[jasonschaffin]

Originally Posted by poopypants

Dont be so niave, and if you ersonally really have a problem then go ahead and hold out till your sure for yourself that its an unfounded opinoin/speculation before you take it and dont throw hearsay out as fact. I dont mind the extra stock being available for me to order.

I didn't know it was hearsay when it was a medical study. Nor did I know it was niave to want to know what estrogens I am putting in my body. Cissus estrogens may be a godsend. Maybe the act like clomid and increase LH. Maybe the are like Nolva and help prevent gyno. Maybe they do nothing but help bone fractures. We don't know. I want to know what they are doing. Give me a little credit poopy, damn.

[jasonschaffin]

Well some quick searching on phytoestrogens it does look like they bind much stronger the ERb. Not 100% sure what this means in males other than what you have already told us in this thread. I would like to hear, as I said earlier, a civil discussion between you guys and the doc. I want to know why he thinks this is such a bad thing. Or maybe he doesn't. I don't think he recommends this product though.

[jasonschaffin]

And back at Lean Bulk the doc started talking way over my head again, lol. USP make this simple on me. Go do some studies on the estrogens in cissus and let us know how they work in males....
That should be pretty simple right?

[dinoiii]

Fortunately, I was alerted into this thread...

Jacob and USP company,

I will assure you I am not mistaken on my information. I would ask that you read in full at LB if purely interested as I am not to get into an e-battle; quite non-sensical.

We can get into the levels of herbal extracts and so on...but the truth remains: herbs are nature's proprietary blend. IF you do NOT adequately test for something because the data is "too new" (i.e. - 2007) which appears what your current claim is, then your issuing this supplement was, in effect, premature.

As for Eucommia if you really want to get in this; I have said it on that forum and this. I do NOT "play for the other team" rather consult with a number of companies actually on product development. Do not attempt to attack me as your sole defense - that is well overdone in this industry.

We can address Eucommia AND I HAVE in the appropriate threads on this forum and there, but you still offer that as your counter-suggestion. Truly poor form. We are still waiting at LB on the other compound which was the original topic you evaded, but this has been your way apparently of addressing the issue that I am growing rather tired of.

If asked about cissus, you counter with Eucommia - get over it. I have offered the rationale already, but that really appears as all you got.

Whomever said that cissus has NOT panned out when it comes to anything outside of fracture research, that is pure fact. And, should someone not possess a fracture...its use would certainly be questionable. There is an apparent superficial misunderstanding about how variants of the ER work and I do invite you to address this with me if so inclined.

Until you learn to stay on topic, however, I will NOT get into ridicule NOR will I get into this perpetual back-and-forth. If people are so inclined and some misinterpret many things like a "pump" for said products to mean it is "working" - then by all means, use it.

For those curious about how this came up or those keeping score...

Thread recap from LB is simple:

[1] I was asked about a bulk product - said I don't understand the nomenclature used. In fact, I went further in exploration to say this was the case with many USP products and until I understood what name game was being played, I would NOT encourage aiding their plight - this is easily remedied by the way.

[2] I was countered with Eucommia sucks because its phytoestrogenic (which shows superficial understanding there as well), and then I brought up cissus post-attack. Interestingly enough, the original topic was never addressed BUT I would appreciate it that UNTIL it is learned by said individuals to stay ON TOPIC, I would encourage their refraining from posting in my subforum until they can handle this simple concept. E-drama is NOT my style and the posting of this whole thing over here...without alluding to the fact that this is where you'd take it is rather shady (I suppose par for the course).



D_

[USPLabs]

Originally Posted by dinoiii

Fortunately, I was alerted into this thread...

Jacob and USP company,

I will assure you I am not mistaken on my information. I would ask that you read in full at LB if purely interested as I am not to get into an e-battle; quite non-sensical.

We can get into the levels of herbal extracts and so on...but the truth remains: herbs are nature's proprietary blend. IF you do NOT adequately test for something because the data is "too new" (i.e. - 2007) which appears what your current claim is, then your issuing this supplement was, in effect, premature.

As for Eucommia if you really want to get in this; I have said it on that forum and this. I do NOT "play for the other team" rather consult with a number of companies actually on product development. Do not attempt to attack me as your sole defense - that is well overdone in this industry.

We can address Eucommia AND I HAVE in the appropriate threads on this forum and there, but you still offer that as your counter-suggestion. Truly poor form. We are still waiting at LB on the other compound which was the original topic you evaded, but this has been your way apparently of addressing the issue that I am growing rather tired of.

If asked about cissus, you counter with Eucommia - get over it. I have offered the rationale already, but that really appears as all you got.

