If you could only take 1 natty anabolic substance, what would it be?

zSplit said:
I'm sorry you felt I was bashing you. That was not my intention.

Nonetheless, you're stating an argument that I'm not really trying to make. I'm not saying their product is soy free, I'm just saying there is a difference in potential quantity between what's present through cross-contamination vs. adding an ingredient on-top of something deliberately.

For example, if I order a product that is manufactured in the same facility as one that produces fish oil, are you saying there is no difference between the quantity in an actual fish oil cap vs. one that simply contains cross-contamination because they're produced in the same facility? Of course there is, otherwise, I may as well stop taking fish oil then, because a lot of manufacturers for supplements say "may contain fish and soy."

Now, specific in this instance, could they be dishonest and not forthcoming? Of course. But, there still is a difference in quantity between cross-contamination and actually adding an ingredient on-top of contaminations.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you say in another thread that you're not from the US?

My point is that you're trying to argue with me over US labeling laws - when I've worked in this industry for 20 years and we are an FDA registered cGMP company that follows all FDA labeling guidelines for allergens, and has a compliance attorney that handles the verbiage like that.

Plus, you're arguing about soy labeling with someone that has a life threatening anaphylactic allergy to soy protein.

I have the non-celiac autoimmune allergy to gluten and a life threatening anaphylactic allergy to soy protein - and I volunteer time speaking on the subject of allergens to support groups on this subject and have for over 15 years. I also am friends with and attend conventions with one of the top allergists on the East Coast, and I try to use my own misfortune and the things that I've learned from it to help others.

One very specific topic I teach on is the difference between soy allergens - in that a person can be be extremely allergic to soy protein, but not have an allergic response at all to soy lecithin, soybean oil, etc. because of the lack of the protein itself in those. It's a very specific and in depth topic, but one that can be life threatening for many of us.

It's not my intention to change your preferences - but I'm not going to be told that I don't know about labeling laws here when my job requires that I do, and especially not on a topic that I've taught on for over 15 years.
 
sns8778 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you say in another thread that you're not from the US?

My point is that you're trying to argue with me over US labeling laws - when I've worked in this industry for 20 years and we are an FDA registered cGMP company that follows all FDA labeling guidelines for allergens, and has a compliance attorney that handles the verbiage like that.

Plus, you're arguing about soy labeling with someone that has a life threatening anaphylactic allergy to soy protein.

I have the non-celiac autoimmune allergy to gluten and a life threatening anaphylactic allergy to soy protein - and I volunteer time speaking on the subject of allergens to support groups on this subject and have for over 15 years. I also am friends with and attend conventions with one of the top allergists on the East Coast, and I try to use my own misfortune and the things that I've learned from it to help others.

One very specific topic I teach on is the difference between soy allergens - in that a person can be be extremely allergic to soy protein, but not have an allergic response at all to soy lecithin, soybean oil, etc. because of the lack of the protein itself in those. It's a very specific and in depth topic, but one that can be life threatening for many of us.

It's not my intention to change your preferences - but I'm not going to be told that I don't know about labeling laws here when my job requires that I do, and especially not on a topic that I've taught on for over 15 years.
Click to expand...
I knew this was going here, where somehow this would turn into me "apparently" questioning your intelligence on labelling laws and what cross-contamination means for people serious health issues or responses to certain ingredients.

This conversation has completely diverted. Oh well.

All I was doing is responding based on what MN told me, and if they told me different, I was willing to retract the statement entirely.

If someone else asked them the same question, and received a response, they would've acted exactly the same as I did, and choose to make the decision probably based on their response. I really don't understand your point. You're making arguments that I'm not making.
 
zSplit said:
I heard you. But, there is no difference in believing them talking about their own product, or if I take you at your word for defending the use of Titanium Dioxide.

The consumers job is not to know the legality of labelling. It's their job to do their due diligence and ask the company questions, research ingredients, and at the end of the day, it comes down to personal preference.

If a company is lying, that's really an impossible task and ask to expect the consumer to figure that out for every company they purchase from.
Click to expand...

Seriously man - this is beyond ridiculous.

You're right - its not the consumers job to know the legality of the labeling - but yet here you are arguing with me over it when I explained it to you.

I explained to you very clearly that that by FDA guidelines, you can say soybean oil or you can say glycerin, and then state that the product contains soy and that its the same thing.

