Powerfull claims

Status
Not open for further replies.

same_old

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
continued from the thread in Nutraplanet's forum...

Originally Posted by USPLabs
Did you bother to read the reference sited? My advice is do not buy if you are skeptical.

In 1975, Ajlouni and colleagues reported the effects of 500mg of oral L-dopa on eight normal and 8 non-obese insulin-dependent diabetic subjects. The normal subjects increased their plasma HGH from 1.5mg/ml before L-dopa, to an average 21mg/ml at 90 minutes post L-dopa, with all subjects showing at least a 10 mg/ml increase. The diabetics increased from 2.5mg/ml to 20mg/ml from 60-90 minutes post L-dopa. Giving 100 grams (3 _ ounces) of glucose with, or 30 minutes after the drug totally suppressed the expected HGH increase (7).

Do the math and you get a number higher than 3iu's. Diabetics are resistant to HGH increases which makes the study even more spectacular.
that you do not encourage skepticism worries me more than anything...people who prefer blind allegiance to a thoughtful, thorough and critical audience are generally not completely honest, IME...

okay, i guess i will start. i have a damn mountain to climb here...

1) your 221% GH claim: have you established equivalency of your product to exactly 500mg of L-dopa? the clinical study was not done using a mucuna pruriens extract but the actual pharmaceutical, and some marked differences have been identified between the two.
2) i dont know where your 53% increase in natural T production claim comes from, but i suspect it was not a study carried out on powerfull itself. i wont ask you to post the study, but some relevant parameters would be helpful - median age? frequency and duration of sampling? size of testing group? placebo controlled? etc etc
3) how exactly do you qualify this claim: "Your unit will be engorged with blood, leading to increased size and pleasure!"? if you could show...i dunno, arginase inhibition, PDE5 inhibition or even increased NO i might let it slide.
4) any research to back this one up: "Helps restore natural hormonal production after a cycle of steroids or pro-hormones."?

Jacob - if i thought your product was worthless i wouldnt take the time to explore these issues. nobody is saying powerfull is crap...in fact, that's part of the reason we are rather annoyed at your "informative descriptions" - as well-informed consumers we take some offense at attempts to win our business with vast overstatements and manipulation of research.
 

Guest

Guest
continued from the thread in Nutraplanet's forum...



that you do not encourage skepticism worries me more than anything...people who prefer blind allegiance to a thoughtful, thorough and critical audience are generally not completely honest, IME...

okay, i guess i will start. i have a damn mountain to climb here...

1) your 221% GH claim: have you established equivalency of your product to exactly 500mg of L-dopa? the clinical study was not done using a mucuna pruriens extract but the actual pharmaceutical, and some marked differences have been identified between the two.
2) i dont know where your 53% increase in natural T production claim comes from, but i suspect it was not a study carried out on powerfull itself. i wont ask you to post the study, but some relevant parameters would be helpful - median age? frequency and duration of sampling? size of testing group? placebo controlled? etc etc
3) how exactly do you qualify this claim: "Your unit will be engorged with blood, leading to increased size and pleasure!"? if you could show...i dunno, arginase inhibition, PDE5 inhibition or even increased NO i might let it slide.
4) any research to back this one up: "Helps restore natural hormonal production after a cycle of steroids or pro-hormones."?

Jacob - if i thought your product was worthless i wouldnt take the time to explore these issues. nobody is saying powerfull is crap...in fact, that's part of the reason we are rather annoyed at your "informative descriptions" - as well-informed consumers we take some offense at attempts to win our business with vast overstatements and manipulation of research.
FIrst, who is "we." Who are you speaking for? Since, you are taking the liberty to represent "we." Please come with a better arguement by reading over the research, look at the numbers above and than prove manipulation than we can discuss.

what are the marked difference between Natural and synthetic L-dopa?

Please Post the other study that I posted in the other thread it will lend to the products claims.
 

Guest

Guest
Can you refute that HGH and testosterone CAN NOT naturally increase to that extent? If you are annoyed, you need to refute with evidence instead of scorned blanket statements.

PowerFULL contains 1-C that reaches the brain in higher concentrations plus some L-dopa that is native to the Herb.

USPlabs has broken the mold with supplements meeting the advertising. We form our claims from beta testing and research. We have created supplements that miff people’s perception of supplements.

Just revisit our line up:

Super Cissus Rx-Is revolutionizing joint health where even drugs fail.

Anabolic Pump--Is revolutionizing specific glucose transport where even drugs fail.

PowerFULL is next inline.

You have to remember that Herbs are the organ of most drugs but pharmaceutical companies modify the molecule not necessarily to improve the compound but to patent it.

My next advice is read user feedback from Improved complexion, Dramatically improved sleep, refreshed upon waking, sleepiness during the day, and mood elevations which are CLEAR signs of HGH increase. Again, the HGH increase is just a portion of PowerFULL's effects.

My next advice is pass on purchasing PowerFULL or any other USPlabs products if you are annoyed and skeptical.

take care
 

same_old

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
FIrst, who is "we." Who are you speaking for? Since, you are taking the liberty to represent "we." Please come with a better arguement by reading over the research, look at the numbers above and than prove manipulation than we can discuss.

what are the marked difference between Natural and synthetic L-dopa?

Please Post the other study that I posted in the other thread it will lend to the products claims.
i was speaking for the others who expressed annoyance with some of the claims and language in your advertisements.

did you want me to repost this study?

In 1975, Ajlouni and colleagues reported the effects of 500mg of oral L-dopa on eight normal and 8 non-obese insulin-dependent diabetic subjects. The normal subjects increased their plasma HGH from 1.5mg/ml before L-dopa, to an average 21mg/ml at 90 minutes post L-dopa, with all subjects showing at least a 10 mg/ml increase. The diabetics increased from 2.5mg/ml to 20mg/ml from 60-90 minutes post L-dopa. Giving 100 grams (3 _ ounces) of glucose with, or 30 minutes after the drug totally suppressed the expected HGH increase (7).

or this one?

Greenspan et al. compared HGH response to L-dopa in 44 young patients (31-44 years of age) and 42 older patients (64-88 years of age). All were considered “healthy participants”. Plasma HGH increased by 221% in the young patients and 167% in the older patients. The post L-dopa HGH levels were similar in young and old (4.5 and 4.8mg/ml) (10).

both beg the question of powerfull's actual functional equivalency to L-dopa.

come with a better argument? my questions come from VERY thorough research. please just answer honestly - they are relatively straightforward.

certainly i allow some lines to be drawn and inductions to be made WRT clinical research and "related" products...i am not completely hard-assed about it, but it's only natural to expect the claimer to at least explain how they drew certain more "creative" conclusions.
 

same_old

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Can you refute that HGH and testosterone CAN NOT naturally increase to that extent? If you are annoyed, you need to refute with evidence instead of scorned blanket statements.

PowerFULL contains 1-C that reaches the brain in higher concentrations plus some L-dopa that is native to the Herb.

