Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

DS Craze Lawsuit and FDA Action

Status
Not open for further replies.
DAdams91982 said:
Not detracting from your right to feel how you do.

Problem is, it will come to light one way or another if it is tainted, or if it is not. No reason to be He-man right now for the product. You do understand that Craze is experiencing the highest sale volume it will experience in it's time on the market right now due to the controversy. And if it does come to light that it is tainted with a hidden ingredient, more power to the people who brought it to light.

I could care less if BK, RK and PA test products as much as they want or are paid to do... if your company is following the letter of the law then you have nothing to worry about. Again, you are defending a company that has their share of a past.. so essentially it is a pot/kettle thing.

In the mean time, just sit back and relax and let it unfold. You crusading right now will not keep the product on the market any longer, nor sway any minds to go purchase it... the controversy already has peoples shelves stocked.
Click to expand...

DA, I'm not upset for any of the reasons you think I am. If it ends up being pulled off the market, so be it. I enjoy the product because it works very well. I love many of your companies' products as well and would hate to see any of them pulled for labeling issues, not because they are tainted, *if that turns out to be the case with Craze. Again, no crusade here on my part. I don't hold myself in that high a regard as to think my interweb postings will make much difference. It will probably end up getting pulled. Everyone involved can go back to being the great "public health crusaders" of our time. Thank you to that group, at least when Craze gets pulled we'll still have theobromine....awesome! Yaaaay.
 
This is actually starting to remind me of the Slim-Xtreme fiasco from a couple years back, LOL
DAdams91982 said:
Not detracting from your right to feel how you do.

Problem is, it will come to light one way or another if it is tainted, or if it is not. No reason to be He-man right now for the product. You do understand that Craze is experiencing the highest sale volume it will experience in it's time on the market right now due to the controversy. And if it does come to light that it is tainted with a hidden ingredient, more power to the people who brought it to light.

I could care less if BK, RK and PA test products as much as they want or are paid to do... if your company is following the letter of the law then you have nothing to worry about. Again, you are defending a company that has their share of a past.. so essentially it is a pot/kettle thing.

In the mean time, just sit back and relax and let it unfold. You crusading right now will not keep the product on the market any longer, nor sway any minds to go purchase it... the controversy already has peoples shelves stocked.
Click to expand...
 
Southpaw, you make it sound like the way the truth is found is all that matters, not the truth itself. Why not care about both? Why not want your favorite companies to be honest, AND your least favorite be equally honest.

I can understand to a small degree you not liking competitors being behind the testings, but you make it seem like you are afraid to find out the truth regardless. That, my friend, is just plain ignorance.
 
southpaw23 said:
DA, I'm not upset for any of the reasons you think I am. If it ends up being pulled off the market, so be it. I enjoy the product because it works very well. I love many of your companies' products as well and would hate to see any of them pulled for labeling issues, not because they are tainted, *if that turns out to be the case with Craze. Again, no crusade here on my part. I don't hold myself in that high a regard as to think my interweb postings will make much difference. It will probably end up getting pulled. Everyone involved can go back to being the great "public health crusaders" of our time. Thank you to that group, at least when Craze gets pulled we'll still have theobromine....awesome! Yaaaay.
Click to expand...

That's not what most here even want. Not many behind the competition wants the product pulled. From the consumer view, all that is wanted, and required is truthful labelling. Nothing more, nothing less.

I could care less if crack is in there, put it on the label and let the masses decide if that is something they want to use.
 
rob112 said:
Southpaw, you make it sound like the way the truth is found is all that matters, not the truth itself. Why not care about both? Why not want your favorite companies to be honest, AND your least favorite be equally honest.

I can understand to a small degree you not liking competitors being behind the testings, but you make it seem like you are afraid to find out the truth regardless. That, my friend, is just plain ignorance.
Click to expand...

If it turns out to be tainted, I support it being pulled off the shelf. If it ends up being pulled because of a technicality or labeling issue, that I don't support. I like how some are calling me overzealous, yet some of you take the other extreme position. But hey some of you carry on being public health crusaders, ya know at least until tomorrow. :)
 
Geoforce said:
I'm sorry this seems like such an insane position to take. Maybe somethings are best off not questioned? Really? You'd rather just not question what you're putting into your body? Is it possible that something gets contaminated somehow through no fault of the company? Certainly, but that isn't the issue at hand. If a company KNOWINGLY mislabeled a product you wouldn't be upset? Your response is really "well we shouldn't question it."?