You're the one that posted something negative about our product for containing soy when the one that you posted promoting plain as day states that it contains soy - and I explained that its just two ways of saying the same thing.

The key word in a cross contamination word is - may or processed in a facility that does.

Contains is a statement of fact.

Again, for like the 5th time - I never said they were lying - they state plain as day that their product contains soy right on the label.

The only difference is that we label it transparently that it is soybean oil, where they just say contains soy and it may be confusing to some people where the soy comes from in it.
 
sns8778 said:
Seriously man - this is beyond ridiculous.

You're right - its not the consumers job to know the legality of the labeling - but yet here you are arguing with me over it when I explained it to you.

I explained to you very clearly that that by FDA guidelines, you can say soybean oil or you can say glycerin, and then state that the product contains soy and that its the same thing.

You're the one that posted something negative about our product for containing soy when the one that you posted promoting plain as day states that it contains soy - and I explained that its just two ways of saying the same thing.

The key word in a cross contamination word is - may or processed in a facility that does.

Contains is a statement of fact.

Again, for like the 5th time - I never said they were lying - they state plain as day that their product contains soy right on the label.

The only difference is that we label it transparently that it is soybean oil, where they just say contains soy and it may be confusing to some people where the soy comes from in it.
Click to expand...
Steve, I'm literally agreeing with you, lol. You're arguing with me as if I'm defending MN's potential dishonesty. I said I would be equally impacted from their dishonesty, and now I won't be purchasing their ArA again because of your explanation of US labelling laws.
 
zSplit said:
Well to be fair, I said it doesn't contain added soybean oil, not that it doesn't contain soy. I'm fully aware of cross-contaminations. Again, in my argument, if they are truthful, there is a difference. However, if they're lying to me, and their glycerin is from soy, that's a different story. But, again, based on what I said, and what I was told, it's pretty rich to say I was spreading false information. That's implying they told me it's from soy, and I came on here saying it doesn't.

So, in reality, your anger should be towards MN for being dishonest - not me. Because, I would be equally affected because I was tricked as well then.
Click to expand...

MN clearly states plain as day on their label that their product contains soy. You're the one that came on here and posted that ours contains soybean oil and theirs doesn't.

I explained to you, literally copied and pasted you the labeling guideline showing you that a company can say soybean oil like ours, or they can say glycerin, like MN's and then say 'Contains: Soy' and they are the same thing.
 
EpiStrong said:
So sns is soyboy free.. you all that are into the soyboys might want to reconsider
Click to expand...

Ha. No, both products contain soybean oil as the emulsifier in the softgel.

I was trying to explain the label semantics to him that a company can say soybean oil, or say glycerin (contains: soy) and it means the same thing.
 
sns8778 said:
MN clearly states plain as day on their label that their product contains soy. You're the one that came on here and posted that ours contains soybean oil and theirs doesn't.

I explained to you, literally copied and pasted you the labeling guideline showing you that a company can say soybean oil like ours, or they can say glycerin, like MN's and then say 'Contains: Soy' and they are the same thing.
Click to expand...
Ok. Thanks for letting me know. I just think you're responding to me as an owner of a supplement company, and not in the eyes of a consumer. If you're a consumer, you won't know labelling laws of every country. There's intricacies, and many tricks companies can do, as you know, from country to country - all across the food and supplement industry. As a consumer, you'll ask your questions to the company itself, as I did. I got lied to by the company. Oh well. Sometimes that happens. Now I know. Have a great evening.
 
zSplit said:
I knew this was going here, where somehow this would turn into me "apparently" questioning your intelligence on labelling laws and what cross-contamination means for people serious health issues or responses to certain ingredients.

This conversation has completely diverted. Oh well.

All I was doing is responding based on what MN told me, and if they told me different, I was willing to retract the statement entirely.

If someone else asked them the same question, and received a response, they would've acted exactly the same as I did, and choose to make the decision probably based on their response. I really don't understand your point. You're making arguments that I'm not making.
Click to expand...

You are the one that posted false information. I had went into great detail in this thread to be helpful, but you posted something false and misleading that led the person to going with something by a different company.

MN didn't post the false information - you posted the false information.

MN says plain as day on their label their product contains soy; but the poster listened to you and what you posted.

At first, I took the approach of trying to explain to you nicely that labeling guidelines allow for a company to label soybean oil as 'soybean oil' or glycerin and then declare 'Contains: Soy' and that the terms are both legal and interchangeable.