USPlabs has broken the mold with supplements meeting the advertising. We form our claims from beta testing and research. We have created supplements that miff people’s perception of supplements.

Just revisit our line up:

Super Cissus Rx-Is revolutionizing joint health where even drugs fail.

Anabolic Pump--Is revolutionizing specific glucose transport where even drugs fail.

PowerFULL is next inline.

You have to remember that Herbs are the organ of most drugs but pharmaceutical companies modify the molecule not necessarily to improve the compound but to patent it.

My next advice is read user feedback from Improved complexion, Dramatically improved sleep, refreshed upon waking, sleepiness during the day, and mood elevations which are CLEAR signs of HGH increase. Again, the HGH increase is just a portion of PowerFULL's effects.

My next advice is pass on purchasing PowerFULL or any other USPlabs products if you are annoyed and skeptical.

take care
now you are just reposting your previous responses to others' attacks?? i get that this isnt your favorite topic, but please be respectful enough to address my very specific questions with original and relevant retorts.

i will wait patiently for a hopefully measured response.
 

PumpingIron

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I hate to agree with same old here. I am a devoted PowerFULL user. I feel that the effects that USPLabs claim are true. But I, like same old and many others on this forum like to know the science behind whats happening.

I think you believe SO is jumping down your throat or critisizing, but I don't see that...
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
I hate to agree with same old here. I am a devoted PowerFULL user. I feel that the effects that USPLabs claim are true. But I, like same old and many others on this forum like to know the science behind whats happening.

I think you believe SO is jumping down your throat or critisizing, but I don't see that...
Agreed.

I love my PowerFULL... and Im sure I will love the new PowerFULL.... just looking for something on the claims here. Such as do you by chance have your own blood results to see if in fact thats the case?

Adams
 
bkprice

bkprice

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
If Powerfull is working just like he claims, why would you need a study to confirm the results?

If you dont believe the claims dont buy them, its IS really that simple.

It seems that ever Gym rat now is some sort of Hard hitting Watch dog trying to protect the masses.

Do us all a favor and give it a rest.
 

PumpingIron

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
If Powerfull is working just like he claims, why would you need a study to confirm the results?

If you dont believe the claims dont buy them, its IS really that simple.

It seems that ever Gym rat now is some sort of Hard hitting Watch dog trying to protect the masses.

Do us all a favor and give it a rest.


Wow, I don't even know where to begin with a comment so niave.
 
Enigma76

Enigma76

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
If Powerfull is working just like he claims, why would you need a study to confirm the results?

If you dont believe the claims dont buy them, its IS really that simple.

It seems that ever Gym rat now is some sort of Hard hitting Watch dog trying to protect the masses.

Do us all a favor and give it a rest.
Worthless post. If the science doesnt interest you, then dont post..."its IS really that simple"
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
If Powerfull is working just like he claims, why would you need a study to confirm the results?

If you dont believe the claims dont buy them, its IS really that simple.

It seems that ever Gym rat now is some sort of Hard hitting Watch dog trying to protect the masses.

Do us all a favor and give it a rest.
That comment was about as useful as pockets on a jock strap.

Adams
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
continued from the thread in Nutraplanet's forum...



that you do not encourage skepticism worries me more than anything...people who prefer blind allegiance to a thoughtful, thorough and critical audience are generally not completely honest, IME...

okay, i guess i will start. i have a damn mountain to climb here...

1) your 221% GH claim: have you established equivalency of your product to exactly 500mg of L-dopa? the clinical study was not done using a mucuna pruriens extract but the actual pharmaceutical, and some marked differences have been identified between the two.
You are right, there are marked differences between the two. Certain alkaloids in MP have actually been shown to have LD increasing effects, leading to higher plasma concentrations of LD than synthetic LD.

Mucuna pruriens in Parkinson's disease: a double blind clinical and pharmacological study.

* Katzenschlager R,
* Evans A,
* Manson A,
* Patsalos PN,
* Ratnaraj N,
* Watt H,
* Timmermann L,
* Van der Giessen R,
* Lees AJ.

National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK.

BACKGROUND: The seed powder of the leguminous plant, Mucuna pruriens has long been used in traditional Ayurvedic Indian medicine for diseases including parkinsonism. We have assessed the clinical effects and levodopa (L-dopa) pharmacokinetics following two different doses of mucuna preparation and compared them with standard L-dopa/carbidopa (LD/CD). METHODS: Eight Parkinson's disease patients with a short duration L-dopa response and on period dyskinesias completed a randomised, controlled, double blind crossover trial. Patients were challenged with single doses of 200/50 mg LD/CD, and 15 and 30 g of mucuna preparation in randomised order at weekly intervals. L-dopa pharmacokinetics were determined, and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale and tapping speed were obtained at baseline and repeatedly during the 4 h following drug ingestion. Dyskinesias were assessed using modified AIMS and Goetz scales. RESULTS: Compared with standard LD/CD, the 30 g mucuna preparation led to a considerably faster onset of effect (34.6 v 68.5 min; p = 0.021), reflected in shorter latencies to peak L-dopa plasma concentrations. Mean on time was 21.9% (37 min) longer with 30 g mucuna than with LD/CD (p = 0.021); peak L-dopa plasma concentrations were 110% higher and the area under the plasma concentration v time curve (area under curve) was 165.3% larger (p = 0.012). No significant differences in dyskinesias or tolerability occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid onset of action and longer on time without concomitant increase in dyskinesias on mucuna seed powder formulation suggest that this natural source of L-dopa might possess advantages over conventional L-dopa preparations in the long term management of PD. Assessment of long term efficacy and tolerability in a randomised, controlled study is warranted.
Now, obviously, this does not say that MP directly raised endogenous GH production by 221%, I am the first to concede that. However, it does show extremely increased LD concentrations in the bloodstream as opposed to synthetic LD. I realize science is not additive in so far stating this worked in this manner, so this must work as well, I truly do. However, when the MP preparation was raising LD concentrations that much more than synthetic LD itself, and the effects of synthetic LD were displayed above, I think it not too far of a stretch.

Another two studies showing increased effectiveness of MP as opposed to synthetic LD

Beans (Mucuna Pruriens) For Parkinson’s Disease:
An Herbal Alternative

Bala V. Manyam, M.D., NPF Center of Excellence Plummer Movement Disorders Center Department of Neurology
Glenn R. Cryer, Scientific Publications and Biomedical Communications
Scott & White Clinic and Texas A&M University Health Science System College of Medicine


.....To establish how Mucuna would compare to synthetic L-DOPA, experiments were undertaken in animal models of Parkinson’s disease. Two different doses of synthetic L-DOPA and two different doses of Mucuna were administered making sure that the amount of L-DOPA present is the same in Mucuna as was the doses of synthetic L-DOPA. The effects of the drugs were tested using a specially designed instrument called "Rotometer." Dose for dose, Mucuna was two to three times more effective than equivalent amounts of synthetic L-DOPA. This suggests that Mucuna may contain compounds that make L-DOPA function better such as carbidopa, tolcapone (Tasmar), or entacapone (COMTan). It may also suggest that Mucuna independently improve symptoms of Parkinson’s disease. Although quite encouraging, more research is needed to confirm these findings. This work was done at the time when the United States Congress established the Office of Alternative Medicine in the National Institute of Health and the work was one of the first to receive funding for alternative medicine.....
Neuroprotective effects of the antiparkinson drug Mucuna pruriens.

