DS Craze Lawsuit and FDA Action

Status
Not open for further replies.
3clipseGT said:
I wonder why some people test positive and others dont. Ive taken two UAs on craze and was good both times.

Hey jobless how long after you ingested craze did you take the UA?
Click to expand...

with 1,3-dimethylamylamine it seems sometimes people test positive sometimes they dont

it may have to do with the concentration of the compound in the urine
 
Patrick Arnold said:
with 1,3-dimethylamylamine it seems sometimes people test positive sometimes they dont

it may have to do with the concentration of the compound in the urine
Click to expand...

And the test IIRC, i've seen a few posts about ppl popping on the 95%-98% accurate tests (going off of posts from members claiming to have popped) but from DS testing with 99% accurate tests I don't recall a single one popping.

Makes me think a false positive occurs on the lower tests, you just retest with a more accurate test and it's fine.

Hell, give a blood ir follicle(sp?) sample if you're going to retest.
 
Daycrawler said:
And the test IIRC, i've seen a few posts about ppl popping on the 95%-98% accurate tests (going off of posts from members claiming to have popped) but from DS testing with 99% accurate tests I don't recall a single one popping.

Makes me think a false positive occurs on the lower tests, you just retest with a more accurate test and it's fine.
.
Click to expand...

i was unawares that there are different levels of accuracy in tests
 
Patrick Arnold said:
i was unawares that there are different levels of accuracy in tests
Click to expand...

I may be completely wrong, but I recall reading on bb that one test was 98% accurate and that was a reoccuring thing for that specific test...

I'd call that a false positive. Speaking from memory and mine is kinda shot atm
 
Jobless is a troll...
 
demolition said:
This can't be real, i know if I popped I would raise a fuss and demand to be retested while submitting all the sups I'm taking. Lots of things will pop a test dude and people don't just get canned for it without a retest.
Click to expand...
A company does not "have" to give you a retest. Some states are right to work states and they dont need a reason to fire you...so if they dont want to bother with a retest , they dont have to:(
 
mw1 said:
A company does not "have" to give you a retest. Some states are right to work states and they dont need a reason to fire you...so if they dont want to bother with a retest , they dont have to:(
Click to expand...

Yea your right.... I guess I'm just luckier than most, if it is questionable at my job they will retest. You do bring up a good point I hadn't thought about. Or I'm more valuable at my job than jobless lol.
 
3clipsegt: i took just under two scoops at around 11 am worked out at 1130 i find it worked the best if you gave it a half hour. and the test was done at 5pm saturday. I asked for a blood test or a second test and didn't get to. like i said before some people don't understand it, can't grasp the concept. for example go read the labels and ingredients in all your supplements to you mother or a elderly family member and ask them if they think what your taking is safe i guarantee they will all react badly especially if you test positive for meth and you tell them its possible that its because of one of your supplements , they will say "geez kid git off that crap its no good for you" bosses are no different they don't want the attention or the reputation in there work place either, you would be suprized how quickly people classify you as tainted and give you the cold shoulder. not everyone especially in a business work place are onboard with supplements.
 
mw1 said:
A company does not "have" to give you a retest. Some states are right to work states and they dont need a reason to fire you...so if they dont want to bother with a retest , they dont have to:(
Click to expand...

right to work lol

more like right to fire
 
mw1 said:
A company does not "have" to give you a retest. Some states are right to work states and they dont need a reason to fire you...so if they dont want to bother with a retest , they dont have to:(
Click to expand...


If this is in fact true then I could see supplement companies being in danger of lawsuits. someone gets fired from a false positive and they blame the supplement company. maybe its a wise thing to put a false positive warning on the label, even if you arent sure its a possibility
 
Patrick Arnold said:
If this is in fact true then I could see supplement companies being in danger of lawsuits. someone gets fired from a false positive and they blame the supplement company. maybe its a wise thing to put a false positive warning on the label, even if you arent sure its a possibility
Click to expand...