Instead of just learning something, you tried to argue with me over it.

You keep going back to the question that you say you asked them - it literally says it on their label plain as day that it contains soy.

It doesn't say may contain soy, it says contains soy.

Contains: ____ is a statement of fact.
May Contain: ______ is a statement of caution.
 
zSplit said:
Ok. Thanks for letting me know. I just think you're responding to me as an owner of a supplement company, and not in the eyes of a consumer. If you're a consumer, you won't know labelling laws of every country. There's intricacies, and many tricks companies can do, as you know, from country to country - all across the food and supplement industry. As a consumer, you'll ask your questions to the company itself, as I did. I got lied to by the company. Oh well. Sometimes that happens. Now I know. Have a great evening.
Click to expand...

No, I take a lot of time on here to try to educate people on things like that.

In my very first post to you about it, I explained in great detail to you were I thought the confusion was - because as a consumer, I didn't expect you to know that.

However, most people are thankful when I take the time to explain things like that, but instead, you tried to argue with me about it.

I have a soy protein allergy. I'm not allergic to soy lecithin or soybean oil, but I have a life threatening allergy to soy protein, so my importance of knowing how to read labels and identify it when it isn't clearly listed goes way beyond supplements. That's nothing new, its something I've posted about on here for years - and I try to help people with food allergies on here any way I can because I know how difficult it can be to live with them, and especially when they come on as an adult.
 
To sum up the 'Contains: ______' versus 'May Contain: ______' thing for anyone interested:

Let's use Joint Support XT as an example.

Invalid Link Removed
Look at the part of the panel that is labeled Allergen Information

You will see where it says: Contains ingredients derived from egg.

Contains is a statement of fact. It contains ingredients derived from egg. (NEM Eggshell Membrane)

Then there is a part after that that says: Not manufactured with yeast, wheat, gluten, soy, fish, shellfish, or tree nut ingredients. Produced in a GMP facility that may process other ingredients containing these allergens.

May is a statement of caution. It is telling those of us with allergies that it does not contain those ingredients, but it is made in the same facility that may process other ingredients containing those allergens.
 
sns8778 said:
No, I take a lot of time on here to try to educate people on things like that.

In my very first post to you about it, I explained in great detail to you were I thought the confusion was - because as a consumer, I didn't expect you to know that.

However, most people are thankful when I take the time to explain things like that, but instead, you tried to argue with me about it.

I have a soy protein allergy. I'm not allergic to soy lecithin or soybean oil, but I have a life threatening allergy to soy protein, so my importance of knowing how to read labels and identify it when it isn't clearly listed goes way beyond supplements. That's nothing new, its something I've posted about on here for years - and I try to help people with food allergies on here any way I can because I know how difficult it can be to live with them, and especially when they come on as an adult.
Click to expand...
Nah. You misunderstood my tone in all of my messages. You're blaming me for their response because it's easy. If a company lies, that impacts me too. You're acting like I'm the CEO of MN, and knowingly advertising as soy-free when it isn't. Sorry, but your responses are unjust.

My reasoning is very sound, based on the information the company provided me. Guess what another consumer would've done? They would've reached out to the company too if they weren't 100% sure on an ingredient, or anything about the company itself.

Do you want the screenshot where they clearly say it's only produced in a facility that manages soy, which therefore supports my original argument and reasoning? I gave them the option to state whether it contains soybean oil or not. Or, it might just be easier to say I'm spreading deliberate misinformation, I guess.
 
Last edited:
Does Arimistane count? I just started at 50mg 2X and it's BLOWING me AWAY. Like Superdrol workouts but I feel great?

Turkesterone a couple yrs ago but it left me feeling blah. Easily the best herbal. Easily. I'm trying again with MA Turk 750 after Arimistane.
 
zSplit said:
Nah. You misunderstood my tone in all of my messages. I already thanked you for the clarification, and now you made it clear they lied to me. I'm not sure what you're looking for. You're blaming me for their response because it's easy. If a company lies, that impacts me too. You're acting like I'm the CEO of MN, and knowingly advertising as soy-free when it isn't. Sorry, but your responses are unjust.

Do you want the screenshot where they clearly say it's only produced in a facility that manages soy? I gave them to option if it contains soybean oil.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying they intentionally lied to you. That's the irony in all of this is that I don't dislike MN at all. I've known people there for years and have always had a good relationship with them.