* Manyam BV,
* Dhanasekaran M,
* Hare TA.

Department of Neurology, Health Science Center College of Medicine, Temple, TX 76508, USA. [email protected]

Mucuna pruriens possesses significantly higher antiparkinson activity compared with levodopa in the 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA) lesioned rat model of Parkinson's disease. The present study evaluated the neurorestorative effect of Mucuna pruriens cotyledon powder on the nigrostriatal tract of 6-OHDA lesioned rats. Mucuna pruriens cotyledon powder significantly increased the brain mitochondrial complex-I activity but did not affect the total monoamine oxidase activity (in vitro). Unlike synthetic levodopa treatment, Mucuna pruriens cotyledon powder treatment significantly restored the endogenous levodopa, dopamine, norepinephrine and serotonin content in the substantia nigra. Nicotine adenine dinucleotide (NADH) and coenzyme Q-10, that are shown to have a therapeutic benefit in Parkinson's disease, were present in the Mucuna pruriens cotyledon powder. Earlier studies showed that Mucuna pruriens treatment controls the symptoms of Parkinson's disease. This additional finding of a neurorestorative benefit by Mucuna pruriens cotyledon powder on the degenerating dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra may be due to increased complex-I activity and the presence of NADH and coenzyme Q-10. Copyright (c) 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

PMID: 15478206 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
EDIT: I thought I would add that the average LD concentration is around 2.0% in MP. Given the results posted above (percentages and arbitrary "two to three times more effective) you see that a very small dose of MP is needed in order to be equivalent to 500mg L-DOPA.

2) i dont know where your 53% increase in natural T production claim comes from, but i suspect it was not a study carried out on powerfull itself. i wont ask you to post the study, but some relevant parameters would be helpful - median age? frequency and duration of sampling? size of testing group? placebo controlled? etc etc
The Testosterone increase in PFull is much more of a mediated response than other supps, it comes as a result of the modulation of hormonal intermediates in the production of androgens as opposed to modulating any feedback loop. The main Triterpene Saponins in PFull form precursors to all steroids. As stated above, it does not modulate any HPTA feedback loop, but acts as an intermediate in the production of hormones:


Pfaffia paniculata-induced changes in plasma estradiol-17beta, progesterone and testosterone levels in mice.

* Oshima M,
* Gu Y.

Graduate School of Medical Imaging, Suzuka University of Medical Science, 1001-1 Kishioka-cho, Suzuka-shi, Mie 510-0293, Japan.

The present study undertook chemical analysis of components of Pfaffia paniculata roots. In addition, an animal experiment was conducted in which mice had ad libitum access to water enriched with powdered P. paniculata root for 30 days. Changes in plasma concentrations of estradiol-17beta and progesterone in female mice and of testosterone in male mice were ascertained. The results revealed that P. paniculata roots contain two types of phytosteroids, beta-sitosterol and stigmasterol, in addition to other compounds such as pfaffic acid, allantoin, saponins, beta-sitosteryl-beta-D-glucoside, and stigmasteryl-beta-D-glucoside. Regarding changes in plasma concentrations of hormones, levels of the sex hormones estradiol-17beta, progesterone and testosterone were clearly higher for mice that drank P. paniculata root-enriched water than for mice that drank plain water. Powdered P. paniculata root is easily dissolved in feed or water, and as no adverse reactions were seen in mice within 30 days of oral intake, consumption of P. paniculata for long periods of time appears safe.

PMID: 14967943 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
This obviously is not a 53% increase, as the % increase was not stated. I am just rather busy and found this for the time being on my comp, in order to satiate you as you seem, and rightfully so, pressed for some answers. Stigmasterol, which is heavily present in PFull, is not a smoke and mirrors compound, it does have testosterone raising ability and I will try to dig up some studies with actual % increases for you.


3) how exactly do you qualify this claim: "Your unit will be engorged with blood, leading to increased size and pleasure!"? if you could show...i dunno, arginase inhibition, PDE5 inhibition or even increased NO i might let it slide.
I cannot answer that.


4) any research to back this one up: "Helps restore natural hormonal production after a cycle of steroids or pro-hormones."?
See answer to number two.

Same Old, you are an intelligent man obviously, so I know you are not going to swallow what I say whole and I respect that. I posted these merely to display that it is not BS. I have to go at this point, but I will attempt to provide more quantifiable answers in terms of PFull's testosterone increasing ability, as one study showing no % is not enough and I know this. In the mean time, I would encourage you to do some research on MPP, and Triterpene Saponins (and Stigmasterol), if you have not already. I hope some of the answers were somewhat satisfying.
 
Enigma76

Enigma76

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Mullet, I ran across the first study as well. My only question (which I dont think anyone will have answers to) is how much l-dopa is stardardized in that 30 gram sample given.

Also, it must be noted that the dose of mucuna pruriens is 30g, and it is compared against a 200mg l-dopa/50mg carbidopa dose.

I dont know how much the 50mg carbidopa dose changes things, but what dosage of l-dopa is used in the Greenspan study?

I think it is important to figure out the standardization of l-dopa in the 30gram sample...what if the sample ends up being standardized to 1g of l-dopa? Then the results should be similar to what were found if the patients were just given double the l-dopa dose, no?
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
Mullet, I ran across the first study as well. My only question (which I dont think anyone will have answers to) is how much l-dopa is stardardized in that 30 gram sample given.

Also, it must be noted that the dose of mucuna pruriens is 30g, and it is compared against a 200mg l-dopa/50mg carbidopa dose.

I dont know how much the 50mg carbidopa dose changes things, but what dosage of l-dopa is used in the Greenspan study?

I think it is important to figure out the standardization of l-dopa in the 30gram sample...what if the sample ends up being standardized to 1g of l-dopa? Then the results should be similar to what were found if the patients were just given double the l-dopa dose, no?

Yeah, those are great questions which you are right I do not have the answers to. The only thing I can state, and this was displayed by the research above, is that MP is more effective than L-Dopa at equivalent L-Dopa dosages i.e., when MP is administered such that the L-DOPA concentration = concurrent Synthetic L-Dopa dose, it is vastly more effective. This leads me to believe that 500mg L-Dopa inherent within the MP is not needed in order to display the same benefits as 500mg synthetic L-DOPA.