Whomever said that cissus has NOT panned out when it comes to anything outside of fracture research, that is pure fact. And, should someone not possess a fracture...its use would certainly be questionable. There is an apparent superficial misunderstanding about how variants of the ER work and I do invite you to address this with me if so inclined.

Until you learn to stay on topic, however, I will NOT get into ridicule NOR will I get into this perpetual back-and-forth. If people are so inclined and some misinterpret many things like a "pump" for said products to mean it is "working" - then by all means, use it.

For those curious about how this came up or those keeping score...

Thread recap from LB is simple:

[1] I was asked about a bulk product - said I don't understand the nomenclature used. In fact, I went further in exploration to say this was the case with many USP products and until I understood what name game was being played, I would NOT encourage aiding their plight - this is easily remedied by the way.

[2] I was countered with Eucommia sucks because its phytoestrogenic (which shows superficial understanding there as well), and then I brought up cissus post-attack. Interestingly enough, the original topic was never addressed BUT I would appreciate it that UNTIL it is learned by said individuals to stay ON TOPIC, I would encourage their refraining from posting in my subforum until they can handle this simple concept. E-drama is NOT my style and the posting of this whole thing over here...without alluding to the fact that this is where you'd take it is rather shady (I suppose par for the course).



D_

First off, I wish my doctor was a cool as you.

My issue is that all innovative companies have trade secrets that cannot be revealed due to other knock off companies.

You may believe our nomenclature is false as I believe you did not extract for phytoadroginic fraction of Eucommia. You may have extracted for the specific fractions but Until you prove otherwise beyond I said so. We are left to believe the associated research that Eucommia has potent ER binding. You write up is superficial on Eucommia. I have my science team dissecting it. We will post our findings soon on this board and on ********.

You are accusing us of an action that you are guilty of.

[dinoiii]

[quote=USPLabs;1210761]First off, I wish my doctor was a cool as you.[/qupte]

Again, continued nonsense offering.

My issue is that all innovative companies have trade secrets that cannot be revealed due to other knock off companies.

Yeah, we'll use MAN for example - seem to do just fine without proprietary and/or irrational naming systems.

You may believe our nomenclature is false as I believe you did not extract for phytoadroginic fraction of Eucommia. You may have extracted for the specific fractions but Until you prove otherwise beyond I said so. We are left to believe the associated research that Eucommia has potent ER binding. You write up is superficial on Eucommia. I have my science team dissecting it. We will post our findings soon on this board and on ********.

You have your science team dissecting what? Eucommia? How about the two USP product questions on the table? Again, far be it from me to request keeping on task though.

You can believe what you will - my acknowledgement is the following - I didn't personally extract for anything...we both know very well how this industry works. There is however, a standard - challenge it, I personally have no time to continue this silly exchange as you won't even merely defend your own products but change topic in a very poor attempt to conversely discuss the opposite.

Shoot, I must have taught you a new word (i.e. - "superficial"). Well, let's see if I can get a bit more specific for you because obviously we won't get that kind of response on cissus and/or the bulk product, even yet still.

Eucommia ulmoides to date, has 27 recognized constituents within it. The more notable concentrations are found within the leaves and bark crossover compounds - all stemming from the ethanolic extract...

Irridoids: geniposidic acid, geniposide, asperulosidic acid, deacetyl asperulosidic acid and asperuloside

Phenols: pyrogallo, protocatechuic acid and p-trans-coumaric acid - anti-clastogenic

Isoflavanoids: though while being anti-clastogenic, they harbor the phytoestrogenic effect you are very wrongly speaking of.

Triterpenoids: recognized androgenic effect with recognized dose-response gradient

Pytolipids: recognized androgenic effect that doesn't appear to harbor the same dose-response effect when separated out, though MAN's PM has a mixed conglomerate

The actual extraction methods (and I'll make this really easy for you) stem from the patent holders for whom we'll acknowledge credit.

So, if you have a question regarding EU extracts of varying proportion, ask away (while off-topic...again, it seems to be the only thing we are going to see accurate in this thread anyway).

You are accusing us of an action that you are guilty of.

Completely false.

Is there question to what the EU extract is? Try again!

D_

[poopypants]

Originally Posted by USPLabs

In addition, You could believe the Good old Doctors signal abstract that is pretty vaque or the thousands and thousand of postive user feedback.

thats what i was getting at.

Jason, your telling me you NEVER take a supplement after you sit and wait for positive user reviews... or dont take it due to negative reviews? Im sure you do this many times over without EVER seeing a study in support or in condridiction to it, so why in this one case are you going to instead follow someones input against this consuumer supported product just cause they say so, especially when you know that this someone has something to gain by discrediting a competitor?

