Article: FDA Rules DMAA Non-Natural

Whatever!
 
"to protect consumers when the agency believes a product regulated under its jurisdiction is unsafe."

HA!! They claim 60 deaths related to DMAA and want to ban it while they let the big pharmaceutical companies keep pumping out drugs that have in their disclaimer that it might kill you! Talk about the tail wagging the dog! It's all in how much the FDA crooks can shove in their pockets!
 
I have to agree with lukehayd on that one. What about banning all drugs that might cause you a heart attack, give you thoughts of suicide, potentially give you the runs, cause you to sleepwalks and hallucinate! Seriously!!!!:rasp:
 
There are 500 deaths a year from tylenol...who gives a **** about DMAA and thanks for taking away the choice from the consumer. Time to stock up and sell it at twice the price in a year
 
bushyman said:
I have to agree with lukehayd on that one. What about banning all drugs that might cause you a heart attack, give you thoughts of suicide, potentially give you the runs, cause you to sleepwalks and hallucinate! Seriously!!!!:rasp:
Click to expand...

Not to mention all of the people who are facing issues with substance abuse because they were given opiate based painkillers BY THEIR DR!
 
lukehayd said:
"to protect consumers when the agency believes a product regulated under its jurisdiction is unsafe."

HA!! They claim 60 deaths related to DMAA and want to ban it while they let the big pharmaceutical companies keep pumping out drugs that have in their disclaimer that it might kill you! Talk about the tail wagging the dog! It's all in how much the FDA crooks can shove in their pockets!
Click to expand...

Preach on brotha!
 
bushyman said:
I have to agree with lukehayd on that one. What about banning all drugs that might cause you a heart attack, give you thoughts of suicide, potentially give you the runs, cause you to sleepwalks and hallucinate! Seriously!!!!:rasp:
Click to expand...

the difference is the drugs have been licenced and with any drug comes an information sheet enclosed It acknowledges thatsome drugs produce side effects which are listed-most common side effects listed first.If you suffer from any side effect you are advised to stop taking it and see your doctor
With DMAA its not been extensively tested on humans to my knowledge so the side effects are not known until they happen to a consumer.

its unfortunate that a ruling like this gets people backs up and start shouting what about this drug, that drug etc We have a population that smokes tobacco and drinks alcohol and we know the damage that they can do , but they are sold and consumed having been passed by the govt and thats the fundamental difference -DMAA hasnt.
 
corsaking said:
the difference is the drugs have been licenced and with any drug comes an information sheet enclosed It acknowledges thatsome drugs produce side effects which are listed-most common side effects listed first.If you suffer from any side effect you are advised to stop taking it and see your doctor
With DMAA its not been extensively tested on humans to my knowledge so the side effects are not known until they happen to a consumer.

its unfortunate that a ruling like this gets people backs up and start shouting what about this drug, that drug etc We have a population that smokes tobacco and drinks alcohol and we know the damage that they can do , but they are sold and consumed having been passed by the govt and thats the fundamental difference -DMAA hasnt.
Click to expand...

I see what you are saying and understand. But taking into consideration your statement, why not then have warning labels on supp products and let the consumer decide? Alcohol is sold and causes much more deaths than supplements and more soldiers die by committing suicide more than in actual combat. Root causes are never addressed. So then... where is the logic in banning DMAA?
 
bushyman said:
I see what you are saying and understand. But taking into consideration your statement, why not then have warning labels on supp products and let the consumer decide? Alcohol is sold and causes much more deaths than supplements and more soldiers die by committing suicide more than in actual combat. Root causes are never addressed. So then... where is the logic in banning DMAA?
Click to expand...

if they feel they need to ban DMAA, then they should also ban all cookies and sweets because they can cause diabetes...
 
...just dont ban sex cause it cause aids or blisters on your dick...


thats all i care about..they can take away my stims but dont take away my poon!
 
This is gonna cause more people to just purchase bulk DMAA and put themselves at a high risk of overdosing and hurting themselves. Bulk DMAA is a hell of a lot worse since most people take too much and can't properly dose it.
 
There are so many "legal" drugs that have far worse effects on people than DMAA could ever dream about. That hogwash from the poster who said it hasn't gone through the FDA obviously doesn't know how the FDA works. It's basically a giant pay off scheme to get product legalized. Why do you think things like MSG and aspartame and opiates are still legal? Big Pharma and Big Food spend a lot of their profitgs making sure that they stay that way. Big Pharma manipulates their studies so they can pass their product. Eli Lily got in trouble for this a few years back only because it was painfully obvious. Even dangerous drugs don't get pulled unless there is a SEVERE outcry. Or better yet, a couple of doctors looking to clear their conscience from peddling their wares look to have it banned. A lot of people are almost more screwed up GOING to the "trusted" doctor. I am personally not the biggest DMAA fan, I just think it sets a bad precedent. At the same time, some of the lowly and unscrupulous supplement companies need to stop f*cking it up for the rest of us and putting drugs and who knows what else in their products.
 