I do truly wish I had more coherent and in-depth answers for you though.
 

same_old

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
thanks Mullet - good stuff. i will follow up shortly with some responses and more questions!
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
thanks Mullet - good stuff. i will follow up shortly with some responses and more questions!
No problem bro. As I said, I know you are after real meat and potatoes answers and I will honestly do the best I can to accomodate any requests put forth for USP Labs as a company to answer.
 
bkprice

bkprice

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
Worthless is posting I love your product, its work great, read the studies, but I dont believe you.

There were studies posted, so yes the science was there, I care about such things but when presented and you still dont get it, then yeah, its called BS.
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
Let's keep the hostility and insults to a murmur before they get out of control. I think we as the members of AM pride ourselves on not letting discussions turn worthless and insulting. Not directed to any inparticular, I am just enjoying this debate and would hate for no good to come out of it.
 

same_old

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Mullet, I ran across the first study as well. My only question (which I dont think anyone will have answers to) is how much l-dopa is stardardized in that 30 gram sample given.

Also, it must be noted that the dose of mucuna pruriens is 30g, and it is compared against a 200mg l-dopa/50mg carbidopa dose.

I think it is important to figure out the standardization of l-dopa in the 30gram sample...what if the sample ends up being standardized to 1g of l-dopa? Then the results should be similar to what were found if the patients were just given double the l-dopa dose, no?
assuming the 2% concentration mentioned earlier is reasonably accurate, 1g of MP contains about 20mg of L-dopa that is 2-3x more potent than synthetic l-dopa, so...40-60mg l-dopa per gram of MP.

but...in the UK study the 30g MP sample was 2-2.5X as potent as 200mg of synthetic l-dopa (110% more peak but 165% greater AUC) in elevating plasma l-dopa (not GH release, of course)...let's chop that down by, say, 2.25 to get a 1:1 effect ratio (not exactly accurate of course unless a linear relationship exists...and without the 15g findings i cant really tell) so 13g of MP = 200mg synthetic l-dopa, and....15mg L-dopa per gram of MP

the apparent discrepancy between this study's findings and the 2% estimate suggests either a) the 2% estimate is off, or b) the "2-3x as strong as l-dopa" is off, or 3) these labs are using different preparations of MP.

if we assume we are getting the same MP as the UK study, we'll need, oh, 32g of MP (13g x 2.25) to equal 500mg synthetic l-dopa. i honestly dont think this is the case...but it does point out how varied these studies can be when handling an herbal preparation...

i honestly dont know what to think about the equivalency of Pfull to L-dopa, but i know for damn sure that saying they are capable of identical GH release is rather irresponsible given the studies we've seen thus far.
 

PumpingIron

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Let's keep the hostility and insults to a murmur before they get out of control. I think we as the members of AM pride ourselves on not letting discussions turn worthless and insulting. Not directed to any inparticular, I am just enjoying this debate and would hate for no good to come out of it.

Here, here!
 

Guest

Guest
i was speaking for the others who expressed annoyance with some of the claims and language in your advertisements.

did you want me to repost this study?

In 1975, Ajlouni and colleagues reported the effects of 500mg of oral L-dopa on eight normal and 8 non-obese insulin-dependent diabetic subjects. The normal subjects increased their plasma HGH from 1.5mg/ml before L-dopa, to an average 21mg/ml at 90 minutes post L-dopa, with all subjects showing at least a 10 mg/ml increase. The diabetics increased from 2.5mg/ml to 20mg/ml from 60-90 minutes post L-dopa. Giving 100 grams (3 _ ounces) of glucose with, or 30 minutes after the drug totally suppressed the expected HGH increase (7).

or this one?

Greenspan et al. compared HGH response to L-dopa in 44 young patients (31-44 years of age) and 42 older patients (64-88 years of age). All were considered “healthy participants”. Plasma HGH increased by 221% in the young patients and 167% in the older patients. The post L-dopa HGH levels were similar in young and old (4.5 and 4.8mg/ml) (10).

both beg the question of powerfull's actual functional equivalency to L-dopa.

come with a better argument? my questions come from VERY thorough research. please just answer honestly - they are relatively straightforward.

certainly i allow some lines to be drawn and inductions to be made WRT clinical research and "related" products...i am not completely hard-assed about it, but it's only natural to expect the claimer to at least explain how they drew certain more "creative" conclusions.
Are you stating that a synthetic l-dopa has different physiological properties than Natural L-dopa?
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
assuming the 2% concentration mentioned earlier is reasonably accurate, 1g of MP contains about 20mg of L-dopa that is 2-3x more potent than synthetic l-dopa, so...40-60mg l-dopa per gram of MP.

but...in the UK study the 30g MP sample was 2-2.5X as potent as 200mg of synthetic l-dopa (110% more peak but 165% greater AUC) in elevating plasma l-dopa (not GH release, of course)...let's chop that down by, say, 2.25 to get a 1:1 effect ratio (not exactly accurate of course unless a linear relationship exists...and without the 15g findings i cant really tell) so 13g of MP = 200mg synthetic l-dopa, and....15mg L-dopa per gram of MP

the apparent discrepancy between this study's findings and the 2% estimate suggests either a) the 2% estimate is off, or b) the "2-3x as strong as l-dopa" is off, or 3) these labs are using different preparations of MP.

if we assume we are getting the same MP as the UK study, we'll need, oh, 32g of MP (13g x 2.25) to equal 500mg synthetic l-dopa. i honestly dont think this is the case...but it does point out how varied these studies can be when handling an herbal preparation...

i honestly dont know what to think about the equivalency of Pfull to L-dopa, but i know for damn sure that saying they are capable of identical GH release is rather irresponsible given the studies we've seen thus far.
I would more than likely assume the third. There are several preperations of MP, the one most commonly used is HP200, I believe that is its name. The UK study could have very well been using nothing more than powdered MP seeds, hence the large 30g dosing.
 

Guest

Guest
assuming the 2% concentration mentioned earlier is reasonably accurate, 1g of MP contains about 20mg of L-dopa that is 2-3x more potent than synthetic l-dopa, so...40-60mg l-dopa per gram of MP.

but...in the UK study the 30g MP sample was 2-2.5X as potent as 200mg of synthetic l-dopa (110% more peak but 165% greater AUC) in elevating plasma l-dopa (not GH release, of course)...let's chop that down by, say, 2.25 to get a 1:1 effect ratio (not exactly accurate of course unless a linear relationship exists...and without the 15g findings i cant really tell) so 13g of MP = 200mg synthetic l-dopa, and....15mg L-dopa per gram of MP

the apparent discrepancy between this study's findings and the 2% estimate suggests either a) the 2% estimate is off, or b) the "2-3x as strong as l-dopa" is off, or 3) these labs are using different preparations of MP.

if we assume we are getting the same MP as the UK study, we'll need, oh, 32g of MP (13g x 2.25) to equal 500mg synthetic l-dopa. i honestly dont think this is the case...but it does point out how varied these studies can be when handling an herbal preparation...

i honestly dont know what to think about the equivalency of Pfull to L-dopa, but i know for damn sure that saying they are capable of identical GH release is rather irresponsible given the studies we've seen thus far.

