify, I've actually used 5 different AX products in the past, seen good results, and have recommended them to a number of friends. You have given me access to your designer, Dr. D, which as you say is more than most companies offer.
 
Last edited:
I have no clue even if Dr.D is real. From what i'm told he's a figment of my alcohol and sometimes chemical induced hallucinations. He's hella sexy in a lace tutu though.
 
Marketing products with no real, substantiated claims? Try typing in 'Legal Gear' into your favorite online dictionary/thesaurus and that's the result you'll get.
 
DeerDeer said:
Would you ever consider purchasing a supplement, specifically an alledged hormone modulator, without knowing anyhting about its safety, efficacy or ANY studies whatsoever?

What if the company states it is safe but then refuses to release studies substantiating their claim, would you still show the same reluctance to purchase the product or go solely by logs they sponsor/provide?

Wouldn't a company provide the studies to tout their product and make the sonsumer more comfortable with their purchase? As wary consumers we should have some of the data made available!

Your thoughts/experiences!
Click to expand...
I've had similar thoughts lately. I understand why supplement manufacturers have to protect their intellectual property, and that this will always go against the consumer's desire to know exactly what is in supplements. I also understand that the law is partly to blame, because manufacturers have to make their products sound acceptable, they couldn't put "this is a designer steroid" on the label, even if that is what the supplement effectively is.

But I don't see any reason why there shouldn't be some blood results published from initial testing. A standard range of test values, published for before, during, and after the testers started taking the supplement. And also details of any additional supplements you need to take before, during, or after to protect your health should be clearly stated on the label.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top