I agree with this and its sort of why I'm posting here just letting people know I'm a real person and this happened to me. it says in the pdf of the lawsuit at the bottom that the law firm was not looking for a pay out or to have and legal feels covered it asked them to comply with proper labelling and not misleading labelling, if there was a false positive warning on the label then i would have avoided the product due to the drug testing I'm am subject to, however that would hurt sales and is probably why its not on the label.
 
jobless said:
I agree with this and its sort of why I'm posting here just letting people know I'm a real person and this happened to me. it says in the pdf of the lawsuit at the bottom that the law firm was not looking for a pay out or to have and legal feels covered it asked them to comply with proper labelling and not misleading labelling, if there was a false positive warning on the label then i would have avoided the product due to the drug testing I'm am subject to, however that would hurt sales and is probably why its not on the label.
Click to expand...

Um, sorry but they did that for a specific reason.
 
jobless said:
I agree with this and its sort of why I'm posting here just letting people know I'm a real person and this happened to me. it says in the pdf of the lawsuit at the bottom that the law firm was not looking for a pay out or to have and legal feels covered it asked them to comply with proper labelling and not misleading labelling, if there was a false positive warning on the label then i would have avoided the product due to the drug testing I'm am subject to, however that would hurt sales and is probably why its not on the label.
Click to expand...

How many times a year do you get tested?
 
jobless said:
I agree with this and its sort of why I'm posting here just letting people know I'm a real person and this happened to me. it says in the pdf of the lawsuit at the bottom that the law firm was not looking for a pay out or to have and legal feels covered it asked them to comply with proper labelling and not misleading labelling, if there was a false positive warning on the label then i would have avoided the product due to the drug testing I'm am subject to, however that would hurt sales and is probably why its not on the label.
Click to expand...


Not to split hairs here, but if you knew you were getting drugged tested I probably would of avoided all stims just for a risk of getting flagged.
 
Mandatory is only once a year but there is lots of different reason to get tested throughout the year. On site it policy if there's an incident that all parties involved must go for testing Evan if it was not your fault and these sorts of things can happen any time without notice so it's not like you can plan around them and just go off your suppliments for a week prior because you don't always know when you'll have to test.
 
jobless said:
I agree with this and its sort of why I'm posting here just letting people know I'm a real person and this happened to me. it says in the pdf of the lawsuit at the bottom that the law firm was not looking for a pay out or to have and legal feels covered it asked them to comply with proper labelling and not misleading labelling, if there was a false positive warning on the label then i would have avoided the product due to the drug testing I'm am subject to, however that would hurt sales and is probably why its not on the label.
Click to expand...

i dont agree that it would hurt sales to any meaningful degree to have such a warning. one may make an argument that it could enhance sales, considering the psychology of the typical user
 
D2footballjrc said:
Not to split hairs here, but if you knew you were getting drugged tested I probably would of avoided all stims just for a risk of getting flagged.
Click to expand...

Agreed , I've learnt that the hard way craze if the first suppliment besides protien I've ever taken I'm a "noob" at this stuff. Honestly I didn't think anything of it.
 
Your probably right, wld add to the hype for sure and imply that it's so good it's barly legal. I would have appreciated a warning
 
jobless said:
Your probably right, wld add to the hype for sure and imply that it's so good it's barly legal. I would have appreciated a warning
Click to expand...

Fight for your job. How long have you been there? Any prior issues with disciplinary actions? If you have a good history with this company you need to fight.
 
Mission1 said:
Fight for your job. How long have you been there? Any prior issues with disciplinary actions? If you have a good history with this company you need to fight.
Click to expand...

Thanks man, yeh I'm not letting it go I'm doing what I can to get it sorted out I'm going after a blood test and hair test and using the results to put a case together. Also getting the tub I currently have tested as well. I'll keep posting as this plays out.
 
mr.cooper69 said:
Doesn't the compound found in Supersize have an amide, not an amine, between the aromatic rings?
Click to expand...


that is correct and that makes it wholly different. the supersize molecule can hydrolyze to PEA and benzoic acid but in its parent form should have no cns activity
 
Patrick Arnold said:
i was unawares that there are different levels of accuracy in tests
Click to expand...