Truth in labeling is just that - in labeling. And their labels are being truthful within the sense of the law, even if you don't understand them.

^^^ And I don't mean that in a bad way - I realize that a lot of people wouldn't, which is why I explained very nicely at first that soybean oil and glycerin (contains: soy) are interchangeable by labeling laws. There's nothing not legal about the way they label it; we just go with the more transparent way of saying soybean oil.

Which is why I pointed out to you that this is one of those ironic cases of you viewing us negatively for saying soybean oil, but it really being that we say it transparently bc we want people to know. We could have easily said glycerin and then put (contains: soy) on the label too and then you would have not known it had it in there. We just prefer to be transparent.

MN isn't advertising that it is soy free - they state it clearly on the label that it contains soy. When you first said it didn't, that's why I posted the screenshot and showed you then that theirs contains it to. Then when you tried to say that you were talking about soybean oil, not soy - I explained to you that I was too and explained to you how it could be labeled different ways.

The label already told you it contained soy. I don't think their customer service person intentionally mislead you, I think they likely didn't know that glycerin (contains: soy) could be used interchangeably with soybean oil on a label. They probably looked at the ingredients and other ingredients and didn't clearly see soy anywhere, so they assumed it was a cross contamination warning. That's where I explained to you the difference in what 'Contains' and 'May contain' is by law.

When anyone contacts a company, its important to realize that customer service representatives normal job roles are to handle order related questions and issues and that they generally will not know all the details of the products in terms of specs, allergens, etc. That's not a knock at MN or any company - I can guarantee you that my office manager nor customer service staff knows that, and its not their job to. Their job is to take your order, give you tracking, help you with order related issues, do invoices, etc.

This whole thing started with you making a false statement that ours had soybean oil in it and theirs didn't. When I posted a screen shot to you that theirs says it contains soy and how the terms soybean oil and glycerin (contains: soy) could be used interchangeably, this should have stopped there.

Stuff like this is why most all company owners have stopped posting here - I work 70+ hours a week and I try to come on here to help people in any way that I can. But this has taken hours out of a very busy day for me to have to try to defend one of our products against a false statement on, when in hindsight I should have just clicked the report button and been done with it.
 
paulg said:
Does Arimistane count? I just started at 50mg 2X and it's BLOWING me AWAY. Like Superdrol workouts but I feel great?

Turkesterone a couple yrs ago but it left me feeling blah. Easily the best herbal. Easily. I'm trying again with MA Turk 750 after Arimistane.
Click to expand...

Eradicate-E is a great product. That's one of those ingredients where some people may consider it natural, but then some may not because it is banned by a lot of athletic organizations.

I think you'll like Turkesterone-750. I've never heard anyone say it made them feel blah - most people really like it. Most everyone likes it and most do well on it, and then there definitely seem to be some hyper responders to it.
 
paulg said:
Does Arimistane count? I just started at 50mg 2X and it's BLOWING me AWAY. Like Superdrol workouts but I feel great?

Turkesterone a couple yrs ago but it left me feeling blah. Easily the best herbal. Easily. I'm trying again with MA Turk 750 after Arimistane.
Click to expand...

50mg 2x is a high dose. Surprised your joints are doing OK.
 
BigGame84 said:
50mg 2x is a high dose. Surprised your joints are doing OK.
Click to expand...

We don't see 50 mg. x 2 much, but we see 25 mg. 3x per day a lot and very rarely hear anyone having any issues with joints.

It's one of those ingredients that works good for most people, but fantastic for some people - I've learned that over the years from feedback we're received on the Muscle Addiction Eradicate-E.
 
sns8778 said:
We don't see 50 mg. x 2 much, but we see 25 mg. 3x per day a lot and very rarely hear anyone having any issues with joints.

It's one of those ingredients that works good for most people, but fantastic for some people - I've learned that over the years from feedback we're received on the Muscle Addiction Eradicate-E.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm the fantastic guy. Strength gains that are frankly reminiscent of the original phs. Immediately fuller muscles. And I feel wonderful. I mean, if you lower E and cortisol and raise T (I said IF) then how can there not be results.

Yes, my Turk is teasing me in the cabinet but I'm literally the only person who doesn't try eight things at once.
Heck, I almost pulled the trigger on Genostim and also HTP Pro IGF-1. But I fought the urge.
 