I can source a 98% natural l-dopa. Before our MP hits the R&D lab to concentrate the 1-c, we use a 75% natural l-dopa extract. Once the science is completed, we have a 50% l-dopa.
 

Guest

Guest
Worthless is posting I love your product, its work great, read the studies, but I dont believe you.

There were studies posted, so yes the science was there, I care about such things but when presented and you still dont get it, then yeah, its called BS.

I have to agree. I'm all for civil discussion, but you do not start the discussion by calling the other side a liar and then PRESENTING 0 EVIDENCE on the fact. If you believe the claims are lies, please present the arguement civilly instead of "I love USP but you are F&Sken liars."

1. I presented research without jeopardizing the formula
2. The ancedotal feedback supports it

On the other hand, I'm awaiting your research that increasing HGH by 200% with nutritional supplements is impossible. You need to prove your arguement to form an arguement.
 

Guest

Guest
both beg the question of powerfull's actual functional equivalency to L-dopa..
Why?

come with a better argument? my questions come from VERY thorough research. please just answer honestly - they are relatively straightforward.
.
Where is the research?

I answered your questions with 2 cited studies. Please present the thourough research in defense to continue the discussion.

take care
 
bpmartyr

bpmartyr

Snuggle Club™ mascot
Awards
1
  • Established
i honestly dont care one lick what reps or supp co owners say or dont say on boards. i let new products speak for themselves, and i let the more impulsive consumers report their impressions before i consider buying.

ANYWHO! keep up the good work, USPLabs. i got nothin but love fo ya!
Change of heart? :)
 

crappero

New member
Awards
0
Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai Zasshi. 1987 Aug 20;63(8):934-46. Links
[Effect of oral administration of L-dopa on the plasma levels of growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) in normal subjects and patients with various endocrine and metabolic diseases][Article in Japanese]
Mitsuhashi S, Yamasaki R, Miyazaki S, Saito H, Saito S.
First Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Tokushima, Japan.

The responses of plasma growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) and growth hormone (GH) to oral administration of L-dopa were studied in normal subjects and patients with various endocrine and metabolic diseases to clarify the pathophysiological role of the GHRH-GH axis. In normal subjects, the plasma GHRH concentration was increased from the basal value of 9.8 +/- 1.4 pg/ml (mean +/- SE) to 34.8 +/- 3.1 pg/ml at 30 approximately 90 min after oral administration of 500 mg L-dopa, followed by a rise of GH release (plasma GH level from less than 1 ng/ml to 21.7 +/- 4.7 ng/ml) in most cases, indicating that L-dopa stimulates GH secretion via hypothalamic GHRH. On L-dopa administration, no apparent increases in both plasma GHRH and GH concentrations were observed in patients with hypothalamic hypopituitarism, whereas GHRH administration induced almost normal GH response. In patients with acromegaly, the plasma levels of GHRH remained stationary after the L-dopa administration and did not correlate with plasma GH levels. In subjects with simple obesity, the responses of plasma GHRH (peak 13.2 +/- 1.2 pg/ml) and GH (peak 4.3 +/- 1.7 ng/ml) to L-dopa were significantly lower than those in normal subjects (p less than 0.01). In patients with primary hypothyroidism, peak levels of plasma GHRH (12.6 +/- 1.3 pg/ml) and GH (2.4 +/- 0.6 ng/ml) were significantly lower than those in normal subjects (p less than 0.01). In patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM), the responses of GHRH and GH were divided into 2 groups; in the responder the peak values of GHRH and GH were 19.4 +/- 8.6 pg/ml and 12.2 +/- 1.4 ng/ml and in the low or non responder 14.7 +/- 1.5 pg/ml and 2.0 +/- 0.6 ng/ml, respectively. Between both groups, there was a significant difference in the values of fasting blood sugar and HbA1 and mean suffering period. These findings suggest that GH secretion evoked by the L-dopa administration is induced by GHRH released from the hypothalamus, and impairment of GH secretion associated with simple obesity, primary hypothyroidism, or NIDDM may be in part attributed to insufficiency of GHRH release from the hypothalamus, and indicate that L-dopa test is clinically useful for evaluating the ability of intrinsic GHRH release in such diseased states.
-------
L-dopa does increase GH, by significant amounts.
 

crappero

New member
Awards
0
Mucuna Pruriens Aphrodisiac Effects
Mucuna pruriens can improve sexual behavior, libido, and performance. In an aphrodisiac study done at College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal, Mucuna Pruriens when administered in a dose of 75 mg/kg body weight daily, increased the sexual activity of male albino rats considerably by stimulating testosterone level. A ten fold increase in the mounting frequency was observed. The research shows that sexually active animals had increased sexual desire and improved sexual performance after 21 to 28 days. However, impotent animals did not derived any benefits.

Another research shows that Mucuna Pruriens heightened arousal and increased sexual activity to a moderate extent but also sustains it for a longer time as indicated by the increase in below Ejaculation Latency and decrease in Post Ejaculatory Interval. Mucuna Prueins is shown to possess central depressant activity. The delay in ejaculation could be due to toning down of hypersensitity of genitals and hyperexcitation of the regulatory centers. This study show that Mucuna Pruriens can be used to improve libido and delay premature ejaculation.

Parameters
Mean Frequency +/- S.E. (actual results)

Control (numbers in italics)
M Pruriens (numbers in bold)


-Mounting Frequency
13.16 +/- 0.95
24.00 +/- 1.06

-Intermission Frequency
4.83 +/- 0.47
6.33 +/- 0.42

-Mounting Latency
31.50 +/- 1.60
185.33 +/- 2.33

-Intermission Latency
41.16 +/- 1.74
213.16 +/- 0.79

-Ejaculatory Latency in 1st Series
194.16 +/- 2.30
317.00 +/- 1.21

-Ejaculatory Latency in 2nd Series
287.50 +/- 2.32
345.66 +/- 17.16

-Post Ejaculatory Interval
362.83 +/- 2.90
322.46 +/- 1.44


Mucuna Increase Sperm Count
The total alkaloids from Mucuna Pruriens comprise of five alkaloids (purienine and purienidine), are found to stimulate the secretion of testosterone to ensure greater availibility to gonads. These leads to increase sperm count and increase testes size. The testes section of the mice shows increase sperm count at the 20th day, and even higher spem count on the 30th day. Spermatogenesis is governed by testosterone. The alkaloids in Mucuna increase testosterone level in seminiferous tubules either by action on pituitary function or on leydig's cells that store testosterone.