Eye opening and shocking that its 2013 and the FDA is just challenging Supplement powerhouses, USP still makes great products and if used correctly negative side effects are very hit and miss.
 
TheMovement said:
Eye opening and shocking that its 2013 and the FDA is just challenging Supplement powerhouses, USP still makes great products and if used correctly negative side effects are very hit and miss.
Click to expand...

exactly
 
iparatroop said:
If there were DMAA in cigarettes, no one would give a damn.
Click to expand...

I'm upset my bath salts were contaminated DMAA. Its appetite suppression made me eat less faces. Plus, it's stim-dick properties made my goods look smaller while I was running around naked.
 
swim15 said:
There are 500 deaths a year from tylenol...who gives a **** about DMAA and thanks for taking away the choice from the consumer. Time to stock up and sell it at twice the price in a year
Click to expand...

Precisely. I used DMAA once and it made me feel like absolute horse szit. Therefore, I do think it's a dangerous supp. However, if they are going to ban it they may as well ban cigarettes and alcohol while they are at it. I mean the death toll on those has to make DMAA look like candy. Banning DMAA is an idiotic decision by people who really don't care about anything but money and government power.
 
rockme said:
Precisely. I used DMAA once and it made me feel like absolute horse szit. Therefore, I do think it's a dangerous supp. However, if they are going to ban it they may as well ban cigarettes and alcohol while they are at it. I mean the death toll on those has to make DMAA look like candy. Banning DMAA is an idiotic decision by people who really don't care about anything but money and government power.
Click to expand...
i still think many are missing the point -its no good quoting products such as cigarettes , alcohol etc in the same context because whether they have health problems associated with them or not , they have been approved by respective governments as suitable for human consumption , DMAA hasnt , simple as that.
 
bushyman said:
I see what you are saying and understand. But taking into consideration your statement, why not then have warning labels on supp products and let the consumer decide? Alcohol is sold and causes much more deaths than supplements and more soldiers die by committing suicide more than in actual combat. Root causes are never addressed. So then... where is the logic in banning DMAA?
Click to expand...

Because very few people will buy most any supplement on their own if it says "may cause death". The only reason why I may take any prescription med that says "may cause, death" is because I have had too, not by personal choice. If I have a free willing choice to take Jack3d, for example only, and it states "may cause excessive heart beats and heart attacks" then I probably am not going to buy it...
 
rockme said:
Precisely. I used DMAA once and it made me feel like absolute horse szit. Therefore, I do think it's a dangerous supp. However, if they are going to ban it they may as well ban cigarettes and alcohol while they are at it. I mean the death toll on those has to make DMAA look like candy. Banning DMAA is an idiotic decision by people who really don't care about anything but money and government power.
Click to expand...

Cigs and Alcohol have warning labels, Cigs are known to cause lung cancer and death, Alcohol is known to be the cause of deaths and it is readily accepted by the public. DMAA and just about every single supplement in existing isn't readily used by the MAJORITY of the public. Believe it or not, supplement use is in the minority even though it is a multi billion dollar industry it still pales in comparison to medicines, cigs, and alcohol.

Few people are defending supplements (100 million) where as 5 billion are defending Cigs and Alcohol, for instance.

I'm not advocating that DMAA causes death, I am just pointing out the facts.
 
corsaking said:
the difference is the drugs have been licenced and with any drug comes an information sheet enclosed It acknowledges thatsome drugs produce side effects which are listed-most common side effects listed first.If you suffer from any side effect you are advised to stop taking it and see your doctor
With DMAA its not been extensively tested on humans to my knowledge so the side effects are not known until they happen to a consumer.

its unfortunate that a ruling like this gets people backs up and start shouting what about this drug, that drug etc We have a population that smokes tobacco and drinks alcohol and we know the damage that they can do , but they are sold and consumed having been passed by the govt and thats the fundamental difference -DMAA hasnt.
Click to expand...

Which is why it is a shame. Our regulatory system is built around exceptions and hypocrisy. You could take your statement a step further regarding the tobacco industry and research how much revenue the government takes in taxes from the sale of tobacco. It's no wonder they "dont go there".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top