Back to topic, right now I am pretty amazed by Peptistrong. Peptiplex being the best formula imo. I am only on trt and 6 caps a day of Peptistrong is quite effective at gaining muscle. I'm still losing fat but clothes are getting tighter. I keep thinking whether or not 8 caps would be worth trying. 4 was great, 6 is much better.

I may like it more than Recomp20 now. I was not expecting the AI fava bean discovery to be this impressive.

I still have to run PA XT in the summer to see how that is, but for natty options Recomp20 and Peptiplex are my votes.
 
Foxx13 said:
So what’s the verdict on the soybean squabble??
Click to expand...

There's no squabble - facts are facts.

Cliff notes:
  • Person posted a lie saying that X-Gels contains soybean oil and X-Factor doesn't.
    • Not saying he intentionally lied, as I believe he truly didn't understand the labeling laws.
    • It got out of hand though that after explaining them to him, he kept trying to argue about them - labeling laws are laws, not opinion.
  • Both products contain soybean oil as an emulsifier, just labeled different.
  • I posted a screen shot for him to see that their label clearly says 'Contains: Soy'
  • I nicely explained the way they were labeled to him, because it can be confusing to the average consumer.
    • We take the non-confusing way with X-Gels and just say soybean oil - being transparent.
    • Soybean oil can be labeled as glycerin as long as the label states 'Contains: soy' which is the way MN labels theirs.
      • ^^^ 90%+ of all softgels have soybean oil as an emulsifier in them and it can be labeled legally either way
  • He tried to argue that theirs didn't contain soy even though the label literally has in bold letters - 'Contains: Soy'
    • He tried to say that it was a cross contamination warning.
    • I explained to him that no, the labeling laws are clear on that:
      • Contains: - means it does contain and is a statement of fact (legally)
      • May Contain - means it may contain and is a statement of caution (legally)
        • I did a breakdown in a post for anyone interested in learning about this using one of our own products as an example.
  • He tried to blame MN and saying my issue should be with them, not his post - which was baffling as he is the one that posted theirs didn't contain it; they didn't post it and acknowledge in on their labels clearly, much to their credit - and I actually like MN.
  • Issue became more baffling as the person trying to argue with me about US labeling laws isn't even in the US. I know the labeling laws because I've worked in the industry for 20 years, have an allergy to the ingredient myself, and we have a compliance attorney that reviews labels and dictates how we present allergen information.
    • Which I explained to him - and said several times that as a consumer, especially one that doesn't live in the US, I didn't expect him to know all of that and didn't mind explaining it, but it was pretty ridiculous to try to argue about it.

The irony is that soybean oil is in 90%+ of softgels anyway and is even safe for people with a soy protein allergy (like me).

It's further ironic that the amount of ARA oil is 625 mg. per softgel, so mathematically there is only minute amounts of it in either product. It is only used in either as an emulsifier.

The whole thing was ridiculous bc it went around the world just to say what I said in the beginning - both products use soybean oil as an emulsifier, just like the majority of other softgels do.

I hope that helps sum it up and we can all move past that topic.
 
Resolve10 said:
Honestly you serious? Just read it seems pretty obvious.

Idk why this was even an issue, probably one of the dumbest things to be worried about that I’ve seen on here. Feel people go out of their way to find things to worry about on here I swear.
Click to expand...

I could even understand how it was confusing to the average person (if they cared at all), but I couldn't understand why he kept trying to argue with me after I nicely explained the labeling laws and how it was saying the same thing on both labels, just in a different way and that they both contained it.

It's one of those things where we always choose to use the clearest most transparent way of labeling something to avoid confusion, but its crazy that oftentimes the companies that are the most transparent get nitpicked the most for being.

But yeah, as you've seen me post about for years, I'm anaphylactically allergic to soy protein and even I can consume soybean oil.
 
Danksta710 said:
Back to topic, right now I am pretty amazed by Peptistrong. Peptiplex being the best formula imo. I am only on trt and 6 caps a day of Peptistrong is quite effective at gaining muscle. I'm still losing fat but clothes are getting tighter. I keep thinking whether or not 8 caps would be worth trying. 4 was great, 6 is much better.

I may like it more than Recomp20 now. I was not expecting the AI fava bean discovery to be this impressive.