-----------------------

PowerFULL is said to contain purienine and purienidine as well as Stigmasterol. These studies above show that purienine and purienidine increased testosterone. The above information is incomplete as it does not show the full aspects of the studies it references. I found the information at this URL:
Mucuna Pruriens, Dopamine, L-dopa, Growth Hormone, Macuna
 

crappero

New member
Awards
0
Herbal Actions:

The total alkaloids from seeds of Mucuna pruriens comprising 5 alkaloidal bases were found to bring about a note-worthy increase in the population of spermatozoa and in the weights of body testes, seminal vesicles and prostrate of the treated rats. The exhibited activity was found to stimulate testosterone-enanthate induced androgenic activity observed in another set of treated individuals. (Saksena, S. and Dixit, V.K., Ind. J. Nat. Prod, 1987, 3(1), 3-7).

Lower dose corresponding to the clinical dose significantly decreased the sleeping time, increased the motor activity and gave equivocal results in rotarod test in experimental animals. The high dose (3 times the clinical dose) significantly increased the sleeping time, decreased the motor activity and reduced the time for falling from the rod. Thus the drug possesses CNS stimulant effect at low doses and CNS depressant effect at high doses. (Ahmad, S., et al., Conference of Pharmacology and Symposium of Herbal Drugs. (New Delhi), March 1991, 15, 26.)
-----------

This above shows that alkaloids from seeds of Mucuna pruriens raise Testosterone levels, but by how much, I do not know. PowerFULL contains alkaloids from Mucuna pruriens in PureSap.
 

crappero

New member
Awards
0
I myself am a PowerFULL user and I can def say that while I am on PowerFULL I have much better sleep, I have stronger pumps in the gym, and my libido def increased.

But I too am curious as to how PowerFULL works, I want to learn about the scientific actions behind the results we all see.
 

crappero

New member
Awards
0
(1-carboxy-2-amino-3-pyrobenzol(3,4 diol) is natural L-dopa derived from the Velvet bean. That is just another way of writing the chemical name of L-dopa which is (S)-2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)propanoic acid.
 

crappero

New member
Awards
0
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004 Dec;75(12):1672-7. Links
Mucuna pruriens in Parkinson's disease: a double blind clinical and pharmacological study.
Katzenschlager R, Evans A, Manson A, Patsalos PN, Ratnaraj N, Watt H, Timmermann L, Van der Giessen R, Lees AJ.
National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK.

BACKGROUND: The seed powder of the leguminous plant, Mucuna pruriens has long been used in traditional Ayurvedic Indian medicine for diseases including parkinsonism. We have assessed the clinical effects and levodopa (L-dopa) pharmacokinetics following two different doses of mucuna preparation and compared them with standard L-dopa/carbidopa (LD/CD). METHODS: Eight Parkinson's disease patients with a short duration L-dopa response and on period dyskinesias completed a randomised, controlled, double blind crossover trial. Patients were challenged with single doses of 200/50 mg LD/CD, and 15 and 30 g of mucuna preparation in randomised order at weekly intervals. L-dopa pharmacokinetics were determined, and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale and tapping speed were obtained at baseline and repeatedly during the 4 h following drug ingestion. Dyskinesias were assessed using modified AIMS and Goetz scales. RESULTS: Compared with standard LD/CD, the 30 g mucuna preparation led to a considerably faster onset of effect (34.6 v 68.5 min; p = 0.021), reflected in shorter latencies to peak L-dopa plasma concentrations. Mean on time was 21.9% (37 min) longer with 30 g mucuna than with LD/CD (p = 0.021); peak L-dopa plasma concentrations were 110% higher and the area under the plasma concentration v time curve (area under curve) was 165.3% larger (p = 0.012). No significant differences in dyskinesias or tolerability occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid onset of action and longer on time without concomitant increase in dyskinesias on mucuna seed powder formulation suggest that this natural source of L-dopa might possess advantages over conventional L-dopa preparations in the long term management of PD. Assessment of long term efficacy and tolerability in a randomised, controlled study is warranted.
----------

This shows that natural L-dopa compared to synthetic has some advantages, albeit it is advantages in dealing with Parkinson's Disease.
 

same_old

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
I answered your questions with 2 cited studies. Please present the thourough research in defense to continue the discussion.

take care
no offense, but please leave this to Mullet. he is more than holding his own. for some reason you are stuck at post #1.

i am intrigued by the androgenic action of MP...curious as to how something either a) stimulates HPTA in a manner other than feedback, or b) simulates (not stimulates) LH. in either case, it's a good MOA for a drug to have.

bpmartyr and wildor - i can only listen to so much BS before i say something. fortunately there are some other reps who are willing to step up and answer questions. also, i praised (and continue to praise) USPLabs' products. i never applauded the boss' sales technique.

normally i would do my own research about a product before trying it out, but in this case i didnt even know what the product actually was, so i had to come to the source for some substantiation of claims. it's not an outrageous or antagonistic endeavor, i just didnt know where else to go for info.

MP appears to be capable of both GH release (how much? i dunno. a significant amount it looks like) as well as a quasi-LH effect that seems to be only shared by HCG...in this i am assuming the much more difficult alternative of strictly testosterone-focused HPTA stimulation via an unknown mechanism without precedent isnt the cause...just playing the odds there...it is no damn wonder you all were interested.

okay, the natural follow-on questions:

most GH releasers are plagued by concurrent prolactin and cortisol release. there are exceptions of course. anybody seen any numbers for l-dopa or MP? i cant recall any i've seen off hand...

if MP acts like HCG, and it REALLY is starting to look like it does...then there is going to probably be a degree of HPTA shutdown (as HCG stands in for LH and the HPTA stops kicking it out)...how much? probably not a ton, but we all dont use HCG during PCT for this reason...additionally, leydig cells stop responding to HCG after awhile. i am inclined to think the same is true for MP. anybody disagree? my response to Pfull was markedly reduced in the 3rd and 4th weeks, and could easily be the reason. also, if true, we should think seriously about not using Pfull in PCT...

somebody redirect, my brain is getting foggy...
 

Guest

Guest
no offense, but please leave this to Mullet. he is more than holding his own. for some reason you are stuck at post #1.

i am intrigued by the androgenic action of MP...curious as to how something either a) stimulates HPTA in a manner other than feedback, or b) simulates (not stimulates) LH. in either case, it's a good MOA for a drug to have.

bpmartyr and wildor - i can only listen to so much BS before i say something. fortunately there are some other reps who are willing to step up and answer questions. also, i praised (and continue to praise) USPLabs' products. i never applauded the boss' sales technique.

normally i would do my own research about a product before trying it out, but in this case i didnt even know what the product actually was, so i had to come to the source for some substantiation of claims. it's not an outrageous or antagonistic endeavor, i just didnt know where else to go for info.