I just can't come to grips I guess with what some people are claiming in this thread. And FWIW I agree with a lot of what Autokal and Southpaw have said, but comments like this just baffle me.
Click to expand...

Something's you don't want an answer too. Nowhere in my post did I say the "unlisted ingredient" that this law firm (who according to Vaughn) is filing a claim against jack3d and DMAA is not out to make a quick buck. And do you know for a fact that they "KNOWINGLY" mislabeled a product? if you do please I would love to see sources. However, you know just as much as everybody else does.
 
kokobeware2 said:
Something's you don't want an answer too. Nowhere in my post did I say the "unlisted ingredient" that this law firm (who according to Vaughn) is filing a claim against jack3d and DMAA is not out to make a quick buck. And do you know for a fact that they "KNOWINGLY" mislabeled a product? if you do please I would love to see sources. However, you know just as much as everybody else does.
Click to expand...


BINGO.
 
southpaw23 said:
Everyone on the internet considers themselves an expert, as such you're entitled to your opinion. Again the insults don't bother me, the lack of transparency does, BK. Please don't let me get in the way of the "pseudo-concern."
Click to expand...

Sorry what's does "BK" mean ? And like you say everyone entitled to there opinions so choose to formulate any opinion about me that you want. I don't see what motivations I would have to bring up a simple point of concern for others like me beside just letting people know. I'm in this because I'm trying to learn about what I just put down my throat as I am actually concerned about it
 
jobless said:
Sorry what's does "BK" mean ? And like you say everyone entitled to there opinions so choose to formulate any opinion about me that you want. I don't see what motivations I would have to bring up a simple point of concern for others like me beside just letting people know. I'm in this because I'm trying to learn about what I just put down my throat as I am actually concerned about it
Click to expand...

Okay.
 
kokobeware2 said:
Something's you don't want an answer too. Nowhere in my post did I say the "unlisted ingredient" that this law firm (who according to Vaughn) is filing a claim against jack3d and DMAA is not out to make a quick buck. And do you know for a fact that they "KNOWINGLY" mislabeled a product? if you do please I would love to see sources. However, you know just as much as everybody else does.
Click to expand...

Of course I don't know this, hell none of us really know anything. You came off (or at least I and others interpreted it) as "who cares" what's in it, let people take their own poison, etc. I was saying that is an insane position to take.

I actually probably agree with Southpaw and Autokal in this thread more than a lot of other people. But some (and sorry if I've misconstrued your post, but you seem to be trying to walk back some comments now) people who are acting like they only care if it works who cares what it actually has in it come off as nuts to me.

Like DA I could care less if it has crack as long as they tell me it has crack in it. I'll decide then if its worth it. But if it doesn't have what they say it does in it how could anyone think that is no big deal is besides me. It's part of the reason I'm not a big fan of prop blends because we don't get to know how much of something a product has. It keeps us from making a truly informed decision.
 
DAdams91982 said:
This is the problem in the industry.... unknowingly is just as bad.

You sell a product that is meant for ingestion.. how in the world is it okay for it to be even unknowingly mislabeled?
Click to expand...

I'll reiterate my previous point, if it is tainted, then in fact it should be pulled. I would be very upset if I found out it was tainted. At this point, I'm simply reserving judgment until all the facts come out. *IF being the keyword here.
 
DAdams91982 said:
That's not what most here even want. Not many behind the competition wants the product pulled. From the consumer view, all that is wanted, and required is truthful labelling. Nothing more, nothing less.

I could care less if crack is in there, put it on the label and let the masses decide if that is something they want to use.
Click to expand...

+1 ^^^
 
southpaw23 said:
If it turns out to be tainted, I support it being pulled off the shelf. If it ends up being pulled because of a technicality or labeling issue, that I don't support. I like how some are calling me overzealous, yet some of you take the other extreme position. But hey some of you carry on being public health crusaders, ya know at least until tomorrow. :)
Click to expand...

