Dmaa banned by the FDA

Nac said:
Maybe you can help me understand this better.

What does the source matter?

If the synthesized compound used in the supp is identical to that found in nature, wheres the issue? Why does it have to be extracted? Surely, it only need be extractable, if even only in theory.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if this in entirely accurate, but if something contains an active at such a miniscule dosage in the food supply, then the dose being advertised will never be obtained through eating the plant alone. I just remember getting that info from another source at one point or another

Can I sell cyanide as a supplement since apples have it?
 
HIT4ME said:
Doesn't the law state that the ingredient has to have been used as a supplement or part of a normal food supply prior to 1992 or something like that? If so, that negates the judges finding because you can make the case that geraniums fit that bill while some rare herb in Tibet doesn't. So his logic is faulty.
Click to expand...
Has to have been marketed before 1994, no?

The law itself is very ambiguous.
 
Jiigzz said:
I'm not sure if this in entirely accurate, but if something contains an active at such a miniscule dosage in the food supply, then the dose being advertised will never be obtained through eating the plant alone. I just remember getting that info from another source at one point or another

Can I sell cyanide as a supplement since apples have it?
Click to expand...

EDITED

...flag it, the way I (mis)understand it, the legislation is in many respects retarded and I cant be arsed delving further into it
 
Nac said:
That potentially opens a whole messy can of worms.

Maybe my intuition is waaaay off but, I would guess that many (most?) supps contain compounds at quantities far in excess of what could be practically or reasonably ingested by way of whole foods. I mean, Ive seen this pointed out many a time (for unrelated reasons) with regards to ArA and creatine (how many eggs/steaks do I have to eat to get the equivalent supplemental dose of compound-X?).

I can see how how "ingestable amounts found in nature" may apply for many of the Ayurvedic herbals, but lots of these modern compounds? I mean, is anyone going "well, this much is what is found in a 'serving' of its parent source, so thats how much we will be permitted to dose in a supplement." Its fairly obvious that in at least some cases, we want significantly greater amounts of the target compound than what could possibly be eaten via its source, cos thats where the good effects occur!
Click to expand...
Those things are not too far in excess of what is found in nature. Im talking hundreds of thousands of a percent.

If it takes 10 tonnes of raws to produce 1mg of active, how do we know 50mg is safe? That's the type of thing im referring to.
 
I'll hold off till the final verdict, and if **** hits the fam there will be a ton of flash sales, and 50%+ off, going around.

I don't use a DMAA pre anyway, but wouldn't mind 25mg caps if I could get em cheap.
 
Jiigzz said:
Those things are not too far in excess of what is found in nature. Im talking hundreds of thousands of a percent.

If it takes 10 tonnes of raws to produce 1mg of active, how do we know 50mg is safe? That's the type of thing im referring to.
Click to expand...

Aaaaargh, now youve drawn me back in (I edited my earlier reply after you replied to it heh)...

I guess my initial query was not so much concerned with the quantity/safety aspect per se but more: lets say compound-Y is found abundantly in the food chain. Its cheaper for me to synthetically produce that compound, rather than pay for it to be processed/extracted.

Is it illegal for me to sell a synthetic analogue of that (perfectly safe) compound as a supplement?
 
Nac said:
Aaaaargh, now youve drawn me back in (I edited my earlier reply after you replied to it heh)...

I guess my initial query was not so much concerned with the quantity/safety aspect per se but more: lets say compound-Y is found abundantly in the food chain. Its cheaper for me to synthetically produce that compound, rather than pay for it to be processed/extracted.

Is it illegal for me to sell a synthetic analogue of that (perfectly safe) compound as a supplement?
Click to expand...
Haha its all for good discussion! Nah, there's no way people are extracting vitamin C (well, mostly anyway). But Vit C is found in abudance in the food supply anyway.

If we synthesize a compound at 50,000x what we could expect to find in nature, then it might not fly.
 
Jiigzz said:
Haha its all for good discussion! Nah, there's no way people are extracting vitamin C (well, mostly anyway). But Vit C is found in abudance in the food supply anyway.

If we synthesize a compound at 50,000x what we could expect to find in nature, then it might not fly.
Click to expand...

Im assuming the legislation does not specify numbers (minimums, etc) like the hypotheticals you make here. Any idea what criteria (quantitative) the FDA might be using or intending to use in order to make a decision that a compound is below some arbitrary threshold? Commonsense would suggest certain obvious parameters, but the law is anything but obvious/commonsensical. Will this utimately be a case-by-case situation?
 
Nac said:
Im assuming the legislation does not specify numbers (minimums, etc) like the hypotheticals you make here. Any idea what criteria (quantitative) the FDA might be using or intending to use in order to make a decision that a compound is below some arbitrary threshold? Commonsense would suggest certain obvious parameters, but the law is anything but obvious/commonsensical. Will this utimately be a case-by-case situation?
Click to expand...
It doesn't have to specify numbers, it might just assume reasonable amounts. Don't really know, I haven't read DSHEA
 
Heh, yeah well I guess the lawyers can argue over what constitutes 'reasonable'.
 
Jiigzz said:
Has to have been marketed before 1994, no?

The law itself is very ambiguous.
Click to expand...

Maybe, I don't actually have a lot of legal knowledge in the law.. was just going by memory.
 
I guess I could start eating 2-3 pounds of steak per day in order to get my (5g) of creatine instead of my supplement.
 
justhere4comm said:
I guess I could start eating 2-3 pounds of steak per day in order to get my (5g) of creatine instead of my supplement.
Click to expand...
Still doable. But downing 500 tonnes of a random plant isnt ;)
 
Jiigzz said:
Still doable. But downing 500 tonnes of a random plant isnt ;)
Click to expand...

What if you chop it up, wrap it in batter, fry it and call it an egg role?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top