MP appears to be capable of both GH release (how much? i dunno. a significant amount it looks like) as well as a quasi-LH effect that seems to be only shared by HCG...in this i am assuming the much more difficult alternative of strictly testosterone-focused HPTA stimulation via an unknown mechanism without precedent isnt the cause...just playing the odds there...it is no damn wonder you all were interested.

okay, the natural follow-on questions:

most GH releasers are plagued by concurrent prolactin and cortisol release. there are exceptions of course. anybody seen any numbers for l-dopa or MP? i cant recall any i've seen off hand...

if MP acts like HCG, and it REALLY is starting to look like it does...then there is going to probably be a degree of HPTA shutdown (as HCG stands in for LH and the HPTA stops kicking it out)...how much? probably not a ton, but we all dont use HCG during post cycle therapy for this reason...additionally, leydig cells stop responding to HCG after awhile. i am inclined to think the same is true for MP. anybody disagree? my response to Pfull was markedly reduced in the 3rd and 4th weeks, and could easily be the reason. also, if true, we should think seriously about not using Pfull in PCT...

somebody redirect, my brain is getting foggy...
You obviously are blind to the primary references cited. In these special cases, I always let Mullet deal with the quasi bs.

L-dopa is converted to dopamine and dopamine is a prolactin inhibitior.

take care
 
bpmartyr

bpmartyr

Snuggle Club™ mascot
Awards
1
  • Established
bpmartyr and wildor - i can only listen to so much BS before i say something. fortunately there are some other reps who are willing to step up and answer questions. also, i praised (and continue to praise) USPLabs' products. i never applauded the boss' sales technique.

...
LOL, I am just yankin your chain bro. You should know me by now. :D
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
i am intrigued by the androgenic action of MP...curious as to how something either a) stimulates HPTA in a manner other than feedback, or b) simulates (not stimulates) LH. in either case, it's a good MOA for a drug to have.

MP appears to be capable of both GH release (how much? i dunno. a significant amount it looks like) as well as a quasi-LH effect that seems to be only shared by HCG...in this i am assuming the much more difficult alternative of strictly testosterone-focused HPTA stimulation via an unknown mechanism without precedent isnt the cause...just playing the odds there...it is no damn wonder you all were interested.

okay, the natural follow-on questions:

most GH releasers are plagued by concurrent prolactin and cortisol release. there are exceptions of course. anybody seen any numbers for l-dopa or MP? i cant recall any i've seen off hand...

if MP acts like HCG, and it REALLY is starting to look like it does...then there is going to probably be a degree of HPTA shutdown (as HCG stands in for LH and the HPTA stops kicking it out)...how much? probably not a ton, but we all dont use HCG during post cycle therapy for this reason...additionally, leydig cells stop responding to HCG after awhile. i am inclined to think the same is true for MP. anybody disagree? my response to Pfull was markedly reduced in the 3rd and 4th weeks, and could easily be the reason. also, if true, we should think seriously about not using Pfull in PCT...
The studies I have seen are unfortunatlely very vague on just how MP is raising Testosterone, only that it is. I will investigate some more and see if I cannot have a more definite answer tomorrow. At any rate, the evidence is there that it is having some androgenic action as you said, though the specific MOA will be valuable info.

The PureSap component of PFull, comprised of Triterpene Saponins, is the hormonal intermediate component I was speaking of earlier. IMO, the most important of these saponins is Stigmasterol. It is a fairly interesting sterol in that it is so structurally similar to Test (Triterpene Saponins can form the basis for all hormones) it can occupy receptors, as well as being able to act as an intermediate in the synthesis of hormones. Combined with the Prolactin Inhibitory effects of MP mentioned below, you have an environment catered to increased synthesis and release of Endogenous Testosterone.

Stigmasterol has also been shown to inhibit cortisol.

Unfortunately I could not find an abstract to the second ref., though hopefully somebody can. At any rate, L-DOPA, and conversely MP, seem to inhibit the release but not the production of Prolactin at the pituitary level. I know Dopamine itself is a Prolactin antagonist, it is quite possible that the increased levels of Dopamine as a result of MP or L-DOPA supplementation are activating the D2 receptors in the brain. This would cause an inhibitory effect on the release of PRL, but would not effect its production at all.

The effect of L-dopa and chlorpromazine on prolactin and growth hormone secretion in normal women.

Leblanc H,
Yen SS.
The time course of simultaneous changes in prolactin (PRL) and growth hormone secretion in response to a single dose of L-dopa and chlorpromazine was determined in normal women. L-Dopa induced greater, but shorter (30 minutes), growth hormone release than concomitant suppression of PRL secretion. The PRL peak following chlorpromazine occurred at the same time as the nadir of PRL after L-dopa (3.5 hours). The quantity of PRL release inhibited by L-dopa equaled the amount of PRL secretion during the period of rebound, suggesting L-dopa inhibits PRL release, but not synthesis, by the pituitary.
PMID: 961756 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
1: Neurol India. 1978 Dec;26(4):177-8. Links
The inhibitory effect of the cowhage plant-Mucuna pruriens-and L-dopa on chlorpromazine-induced hyperprolactinaemia in man.

To add to the earlier discussion, here's a study that shows I was apparently grossly underestimating the % of L-DOPA in MP. I just thought that I would clear that up as those figures you posted seemed low.

[Effect of different cooking treatments of Mucuna beans on its L-Dopa content]

[Article in Spanish]
Garcia Echeverria CL,
Bressani R.
Centro de Ciencia y Tecnologia de Alimentos, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala-Guatemala.
The main limiting factor in the consumption by humans of the velvet bean (Mucuna) is its relatively high content of L-Dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-Dopa), with levels as high as 9%. Conventional cooking methods used to transform raw velvet bean into an edible product are not sufficiently effective in reducing the levels of L-Dopa in adequate processing time. In this report, Mucuna beans were cooked by microwave, utilizing vapor and in water solutions at pH 3, 6, 7, 9 and 11. Cooking alkaline solutions were achieved using sodium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide, and calcium hydroxide. The acid pH was achieved through the use of HCl. The initial cooking time was fixed at 6 hrs. The processed bean samples were dried, ground and analyzed for L-Dopa and protein. The ground samples were further washed with boiling water for 0, 3 and 6 minutes, them dried and analyzed. None of the procedures evaluated was capable of eliminating L-Dopa from Mucuna beans. The Ca(OH)2 treatment at pH 9 which was washed with hot water produce a reduction of L-Dopa of 80.4%. There was not effect attributed to the alkaline ions. Reducing particle size appears to be most effective as it has been shown by other workers.
 
djremix

djremix

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
not going to post any much scientific referances, but from personal experience of using powerfull at the lowest dose possible for a month(2 pills before bedtime with DS's activate)

id say powerfull's effect in da brain is very very close to selegiline but we know its not a maoi so its probably affecting the reuptake of dopamine in one way or another.

and yes i tried bromocriptine but i could not handle it at any dose. could not breath so i guess im very sensitive to prolactine inhibitors.

its very subtle but a very nice overall feeling. calming and happy.

looking forward to powerfull 2 (or powerfull sqaured :) )
 

same_old

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
naturally, the results of a prolactin study on women cannot be extended to include men...not at all.

the Indian study - that title is a little confusing. apparently they were comparing the attentuation of prolactin release by both MP and l-dopa....but we have no idea what the result was!

i will see what i can find on stigmasterol - very curious. how does it bind to ARs but not suppress? the earlier study posted suggests strongly that it acts on leydig cells (which is what HCG does), not androgen receptors. i imagine there is more to it, but i dont know what...
 
poison

poison

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
Can you refute that HGH and testosterone CAN NOT naturally increase to that extent? If you are annoyed, you need to refute with evidence instead of scorned blanket statements.