I still have to run PA XT in the summer to see how that is, but for natty options Recomp20 and Peptiplex are my votes.
Click to expand...

I'm glad that you're enjoying Pepti-Plex. PeptiStrong is a great ingredient and its a very diverse one - and I think the other ingredients in the Pepti-Plex formula support it working extremely well because its a very in depth formula in the different mechanisms of action and how it works.

I love Recomp20 as well, and they make for a great stack.
 
Resolve10 said:
It was one of the most popular ingredients for awhile.

Joint issues are overblown. People absolutely loved it for awhile I had tons of people who used beyond recommended with no issues.

It is something to keep in mind about joints, but it feels like it went from oh maybe don’t overdo it, to suddenly people acted like you couldn’t take 25mg without joints disintegrating. 🙃
Click to expand...

Yeah, its weird how stuff like that happens. You'll see ingredients super popular for years and then one person will mention something and then everyone is paranoid about it.

Cortisol control products were popular for 10+ years and then someone on here mentioned drying out joints and everyone got paranoid about it, but to this day, we have never received one single email from a single customer saying they had it happen.

Examples:
- The most common dose of Eradicate-E is 3 caps per day and I've never received one single email about it drying out joints.
- I've seen people on here worried about taking 3 caps of Reduce XT bc people talk about cortisol and drying the joints, when a huge trend right now is people doubling the dose and taking 6 caps per day and not having any issues. (I know one person having incredible results off 9 caps a day, so good that I'm probably going to try it myself)

I don't blame the people that worry about the issues, I know it can be confusing to read things; I'm just pointing out how crazy it can be how things like that can take off and become a source of worry when they won't be for 99% of people.
 
GQdaLEGEND said:
bullshyt ..i would say no .. maybe doesnt work is a better statement
i know plenty who thought it was but ran it with me and were quite impressed by it.
Click to expand...

I think, IME/IMO, if you could take all the naysayers and magically eliminate all those who used poor quality material, completely bogus material, and underdosed products or they underdosed a quality product we would see the % of people who do not respond to be similar to just about anything that works well for most people. Heck we KNOW a certain percentage of folks get jack from any and all creatines, and that is about as close to a bullet proof supplement you can get.

I'm never surprised when the no-name brand with a label that looks like it was printed off a dot-matrix printer with a thumbnail picture of three bottles none of which show the supp facts and cost 19.99 with free shipping did not deliver "gains better than dbol?" Color me shocked. lol
 
sns8778 said:
Yeah, its weird how stuff like that happens. You'll see ingredients super popular for years and then one person will mention something and then everyone is paranoid about it.

Cortisol control products were popular for 10+ years and then someone on here mentioned drying out joints and everyone got paranoid about it, but to this day, we have never received one single email from a single customer saying they had it happen.

Examples:
- The most common dose of Eradicate-E is 3 caps per day and I've never received one single email about it drying out joints.
- I've seen people on here worried about taking 3 caps of Reduce XT bc people talk about cortisol and drying the joints, when a huge trend right now is people doubling the dose and taking 6 caps per day and not having any issues. (I know one person having incredible results off 9 caps a day, so good that I'm probably going to try it myself)

I don't blame the people that worry about the issues, I know it can be confusing to read things; I'm just pointing out how crazy it can be how things like that can take off and become a source of worry when they won't be for 99% of people.
Click to expand...


I will add to this: Never in all the years of it being available have I had any customers complain about any joint issue/dryness from Eradicate-E.

Heck @Rosie Chee ran it at super high doses with no issues, and actually experienced joint BENEFITS!!!
Invalid Link Removed

"Other Effects: 10/10. The most noticeable effects of Erase - aside from those already mentioned - were on my joints and with water retention prevention . . . Even though I started Erase immediately after finishing Triazole, my joints started getting better (they were not the best - very dry), and also as it got colder and my dose of Erase increased, my joints kept improving considerably re looseness. I noticed the effects on my joints the best at 5 caps (i.e. 125mg of 3,7-keto DHEA) daily, which is interesting, considering that decreasing cortisol generally means negative effects re joints . . . When I started dosing Erase pre-bed, the lack of water retention to the following day got more noticeable, especially since I have the bulk of my carbohydrates and a LOT of carbohydrates in the few hours pre-bed. Do note that I was also using Shred Matrix - although effects were definitely more noticeable when using 5 caps and a pre-bed dose of Erase . . . Strength also increased as I was using Erase - but one of my training focuses was ON gaining strength . . . "
 
Quick question for ya SNS, if one were to empty out the contents of x gels, would amount of capsules need to increase to account for residual left in the softgels? Or would you say it’s negligible
 
john10960 said:
Quick question for ya SNS, if one were to empty out the contents of x gels, would amount of capsules need to increase to account for residual left in the softgels? Or would you say it’s negligible
Click to expand...

