DS CRAZE BANNED IN AUSTRALIA!
- Thread starter AdelV
- Start date
AdelV
Well-known member
VaughnTrue
Well-known member
the compound they read out is a synonym for amphetamine...
They claimed the ingredient was "n-alpha-methylbenzeneethanamine"...
They claimed the ingredient was "n-alpha-methylbenzeneethanamine"...
VaughnTrue
Well-known member
^^^ thus, it makes absolutely no sense.
if it contained amphetamine(s), it would have been showing up.
this is not some analogue to amphetamine, but the real thing....i call strong bull****.
if it contained amphetamine(s), it would have been showing up.
this is not some analogue to amphetamine, but the real thing....i call strong bull****.
AdelV
Well-known member
Just relaying. Its been pulled! DS reps willing to chime in?
AdelV
Well-known member
Nope, serious. It wasnt even tested by the TGA. The federal police have pulled it all off, everything to be destoryed. I have no idea whats going on, but tubs are going for 140$ on ebay!
DjAnthum
New member
That's unreal... i went through like 4 tubs when i was stocking it in my online store...
Does that make me a drug addict?
3clipseGT
On my grind
Agreed. I took a urinalysis for work after taking craze and pissed clean.
frame21
New member
http: // drivensports. com/20130207377/Blog/baseless-lawsuit-against-crazer-dismissed
http: // public-access. riverside. courts. ca. gov/OpenAccess/Civil/CivilCaseReport. asp?CourtCode=A&RivInd=RIV&CaseType=RIC&CaseNumber=1203768
Lawsuit on Craze containing amphetamine dropped in the US but is still banned in Australia not sure whether it will be listed because of this or not...
http: // public-access. riverside. courts. ca. gov/OpenAccess/Civil/CivilCaseReport. asp?CourtCode=A&RivInd=RIV&CaseType=RIC&CaseNumber=1203768
Lawsuit on Craze containing amphetamine dropped in the US but is still banned in Australia not sure whether it will be listed because of this or not...
LMR01
New member
Ive got a link saying the charges were dropped as it was retested and found nothing but can't post it because i haven't posted 150 times.
My fault for taking a three year break from here
put a space in the link somewhere
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
No, the claimed it was n-alpha-DIETHYLlbenzeneethanamine
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
Ive got a link saying the charges were dropped as it was retested and found nothing but can't post it because i haven't posted 150 times.
My fault for taking a three year break from here
that lawsuit has nothing to do with what this thread is about
VaughnTrue
Well-known member
i must have mis-heard him then. My mistake.
edit: i googled that exact term and didn't get a single hit.
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
i will be blogging about the whole thing
yeah google doesnt like the term but the term is there. for instance its here
The decision of the Leagues Anti-Doping Tribunal to impose a two-year sporting ban on Invalid Link Removed Troy Errington for the presence of prohibited substances has been acknowledged by the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA).The substances 1-Phenylbutan-2-amine and N,alpha-diethyl-benzeneethanamine were detected in a sample ASADA collected in-competition from Mr Errington at a Sydney Shield match on 28 July 2012. The ban imposed on the Sydney Shield rugby league player by the Leagues Anti-Doping Tribunal was backdated to commence on the date of his provisional suspension. This means that Errington is ineligible to participate as an athlete or support person, in any sport that has adopted a World Anti-Doping Agency (Invalid Link Removed) compliant anti-doping policy until 25 August 2014.Despite the fact that 1-Phenylbutan-2-amine and N,alpha-diethyl-benzeneethanamine are not specifically named on WADA’s 2012 Prohibited List, they have similar chemical and biological effects of amphetamines and therefore classed as Category 6b stimulants on the List and are prohibited in competition. Stimulants generally act directly on the central nervous system for speeding up parts of the brain and body besides reduce fatigue and increasing alertness in athletes.In another development, rugby league player Terry Bridge has received a four-year anti-doping suspension from UK Anti-Doping after he was found guilty of multiple anti-doping offenses having been sentenced to ten months in prison for the possession of steroids in November 2011. He is banned from participation in sport from 6 February 2012 until 5 February 2016.