Haha, me too. Broader panels and etc., but not drug test that claim somewhat accurate and others that are just not accurate at all.

Even funnier is that the military apparently chose that not really accurate at all test since dudes in military were popping positive after ingesting DMAA/Jack3d, but getting cleared on blood or mass spec.
 
jobless said:
Hello everyone, just signed up today I have a msg i think is important. I started taking craze about 3 weeks ago and thought it worked pretty good and was happy with it till yesterday. yesterday was the day our company did its two year interval drug testing. I have never taken drugs in my life theres no chance anything would ever show up but yesterday I tested positive for meth amphetamines and it literally could not be from anything else. I'm not telling anyone i don't think they should take it or that its bad because i thought it worked great my work outs have been awesome! But if your like me and your at a job where drug testing is taking place and you care about your image and your job Iseriously recommend taking some time to research this. 80,000 dollars a year is no longer my income its now 0 dollars and a large company of some largely influential people are all under the assumption that I'm a F%$@ing drug addict because most of them are in there 50's and they don't grasp the concept that a work out sup has the ability to trigger a bad piss test. so ya my life got severely F@#%ed with thanks DS CRAZE!!!

this job and drug testing was in canada so not sure how that affects those of you who are in the u.s. but if you work in canada don't let this happen to you.
Click to expand...

I call BS, no offense. I have many friends who are in the military and have been drug tested, while using Craze, nothing, nada, zilch...not one positive test. Unbelievable the lengths some people will go to. :/
 
mw1 said:
A company does not "have" to give you a retest. Some states are right to work states and they dont need a reason to fire you...so if they dont want to bother with a retest , they dont have to:(
Click to expand...

This is an excellent point. It's worse for those applying for a job. You false positive, they're not inclined to do a re-test, despite your pleading. That costs money, and you're in no position to demand anything, in that instance...
 
southpaw23 said:
I call BS, no offense. I have many friends who are in the military and have been drug tested, while using Craze, nothing, nada, zilch...not one positive test. Unbelievable the lengths some people will go to. :/
Click to expand...


lengths to go to what? you mean you think he is covering up an actual meth positive?

actually southpaw a lot of pea derivatives theoretically have the potential to give a false positive on a methamphetamine immunoassay. and many of them are completely legal. even 1,3-dimethylamylamine can cause a false positive occasionally, and it completely lacks a phenyl group
 
Really wish DS could officially comment on all of this. Meanwhile Craze jumped back up in price, hope everyone who wanted it got in on the cheaper price :)
 
Geoforce said:
Really wish DS could officially comment on all of this. Meanwhile Craze jumped back up in price, hope everyone who wanted it got in on the cheaper price :)
Click to expand...

I'm sure once they can, they will.

Anything from the company and/or reps can be used as a trial exhibit, i've seen similar online postings used before...

That was the basis of the still active Syntrax case...
 
the presence of n-benzyl-2-pea was confirmed. not only that but this product had the same impurity that was in the standard from sigma aldrich

n-benzyl-2-pea appears to be in the product in very substantial amounts, and as far as i can tell is not listed on the label

now dont shoot the messenger guys. You know this is what i do
 
Patrick Arnold said:
the presence of n-benzyl-2-pea was confirmed. not only that but this product had the same impurity that was in the standard from sigma aldrich

n-benzyl-2-pea appears to be in the product in very substantial amounts, and as far as i can tell is not listed on the label

now dont shoot the messenger guys. You know this is what i do
Click to expand...

Hmm interesting mislabeled.
 
Angelbolic said:
Isn't that the same compound as in Spirodex (disguised as 'oxytropis falcate extracted for biogenic amine content')? I remember some rumors this was in Spirodex because one paper showed it was the only amine present in oxytropis falcate. If so, I'd guess they combined it with a MAOI, either a natural one (like hordenine) or a synthetic one.