That's hard to say with a certainty because it depends on how thoroughly you really tried to squeeze it all out of them.

There would be some loss, but I doubt enough to equal an additional softgel.
 
john10960 said:
Quick question for ya SNS, if one were to empty out the contents of x gels, would amount of capsules need to increase to account for residual left in the softgels? Or would you say it’s negligible
Click to expand...
On a side note, a 23g needle with syringe pulls the liquid out of gel caps fast.
 
sns8778 said:
There's no squabble - facts are facts.

Cliff notes:
  • Person posted a lie saying that X-Gels contains soybean oil and X-Factor doesn't.
    • Not saying he intentionally lied, as I believe he truly didn't understand the labeling laws.
    • It got out of hand though that after explaining them to him, he kept trying to argue about them - labeling laws are laws, not opinion.
  • Both products contain soybean oil as an emulsifier, just labeled different.
  • I posted a screen shot for him to see that their label clearly says 'Contains: Soy'
  • I nicely explained the way they were labeled to him, because it can be confusing to the average consumer.
    • We take the non-confusing way with X-Gels and just say soybean oil - being transparent.
    • Soybean oil can be labeled as glycerin as long as the label states 'Contains: soy' which is the way MN labels theirs.
      • ^^^ 90%+ of all softgels have soybean oil as an emulsifier in them and it can be labeled legally either way
  • He tried to argue that theirs didn't contain soy even though the label literally has in bold letters - 'Contains: Soy'
    • He tried to say that it was a cross contamination warning.
    • I explained to him that no, the labeling laws are clear on that:
      • Contains: - means it does contain and is a statement of fact (legally)
      • May Contain - means it may contain and is a statement of caution (legally)
        • I did a breakdown in a post for anyone interested in learning about this using one of our own products as an example.
  • He tried to blame MN and saying my issue should be with them, not his post - which was baffling as he is the one that posted theirs didn't contain it; they didn't post it and acknowledge in on their labels clearly, much to their credit - and I actually like MN.
  • Issue became more baffling as the person trying to argue with me about US labeling laws isn't even in the US. I know the labeling laws because I've worked in the industry for 20 years, have an allergy to the ingredient myself, and we have a compliance attorney that reviews labels and dictates how we present allergen information.
    • Which I explained to him - and said several times that as a consumer, especially one that doesn't live in the US, I didn't expect him to know all of that and didn't mind explaining it, but it was pretty ridiculous to try to argue about it.
The irony is that soybean oil is in 90%+ of softgels anyway and is even safe for people with a soy protein allergy (like me).

It's further ironic that the amount of ARA oil is 625 mg. per softgel, so mathematically there is only minute amounts of it in either product. It is only used in either as an emulsifier.

The whole thing was ridiculous bc it went around the world just to say what I said in the beginning - both products use soybean oil as an emulsifier, just like the majority of other softgels do.

I hope that helps sum it up and we can all move past that topic.
Click to expand...

This is hilarious. Even your cliff notes are long AF.
 
Foxx13 said:
This is hilarious. Even your cliff notes are long AF.
Click to expand...

Well, to me, the whole reason for posting is to help people and help them understand things.

Is that a bad thing?
Is it bad to actually be thorough for the people that read and post here and really want to learn?

You may not like that I explain myself thoroughly, but a lot of people post and say they appreciate the attention to detail and that I take the time to explain things in a way that people can follow and understand. And a lot of people appreciate learning how to read and understand supplement facts and labels.

I condensed about a page worth of stuff down into a bullet point list that anyone that got lost or confused could easily look through point by point and understand.

I never thought I would see a day when people here got criticized for actually being detailed and trying to help people.
 
sns8778 said:
Well, to me, the whole reason for posting is to help people and help them understand things.

Is that a bad thing?
Is it bad to actually be thorough for the people that read and post here and really want to learn?