If it is in deed some sort of technicality as you say, and not illegal, I wouldn't want it pulled either...just fix the label. If they somehow were duped by a raw ingredient manufacturer then this would just reiterate the need of 3rd party testing on all supplements(whether per batch, every other, whatever). The downside is prices will probably go up...like the saying goes "you get what you pay for."
 
southpaw23 said:
I'll reiterate my previous point, if it is tainted, then in fact it should be pulled. I would be very upset if I found out it was tainted. At this point, I'm simply reserving judgment until all the facts come out. *IF being the keyword here.
Click to expand...

I was only referencing back to your statement of a technicality or labeling issue. I was just saying if a product is out there, with testing and such there should be no technicality to fall back on. If a name is slightly off, or mis organized ingredients, thats no big deal... just that if something was left off even unintentionally, like getting your raws from china then not testing the authenticity and using china's COA.

I never really meant to jump in this thread with so many posts! :D I personally don't really care one way or another as I can't take stims! :D
 
Geoforce said:
Of course I don't know this, hell none of us really know anything. You came off (or at least I and others interpreted it) as "who cares" what's in it, let people take their own poison, etc. I was saying that is an insane position to take.

I actually probably agree with Southpaw and Autokal in this thread more than a lot of other people. But some (and sorry if I've misconstrued your post, but you seem to be trying to walk back some comments now) people who are acting like they only care if it works who cares what it actually has in it come off as nuts to me.

Like DA I could care less if it has crack as long as they tell me it has crack in it. I'll decide then if its worth it. But if it doesn't have what they say it does in it how could anyone think that is no big deal is besides me. It's part of the reason I'm not a big fan of prop blends because we don't get to know how much of something a product has. It keeps us from making a truly informed decision.
Click to expand...

First off, everything is all speculation. I got the assumption that you knew otherwise so I questioned it. Secondly, I'm not trying to change what I meant. I do believe in pick your poison however I also agree in everything in moderation. I apologize for not mentioning that. I agree too if they put coke in a PWO I would make a decision to buy it or not. But then I started to think if ( with a big if) they put an amphetamine like substance in it, do you think they would put an insane amount of it in a PWO? Granted due to settling and other factors in some servings you may get more of the ingredient than other ones but I find it hard to believe that any company would do that
 
DAdams91982 said:
I was only referencing back to your statement of a technicality or labeling issue. I was just saying if a product is out there, with testing and such there should be no technicality to fall back on. If a name is slightly off, or mis organized ingredients, thats no big deal... just that if something was left off even unintentionally, like getting your raws from china then not testing the authenticity and using china's COA.

I never really meant to jump in this thread with so many posts! :D I personally don't really care one way or another as I can't take stims! :D
Click to expand...

I agree as it relates to the comment in bold above. Looking forward to trying the PWO by PES!
 
southpaw23 said:
Agreed. No one goes after underdosed products out of some pseudo-concern, or in the vain some are preaching here of "looking out for us." I'm all for public safety as well. But let's be honest, that isn't the concern here for some. I have a feeling this will all amount to a mislabeling issue/technicality and due to that, the product ends up getting pulled. If that happens I wouldn't spend a dollar on any company/person involved that facilitated this in the first place and I'd advise my friends to follow suit.
Click to expand...


do you consider failing to list a major ingredient on the label to be a "technicality"?
 
southpaw23 said:
Everyone on the internet considers themselves an expert, as such you're entitled to your opinion. Again the insults don't bother me, the lack of transparency does, BK. Please don't let me get in the way of the "pseudo-concern."
Click to expand...

jobless certainly isnt BK. I am familiar with BK's writing style

anyway i am free to admit that my concern is not with your safety southpaw. my concern is with fair competition. i have a responsibility to my business and that is what motivates me primarily. I will let the FDA deal with any safety issues
 
Patrick Arnold said:
jobless certainly isnt BK. I am familiar with BK's writing style

anyway i am free to admit that my concern is not with your safety southpaw. my concern is with fair competition. i have a responsibility to my business and that is what motivates me primarily. I will let the FDA deal with any safety issues
Click to expand...

At least you're honest enough to admit that.
 