:huh:

Are you kidding me? YOU are the ones making these claims. It is YOUR job, and yours only, to back them up. It's not OUR job to prove why we think YOUR claims might be exaggerated.

Jesus.

As someone else here said, I like USPlabs, and I feel they're highly innovative and groundbreaking. I use USPLabs products. I just HATE the lack of clarity on WTF you're selling, what each product is supposed to do, and the lack of fact backing it up.
 
poison

poison

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
Good posting, Mullet. Thanks, bud.
 

Guest

Guest
:huh:

Are you kidding me? YOU are the ones making these claims. It is YOUR job, and yours only, to back them up. It's not OUR job to prove why we think YOUR claims might be exaggerated.

Jesus.

As someone else here said, I like USPlabs, and I feel they're highly innovative and groundbreaking. I use USPLabs products. I just HATE the lack of clarity on WTF you're selling, what each product is supposed to do, and the lack of fact backing it up.
Give me break with your "huh."

Its not my Job to refute our claims. I never heard such a backwards statement in my life.

I am 100% certian and clear on what's being sold. Are you reading the research just posted?

When a compound is innovative and ground breaking research is sometimes lacking and thats the nature of the beast.

As I stated 100 times, USPlabs is using herbs in a manner the industry has never seen. With Anabolic Pump, We have done something with a supplement that pharmacuetical companies have failed to accomplish with a drug. With Super Cissus Rx, we have have done something with a supplement that the pharmacuetical industry have failed to accomplish with a drug.

You either live with it or live without it or Bitc$ about it and still live with it.

take care
 
poison

poison

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
Give me break with your "huh."

Its not my Job to refute our claims. I never heard such a backwards statement in my life.
Right. It's your job to prove or back up your claims. When you say "blahblah 213% increase x 53% increase y massive wood yeehaw", without providing references, you're gonna be asked questions. It IS your job to provide answers, not ours. We are not making the claims, you are.

I am 100% certian and clear on what's being sold. Are you reading the research just posted?
Good, because originally it was sold as a test booster, then a GH booster, now it does both.

I am reading the research...the majority of which you did not post. Wouldn't it be easier to just post all that up front, or say 'hold on, Mullet will be here momentarily', instead of getting pissy with your customers?

When a compound is innovative and ground breaking research is sometimes lacking and thats the nature of the beast.
Hey, there's no shame in saying 'I don't know' or 'I'm not sure', or 'anecdotal evidence shows'. It's better than pumping out Muscletech copy then getting pissed when people want verification.

As I stated 100 times, USPlabs is using herbs in a manner the industry has never seen. With Anabolic Pump, We have done something with a supplement that pharmacuetical companies have failed to accomplish with a drug. With Super Cissus Rx, we have have done something with a supplement that the pharmacuetical industry have failed to accomplish with a drug.
This isn't about AP or Cissus. Nice diversion.

You either live with it or live without it or Bitc$ about it and still live with it.

take care
*****? No one here is *****ing, aside from you. People ask legitimate questions, you get your panties in a bunch. It's too bad, because Mullet here is working very hard to cover your ass (and doing a fine job).

No hard feelings. I just wish you would be straight with us, your customers.
 
jminis

jminis

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Let me get this straight. Everyone agree's the product works and does what it's supposed to do. This we all agree on. So knowing how great the product is you want to now see proof behind the claims of what it can do? I just don't get it.

This isn't muscletech, why is everyone so worried about this.
 

entropy138

New member
Awards
0
Let me get this straight. Everyone agree's the product works and does what it's supposed to do. This we all agree on. So knowing how great the product is you want to now see proof behind the claims of what it can do? I just don't get it.

This isn't muscletech, why is everyone so worried about this.

Wow this thread is amazing. You realize there are thousands of people that believe and claim muscletech products work too right?

I've got to give it to mullet and same old for having an intelligent discussion that will benefit all of the rest of us who are interested in this product. And the idea that USP makes the claims and its same old's job to prove why they aren't true is ludicrous. It's like me making the claim that John Doe murdered someone and then it's his job to prove that he didn't while I have no responsibility to prove that he did.

From what I've seen here I can say USP is lucky so many people are willing to throw chemicals into their body without understanding how they work or why they work.

Anyway - to the people that are putting the time into the research and figuring out how/why this stuff works - THANK YOU - there are others out here following it and appreciate the effort.
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Let me get this straight. Everyone agree's the product works and does what it's supposed to do. This we all agree on. So knowing how great the product is you want to now see proof behind the claims of what it can do? I just don't get it.

This isn't muscletech, why is everyone so worried about this.
Yes people do love powerfull... me being one of them. WIth the new ones, there are just some very large claims. I think people would just like to see quantification. Maybe some 3rd party, indiscriminate tester. WIth some blood results.

Dont get me wrong, I love USPLabs, and all their products, and Im sure will love the new powerFULL, got some on the way. Would jsut like to see something backing it up.

Adams
 

rockhard_4eva

Banned
Awards
0
Kids,

I have to disagree. They are protecting their investment, regardless if it cost them 1 dollar or 1 million dollars. They are not doing anything illegal, I love their **** (stopped taking arthritis meds after starting cissus) and enough people here love their ****!

Just give it up.

**** means supplements
 
Last edited:
jminis

jminis

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
First this is not directed at anyone but just my thoughts on the subject,
Proof is in the pudding or so they say. I"m guessing USP came up with a formula based on the information in the studies he's provided. Based on that info he was able to design a product to do X,Yand Z. So people take the product and unlike a lot of supps this one actually does X,Y and Z . So why are we questioning the relevance of the info.

It was obvioulsy correct and it even applies to the real world not just paper. Yes USPlabs makes bold claims about his products but I'll be damned if he hasn't backed them up with expceptional products that do work as advertised. Keep in mind he's also trying to sell products here he's not going for the boys scout badge of honor.

Nothing wrong with exploring how a supp works but you guys are treating USP like he's trying to pull the wool over your eyes. He's one of the few in this industry that puts the time into his research to make sure his products work. Creating BS products is not only a waste of time but expensive. Lets let the man have his eye catching claims that's he's worked so hard for.

While everyone is so focused on trying to figure out what USP did long before the new formulation came to be I'll be popping some powerfull and hitting the gym in an effort to get bigger, you guys know that place with the weights, the reason were all here. I'll let USP do the research, I'll lift the weights. Naive maybe but I have faith in his company and his products and that's something that I believe he's earned with a lot of folks around here.

Time for bed, oh yeah I'll be getting a good night sleep thanks powerfull:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads


Top