You may not like that I explain myself thoroughly, but a lot of people post and say they appreciate the attention to detail and that I take the time to explain things in a way that people can follow and understand. And a lot of people appreciate learning how to read and understand supplement facts and labels.

I condensed about a page worth of stuff down into a bullet point list that anyone that got lost or confused could easily look through point by point and understand.

I never thought I would see a day when people here got criticized for actually being detailed and trying to help people.
Click to expand...

I like how you explain yourself.
Super clear.
 
DaveMcNaul said:
I like how you explain yourself.
Super clear.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

I always try to post in a way that people can understand and learn, whether they're following the thread or whether they see it and read it months or years down the road. I also know that there are many of people that read here but don't post, and I try to post in a way that can help them too.

I love being interactive, discussing ideas, and giving people the types of products that they want from us + helping people learn about new supplements and ingredients. That's a big part of why I like the Tell Us What You Want From Us yearly thread - because of the interaction.

I really enjoy helping people and appreciate the people that are thankful and really want to learn about supplements.

It's gotten very discouraging to post here lately.

Drama, negativity, and bs like has happened in this thread make it very discouraging to even log on some days, and really have me thinking on whether I want to continue to be as active here anymore.
 
Keep on posting for every negative one you get there is the silence majority that like your post
 
Not anabolic, but the single supplement that provides me biggest bang for the buck is Hydromax glycerol. I train longer, less/no fatigue, look comically shredded, reduced wrinkles, and a HUGE surprise I initially wasn’t aware of- helps with my IOP. I am glaucoma suspect (not glaucoma, but monitor eye pressure), and saw a substantial decrease in pressure, then studied and found it is literally used for this reason.
 
sns8778 said:
Thanks.

I always try to post in a way that people can understand and learn, whether they're following the thread or whether they see it and read it months or years down the road. I also know that there are many of people that read here but don't post, and I try to post in a way that can help them too.

I love being interactive, discussing ideas, and giving people the types of products that they want from us + helping people learn about new supplements and ingredients. That's a big part of why I like the Tell Us What You Want From Us yearly thread - because of the interaction.

I really enjoy helping people and appreciate the people that are thankful and really want to learn about supplements.

It's gotten very discouraging to post here lately.

Drama, negativity, and bs like has happened in this thread make it very discouraging to even log on some days, and really have me thinking on whether I want to continue to be as active here anymore.
Click to expand...

The high majority appreciates your thoroughness along with your great products.
 
BigGame84 said:
Will this also have Chebulic Myrobalan which was the other ingredient in Prime?
Click to expand...

the chebulic was supposedly added to give a calming effect. i used something called Primal that was also sourced from the same raws as Prime which didnt have it and it was every bit as good.
 
thescience said:
the chebulic was supposedly added to give a calming effect. i used something called Primal that was also sourced from the same raws as Prime which didnt have it and it was every bit as good.
Click to expand...

Ok, so Precision Research didn't include the chebulic... I didn't know that.
 
Foxx13 said:
So what’s the verdict on the soybean squabble??
Click to expand...
Here is my takeaway.

Some people make truthful, definitive, thorough and complete statements using terms as they were intended to be used, with detailed explanations that provide information in the proper context.

Others don't.

I hope this was helpful.
 
sammpedd88 said:
The high majority appreciates your thoroughness along with your great products.
Click to expand...

This.

Stay strong and please stay the course, Steve. We need you and appreciate your many contributions. You posts have taught me a great deal and made me a loyal customer of your companies.
 
DaveMcNaul said:
I like how you explain yourself.
Super clear.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I always try to be respectful of people reading and following along and also want people that may not be following now, but come across threads years down the road to be able to easily understand my posts and learn from them.

alvin1 said:
Keep on posting for every negative one you get there is the silence majority that like your post
Click to expand...

Thanks. I try my best to help people and I like helping people that actually want to learn.

sammpedd88 said:
The high majority appreciates your thoroughness along with your great products.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I really appreciate the kind words and support.

Monte Brogan said:
This.

Stay strong and please stay the course, Steve. We need you and appreciate your many contributions. You posts have taught me a great deal and made me a loyal customer of your companies.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I really appreciate it.

I like supplements and I love helping people and that's a big part of what this is all about to me - helping people to reach their goals and hopefully improve their quality of life through supplements.

I hate negativity and drama, and the bs in this thread was so avoidable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top