VaughnTrue
Well-known member
very interesting
Afi140
Legend
Not being slanderous on bb. Just want people to be aware Vaughn. Iforce does things the right way and obviously other companies do not. Which is why the thread already got deleted on bb. Oh well. We will just let it unfold
VaughnTrue
Well-known member
i was referring to your posts in the other thread here at AM.
Afi140
Legend
like i said... If I have been ingesting these types of chemicals without knowing... that's where my problem lies. If craze was completely legit and everything was on the label then cool. This has been going on too long and it's things like this that ruin the industry. I guess we will just let it continue to unfold.
southpaw23
Well-known member
Besides the one mythical youtube video, is there any other proof that it contains this analogue?
Afi140
Legend
Not sure. However, I believe a renowned chemist was able to find analogues based on certain batch numbers but this is all alleged of course.
southpaw23
Well-known member
And where is that proof? Can you be so kind as to point me to it?
southpaw23
Well-known member
around here possibly... Invalid Link Removed
along with many first hand accounts of the differences...not being "slanderous" of course :blindfold: all of these personal accounts must be in their head.
actually pg 58 is better
Thanks.
But that's not exactly proof one way or the other. Craze may in fact contain this analogue, who knows, but so far here is all the evidence that has been unearthed...a youtube video, personal opinions about things feeling different (not exactly scientific, as I also have old tubs and newer tubs and can't tell/feel the difference). Is there anything out there (evidence) showing that this analogue is in the product?
Afi140
Legend
Possibly what they found in Australia? I believe there has been a good amount of evidence suppression. As indicated by deleted threads and lawsuit threats. My own personal experience, 100+ pages of first hand accounts of users who notice a Drastic difference, (from people with no vested interest whatsoever, just fitness enthusiasts) The convenience of "counterfeits" and label changes, accompanies by the owner/formulators shady past has led me and others to come to the conclusion that there was a tainted product. I have a masters so I am all for evidence and research trust me. However, Oj got off.... But we all know the truth to each is own! This is too much of a headache for me lol. I just hateeee dishonest people, especially when it effects my own health. I'll just sit back as a spectator now
to each is own! This is too much of a headache for me lol. I just hateeee dishonest people, especially when it effects my own health. I'll just sit back as a spectator now
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
Invalid Link Removed
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
An actual document from aussies would be helpful
Afi140
Legend
That's why I love PA
southpaw23
Well-known member
Documentation of any sort would be helpful. I'm not dismissing the charge one way or the other. I get that this product is and has been under suspicion/scrutiny for some time, frankly because it's head and shoulders above anything else out there (with the exception of Enhance). It's been tested, retested, gone through lawsuits (eventually dismissed) and yet still not one single mention of this analogue until a youtube video suddenly pops up. Besides this mythical youtube video, what other evidence is available?
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
Invalid Link Removed
southpaw23
Well-known member
So many legitimate questions being raised. Proof...I guess we'll have to wait on that one.
southpaw23
Well-known member
This is just my opinion as a consumer, someone who has purchased the product since its release, firstly, if there is in fact something illicit in the product, it should be banned immediately and those that profited from it should be punished appropriately. However, this thing has been an ongoing soap opera for months now. What some call "evidence" is basically suspicions, accusations and a handful of guys who love being embroiled in the drama of it all, so they post about this on every forum they can find. You have guys like R.Kramer who seemingly has it out for Cahill, also some others intent on beating this thing into the ground because well let's face it, it's the best preworkout to come along in years, it works, period.
Now before someone jumps down my throat, I'm not defending DS, Cahill or anyone else, if the product is indeed spiked with this analogue then as I've stated before, they should face the appropriate sanctions/punishments. But how is this thing allowed to go on for months, when the product was tested multiple times (nothing found...suspicions still remained), lawsuits dismissed with zero evidence turned over suggesting that anything illicit was found in the product. And now we have the smoking gun... a youtube video. Crikes.