Of course, the inclusion of this compound could be a huge red herring to mislead competitors from duplicating the formula and to 'hide' whatever else may be in there.
Click to expand...

No, that is "benzoyl," not "benzyl." The compound patrick mentioned does not appear to be readily hydrolyzed to PEA, and even if it was, hordenine is pretty much bunk, and DS would not use a synthetic MAOI.
 
Angelbolic said:
Isn't that the same compound as in Spirodex (disguised as 'oxytropis falcate extracted for biogenic amine content')? I remember some rumors this was in Spirodex because one paper showed it was the only amine present in oxytropis falcate. If so, I'd guess they combined it with a MAOI, either a natural one (like hordenine) or a synthetic one.

Of course, the inclusion of this compound could be a huge red herring to mislead competitors from duplicating the formula and to 'hide' whatever else may be in there.
Click to expand...

May be why i experienced nausea with Spirodex as well
 
Patrick Arnold said:
the presence of n-benzyl-2-pea was confirmed. not only that but this product had the same impurity that was in the standard from sigma aldrich

n-benzyl-2-pea appears to be in the product in very substantial amounts, and as far as i can tell is not listed on the label

now dont shoot the messenger guys. You know this is what i do
Click to expand...

I've googled that string and not much substanial information was found...

Besides the fact that it has little to.no effects...

Can you elaborate or give a layman explanation?
 
Angelbolic said:
Thanks, but this begs the question to what this compound does hydrolyze too. Any idea?

I think Patrick should either snort or inject some of his sample to be completely sure wether it has any stimulant activity at all.
Click to expand...

this compound will not hydrolyze

i suppose though that the benzyl group will be cleaved off by MAO and the nitrogen oxidized to phenylacetaldehyde and then to phenylacetic acid

(or does the amine go with the cleaved off part giving benzylamine? I dont know exactly how mao works)
 
Angelbolic said:
Thanks, but this begs the question to what this compound does hydrolyze too. Any idea?

I think Patrick should either snort or inject some of his sample to be completely sure wether it has any stimulant activity at all.
Click to expand...

i am not touching it. i will send it to some guys to try though
 
Angelbolic said:
This may be total BS, but this is what I just found on Bluelight:



Patrick, what do you think?

edit: link to paper ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20079438
Click to expand...


there are people that frequent these boards that are more versed in psychopharmacology than I. You should ask them
 
Daycrawler said:
I've googled that string and not much substanial information was found...

Besides the fact that it has little to.no effects...

Can you elaborate or give a layman explanation?
Click to expand...

I think it converts to methamphetamine and amphetamine slightly? all I could really find from blue light.

nvm
 
Stuff like this makes me glad my job doesn't piss test...though I work at a school so what kind of sense does that make? :) Still, what do we really know about most of what we put in our body anyways? It isn't as if we can label test everything ourselves. Personally I'm glad we have people like PA willing to do these kinds of things. Someone can question motives all they want, but I'm glad SOMEONE is doing it.
 
Patrick Arnold said:
the presence of n-benzyl-2-pea was confirmed. not only that but this product had the same impurity that was in the standard from sigma aldrich

n-benzyl-2-pea appears to be in the product in very substantial amounts, and as far as i can tell is not listed on the label

now dont shoot the messenger guys. You know this is what i do
Click to expand...

hey patrick thanks a lot for all the knowlegeable input its great to learn a bit about this as I know basically nothing but I'm really interested now of course.

this "n-benzyl-2-pea" what is it exactly for someone like myself that has no clue? effects? side effects? harmful/harmless?

thanks in advance.
 
jobless said:
hey patrick thanks a lot for all the knowlegeable input its great to learn a bit about this as I know basically nothing but I'm really interested now of course.

this "n-benzyl-2-pea" what is it exactly for someone like myself that has no clue? effects? side effects? harmful/harmless?

thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

BK, are you telling me that you don't know the answer?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top