This logic is extrememly flawed and Im suprised(well maybe not that suprised) anyone here at AM.com would take this mindset given the nature of these boards, that being one of a community of consumers set up purely to confirm the usage of different diets, routines and supplements through widespread trial and error? Its the same reason all these companies come here to feel out their new supplements as well before sending them mainstream.

[poopypants]

Originally Posted by jasonschaffin

I didn't know it was hearsay when it was a medical study. Nor did I know it was niave to want to know what estrogens I am putting in my body. Cissus estrogens may be a godsend. Maybe the act like clomid and increase LH. Maybe the are like Nolva and help prevent gyno. Maybe they do nothing but help bone fractures. We don't know. I want to know what they are doing. Give me a little credit poopy, damn.

Its one thing to want to know, Its another to take a stance of ignorance to the consumer feedback of the product that confirms exactly what you demand a study for casue of someone elses biased study.

[dinoiii]

Yeah? Express to me where my logic is flawed.

What the translation of that is would be the science is flawed - insults do absolutely nothing to contribute to this topic and I wouldn't assume a fair shake here in this particular subforum, but that is what happens.

How bout we strive for something that shows the science and this "real world" stuff agreeing. Novel, I know - but hey...I could care if you bathe in vats of the stuff - I have pointed out some "logic" if you want to call it that - readers can interpret it as they will.


D_

[dinoiii]

Originally Posted by poopypants

Its one thing to want to know, Its another to take a stance of ignorance to the consumer feedback of the product that confirms exactly what you demand a study for casue of someone elses biased study.

Yeah, those 3rd party studies really do stink, ok...it's obvious this will go nowhere here.


D_

[poopypants]

Originally Posted by dinoiii

Yeah, those 3rd party studies really do stink, ok...it's obvious this will go nowhere here.


D_

My real issue is not the third party study rather the ignorance to over whelming user feedback. And was the Logic post above directed at me? cause I was not referring to your logic(or scientific fact as you turned it into thinking its was directed at you) as my post was specifically directed at Jason not you sir. I value your opinion H. but I also value the feedback of the cosumers here as this is the reason why I frequent ANY board. Please re-read my post with the correct context in mind that its directed at Jasons Logic and not you.

[dinoiii]

Originally Posted by poopypants

My real issue is not the third party study rather the ignorance to over whelming user feedback. And was the Logic post above directed at me? cause I was not referring to your logic(or scientific fact as you turned it into thinking its was directed at you) as my post was specifically directed at Jason not you sir. I value your opinion H. but I also value the feedback of the cosumers here as this is the reason why I frequent ANY board. Please re-read my post with the correct context in mind that its directed at Jasons Logic and not you.

I was actually responding to the "flawed logic" comment in USPlabs post reply you offered when he was referencing this "good ole Doctor's" single (rather than signal I presume) abstract. And I am not offering contention to the fact that estrogen would have pertinent effect on joints from a fluidity standpoint alone, especially when people are taking slews of anti-E's, sometimes concurrently unfortunately.

Further still, I have NOT antagonized the anti-glucocorticoid effects...but countered the cummulative effect of hormonal alteration in a scenario when it is not needed - [in other words, the non-fracture populace; over 99% of those taking it based on marketing alone]. I also won't denounce the "pump" effect that some have misinterpretated as "benefit" either.

In fact, if you go to ******** and read the thread in question in its entirety, you may be surprised what was said and how it was said. You can evaluate that and think as you will.


D_

[USPLabs]

Originally Posted by dinoiii

I was actually responding to the "flawed logic" comment in USPlabs post reply you offered when he was referencing this "good ole Doctor's" single (rather than signal I presume) abstract. And I am not offering contention to the fact that estrogen would have pertinent effect on joints from a fluidity standpoint alone, especially when people are taking slews of anti-E's, sometimes concurrently unfortunately.

Further still, I have NOT antagonized the anti-glucocorticoid effects...but countered the cummulative effect of hormonal alteration in a scenario when it is not needed - [in other words, the non-fracture populace; over 99% of those taking it based on marketing alone]. I also won't denounce the "pump" effect that some have misinterpretated as "benefit" either.

In fact, if you go to ******** and read the thread in question in its entirety, you may be surprised what was said and how it was said. You can evaluate that and think as you will.


D_

I rather ignore your condescending superior attitude. Like MAN consults with your service, USPLabs has a team of consultants. Before we hastily respond, they are researching the topic. I promise the response will be civil and without a superiority complex.

I will let the debate continue, but as I rarely do, I will have my science team log on and challenge your rational.

take care