Now before someone jumps down my throat, I'm not defending DS, Cahill or anyone else, if the product is indeed spiked with this analogue then as I've stated before, they should face the appropriate sanctions/punishments. But how is this thing allowed to go on for months, when the product was tested multiple times (nothing found...suspicions still remained), lawsuits dismissed with zero evidence turned over suggesting that anything illicit was found in the product. And now we have the smoking gun... a youtube video. Crikes.
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
What then on the label do you honestly think is causing the effects people are getting?
I dont think anyone that really knew what to look for has tested this product (at least who would talk about it) until the aussie feds. It is a lot harder than you think to decipher all this, and the fact that the culprit compound (may have) appeared to people to be something expected on the label makes it kinda easy to accidentally skip over
When you really think about it, its not so implausible
And do you really care one way or another if its true? You know you love the product either way. Do you feel injured? if not than why care?
southpaw23
Well-known member
I'm not a chemist or product formulator, I'll defer to more capable minds in that area. However, here is what I know, not one ounce of evidence has been presented yet to suggest that the product does in fact contain this analogue. Yes I know...a youtube video, case closed I guess.
Yes I enjoy the product, however, note that if something illicit is found in the product then I believe DS should be held accountable and I'd no longer use the product. Fair approach no? All I'm saying is this, where is the evidence to suggest that it contains the analogue discussed here apart from the factual treasure trove of information known as the mythical youtube? If there is evidence, cool, present it and Craze is out of here. I'm okay with that, even as someone who highly enjoys using the product. My point remains the same, this story has already been spun for months...where's the smoking gun?
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
It is pretty much beyond the shadow of a doubt that craze has been banned from australia because all australia retailers and distributors are talking about it. the question is why was it banned? These people say they were told because it has an amphetamine analog. What does that mean? Suggestions are starting to arise that it is the compound I mentioned. NO there is no documentation but I am confident there will be something soon.
so just be patient, this will play out in due time i am sure
southpaw23
Well-known member
Lol. I'm not emailing anyone. I live in the US, there are different product formulations for other markets outside of the US, based on their restrictions. That is hardly proof of anything. You're asking me to look at a youtube video, then to email "whoever" in Australia. This product has been on the market for well over a year now in the US. I'll wait until valid documentation is presented to make a judgment, or see if Mel Gibson emails me back.
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
In my perspective, it has just started to really play out. What transpired the last few months was piddly BS
southpaw23
Well-known member
Fair enough, we shall see and if you're right you deserve credit for it. But if you're wrong and this is all for not, AGAIN, then I highly doubt you'll be criticized for it.
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
i am trying not to make any definitive statements so if this is all wrong i cant be accused of lying or misrepresentation
southpaw23
Well-known member
On a side note, just got me thinking, this analogue was just recently discovered correct? According to google searches, I see mentions of the Australian ban going back as far as January,February. We're now into April and this is coming up now, almost two months later. Now people have claimed that the newer formula differs from the original, essentially it's weaker. So did the Aussies test the newer (supposedly weaker version), or the original version that some people are claiming is stronger? If DS did tweak the formula to remove anything questionable, then they (Aussies) must have either tested the old version or the counterfeits. I mean it would be pretty stupid of DS, with the level of scrutiny this product receives, to reformulate and still include the analogue. Doesn't make sense.
Patrick Arnold
Featured Author
as you know i cant really discuss the testing i did. if i could though it would be helpful to the conversation
stuff will play out. i know its bizarre
blackjackcat
Member
I was thinking the same thing. People claim the new batches are weaker, yet I assume the new ones were tested and it would be pretty stupid of DS to continue to spike(which I don't really know if they did because I feel no difference from the new or OG) Craze under that scrutiny.