DAdams91982 said:
This is EXACTLY Slim-Xtreme... only reincarnated into a powder.
Click to expand...



if it ends up that there is a powerful designer stim in craze that is not properly identified on the label then it willl be like slim

for now all i can say is that there is a PEA derivative that probably is worthless not listed on the craze label. thats not nearly as serious as what happened with slim
 
southpaw23 said:
If it turns out to be tainted, I support it being pulled off the shelf. If it ends up being pulled because of a technicality or labeling issue, that I don't support.
Click to expand...


can you define for me what you mean by "tainted"?

IMO that means something is put in there that is not listed on the label.
 
Patrick Arnold said:
can you define for me what you mean by "tainted"?

IMO that means something is put in there that is not listed on the label.
Click to expand...

You said it contains a major ingredient NOT listed on the label. So I defer to you and your experience in the industry. You tell me what major ingredient is in it, that is not listed on the label?
 
kokobeware2 said:
Something's you don't want an answer too. Nowhere in my post did I say the "unlisted ingredient" that this law firm (who according to Vaughn) is filing a claim against jack3d and DMAA is not out to make a quick buck. And do you know for a fact that they "KNOWINGLY" mislabeled a product? if you do please I would love to see sources. However, you know just as much as everybody else does.
Click to expand...


if benzyl PEA is in the product (and it apparetnly is in there in very substantial amounts) without their knowledge than to me that is way more disconcerting than if they just kept it off the label. Cuz that means anything can be in their products
 
rob112 said:
If it is in deed some sort of technicality as you say, and not illegal, I wouldn't want it pulled either...just fix the label. If they somehow were duped by a raw ingredient manufacturer then this would just reiterate the need of 3rd party testing on all supplements(whether per batch, every other, whatever). The downside is prices will probably go up...like the saying goes "you get what you pay for."
Click to expand...

there is no need for third party testing. if a company has the ability to perform its own quality control then they can do it themselves.
 
Patrick Arnold said:
if benzyl PEA is in the product (and it apparetnly is in there in very substantial amounts) without their knowledge than to me that is way more disconcerting than if they just kept it off the label. Cuz that means anything can be in their products
Click to expand...

Is Benzyl PEA dangerous as opposed to other forms of PEA? I ask out of genuine curiosity, not being a wise guy. And if it turns out that it is dangerous for human consumption, then I agree wholeheartedly with your last statement.
 
southpaw23 said:
What's the major ingredient not listed on the label?
Click to expand...

do you even read my posts?

n-benzyl-2-phenylethylamine is what i found in there product. It appears to be a major ingredient. It also probably is a pretty worthless ingredient

so we have a situation where it is "tainted" but its not "tainted" with something that i would consider worthwhile - let alone dangerous

If it were up to me i would not demand the product be pulled. I would just hope the labels would be changed asap
 
Patrick Arnold said:
do you even read my posts?

n-benzyl-2-phenylethylamine is what i found in there product. It appears to be a major ingredient. It also probably is a pretty worthless ingredient

so we have a situation where it is "tainted" but its not "tainted" with something that i would consider worthwhile - let alone dangerous

If it were up to me i would not demand the product be pulled. I would just hope the labels would be changed asap
Click to expand...

I studied the cliff notes and I agree with your last statement, if in fact that turns out to the be the case.
 
southpaw23 said:
I studied the cliff notes and I agree with your last statement, if in fact that turns out to the be the case.
Click to expand...

if you read what i have written carefully you will see that i am pretty much of the same mindset as you.

i am curious as to what is in the product and if its something seriously wrong with it i will be upset and would hope some action is taken. i dont want it taken off the market for petty reasons though. i admit there may be others that would like to see it taken off for any reason at all
 
Patrick Arnold said:
if it ends up that there is a powerful designer stim in craze that is not properly identified on the label then it willl be like slim

for now all i can say is that there is a PEA derivative that probably is worthless not listed on the craze label. thats not nearly as serious as what happened with slim
Click to expand...
I was only referencing the backlash so far.. not the actual constituents within the product.
 
Patrick Arnold said:
do you even read my posts?

n-benzyl-2-phenylethylamine is what i found in there product. It appears to be a major ingredient. It also probably is a pretty worthless ingredient

so we have a situation where it is "tainted" but its not "tainted" with something that i would consider worthwhile - let alone dangerous

If it were up to me i would not demand the product be pulled. I would just hope the labels would be changed asap
Click to expand...

Trying to learn here as well...so if it has been tainted with a worthless ingredient can we assume DS DIDN'T mean for this to be in the product?

FWIW I have read every post in this thread, but may have forgotten some key pieces of information.
 
Hopefully something good will come out of this, like companies being told it's mandatory to test each batch they make by a 3rd party lab, to prove what they are selling contains the listed ingredients and amounts.

Kinda tired of the supplement industry tbh, and how people can do what they want without regulation. A minimum regulation of proving that what they are selling is indeed what's in the product, is all that's needed. I don't mess much with supplements these days because of this.
 
Gutterpump said:
Hopefully something good will come out of this, like companies being told it's mandatory to test each batch they make by a 3rd party lab, to prove what they are selling contains the listed ingredients and amounts.

Kinda tired of the supplement industry tbh, and how people can do what they want without regulation. A minimum regulation of proving that what they are selling is indeed what's in the product, is all that's needed. I don't mess much with supplements these days because of this.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised more people don't feel like this and honestly I surprise myself sometimes by not feeling more like this. 100% concur with the proving what you're selling is indeed what's in the product being all that's needed. Let people make their own decisions, but it is a consumer right to be informed properly of ingredients in a substance.
 
Geoforce said:
Trying to learn here as well...so if it has been tainted with a worthless ingredient can we assume DS DIDN'T mean for this to be in the product?

FWIW I have read every post in this thread, but may have forgotten some key pieces of information.
Click to expand...

Lets see

Possibilities in circumstances like this are

Its put it in knowingly but not put on the label purposely.

Its put in knowingly but someone screwed up and forgot to put it on the label (now thats real dumb)

An ingredient that they thought was something else was put in the product but it was actually N-benzyl pea. And the ingredient they thought it was is what is on the label
 
Gutterpump said:
Hopefully something good will come out of this, like companies being told it's mandatory to test each batch they make by a 3rd party lab, to prove what they are selling contains the listed ingredients and amounts.
Click to expand...


Ummmmm

It is mandatory. And in fact that may be the ruin of this product. If this goes to court and DS is asked to turn over their batch records which by law are supposed to include analysis of the finished product and DS cant do that then they may be in big trouble

That COULD be the ultimate strategy of the law firm. To suggest that its tainted and mislabeled and whatever (without having firm evidence) and then in the course of discovery the evidence of DS failing to follow FDA guidelines is revealed
 
southpaw23 said:
Is Benzyl PEA dangerous as opposed to other forms of PEA? I ask out of genuine curiosity, not being a wise guy. And if it turns out that it is dangerous for human consumption, then I agree wholeheartedly with your last statement.
Click to expand...

apparently you skipped over a whole conversation concerning this. this was all discussed in detail in this very thread!

We dont know what the properties of benzyl PEA are but we suspect it is no more dangerous or effective than other forms of PEA
 
Patrick Arnold said:
there is no need for third party testing. if a company has the ability to perform its own quality control then they can do it themselves.
Click to expand...

But who was trust? In all seriousness, I just wish no companies lied, they all tested their stuff, and the FDA would forget the industry exists. I'm a dreamer.
 
rob112 said:
But who was trust? In all seriousness, I just wish no companies lied, they all tested their stuff, and the FDA would forget the industry exists. I'm a dreamer.
Click to expand...

the law states that you have to have your products tested at various stages of the manufacturing process. you can do that with your own lab or send it out to another lab. yeah someone can make stuff up or just as easily send out bogus material to an independent lab. In other words, if you wanna lie you can still lie. But if something goes wrong and you get caught its not good
 
Patrick Arnold said:
Ummmmm

It is mandatory. And in fact that may be the ruin of this product. If this goes to court and DS is asked to turn over their batch records which by law are supposed to include analysis of the finished product and DS cant do that then they may be in big trouble

That COULD be the ultimate strategy of the law firm. To suggest that its tainted and mislabeled and whatever (without having firm evidence) and then in the course of discovery the evidence of DS failing to follow FDA guidelines is revealed
Click to expand...


But if testing by a 3rd party is mandatory, how come the companies won't disclose the results? There's a rare few who do, and that's who I shop from and trust.

I could care less about testing if results aren't made public. I would think that would be key.
 
Gutterpump said:
But if testing by a 3rd party is mandatory, how come the companies won't disclose the results? There's a rare few who do, and that's who I shop from and trust.

I could care less about testing if results aren't made public. I would think that would be key.
Click to expand...

why do you keep saying 3rd party? It does not have to be 3rd party. The testing has to be done though

companies wont disclose results for various reasons. i would venture to guess that the vast majority of sports supplement products dont test their products. Only the very biggest companies do. Its simply too expensive. That is reality
 
Why not disclose the results? Makes testing pointless imo. I keep saying 3rd party, because I will not trust any company that does their own testing in-house, seems totally pointless. Case in point - testing of peptides (think, PH forum using their own lab, GWP, etc). I'm sure you know the deal. Different situation though as those aren't supplements, but same issue. I don't trust people who do testing in-house, unless I KNOW they are trustworthy company. But all that is subjective.
 
Patrick Arnold said:
the law states that you have to have your products tested at various stages of the manufacturing process. you can do that with your own lab or send it out to another lab. yeah someone can make stuff up or just as easily send out bogus material to an independent lab. In other words, if you wanna lie you can still lie. But if something goes wrong and you get caught its not good
Click to expand...

Which is why competitors testing each other is good IMO. Gotta try to keep companies honest. Last thing we all need is full out FDA regulation.

Edit: I can think of two big companies that were caught bull****ting in the last couple years and they are still around. Hence why 3rd party testing(like yourself) seems necessary to me.
 
Gutterpump said:
Why not disclose the results? Makes testing pointless imo. I keep saying 3rd party, because I will not trust any company that does their own testing in-house, seems totally pointless. Case in point - testing of peptides (think, PH forum using their own lab, GWP, etc). I'm sure you know the deal. Different situation though as those aren't supplements, but same issue. I don't trust people who do testing in-house, unless I KNOW they are trustworthy company. But all that is subjective.
Click to expand...

someone can fake a third party test just as well as their own test. just send out a sample of real material to the lab

now if you are talking about third party testing that is done with chain of custody such that it is impossible that the manufacturer can do a bait and switch, that is another thing. And by nature it is impossible to do because the product would have to be out on the marketplace for the lab to have the ability to procure it on their own

so i guess you will not trust anything
 
rob112 said:
But who was trust? In all seriousness, I just wish no companies lied, they all tested their stuff, and the FDA would forget the industry exists. I'm a dreamer.
Click to expand...

I wish for world peace, no hunger, no corruption, etc. Both of our "wishes" have no chance of happening. The industry is a competive one and anytime you have competition you have incentive for cheating, lying etc.
 
Geoforce said:
I wish for world peace, no hunger, no corruption, etc. Both of our "wishes" have no chance of happening. The industry is a competive one and anytime you have competition you have incentive for cheating, lying etc.
Click to expand...

This is my feeling as well.
 
Ok I have a question for the experienced guys in the industry. If a company like ds comes up with something that works great can they apply for a patent on there "recipe" or "design" of there product? the reason I ask is if they list "proprietary blend" as a way of hiding whats in it so competitors don't copy it why not just list whats in it and patent the ratios. I mean if they really believe in there product and think they've done something worth money then why not put it out there for people to see. the patent would protect there investment in both there efforts and there market share and it would allow them to list ingredients properly so people could tell by reading the label whats in it and what there digesting.

if it comes down to controversy like this and people for any list of motivation weather its competition, drug test failure, curiosity, legal .....whatever, the ingredients and the facts are going to come out and be there for everyone to see anyways so why not patent it and disclose the ingredients.

after everything I've read and the reports people are giving this stuff is starting to sound pretty hokus pokus. I'm starting to question if whats in my tub is whats in your tub and visa versa. seems like some reviews are the extreme opposites of others and some people report that its weak and some people report that it feels just like drugs. and the more I read about Mr. M Cahill the more I worry about it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top