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

Fox reporter wants to speak with me

custom

custom

Well-known member
I emailed him, and he got back to me and wants to speak via telephone. I have Chemo's and Siz'e excellent repsonses from the thread ready to go. Do you guys think I should do this, anything else I should take into consideration? I pretty sure he wants to speak w/me because I have a financial interest in the ban. If we do talk, it will probobly be around 3:00 central time. Any opinions?
 
My prayers are with you...and yes, you should do this. A voice of reason needs to be heard. The media has tipped the scales and someone with some intelligence needs to inform the masses. We have to erase the "meathead" mentality that's being portrayed.
 
Make sure you don't hang yourself. Try not to mention tiratricol, I can just see the FDA coming after you.
 
Honestly, I believe the media's only intention ever is to make money. They do this by getting good ratings, which increase their advertisement revenue. They get good ratings by promoting contraversy and anything else that the mass general public will want to watch.

The truth and fairness never fit into that equation. Unless the truth will cause a stir of viewers, it's irrelevent.

If you were given final veto power to what material this fox guy shows - that would be different. :) But something tells me you won't. And something tells me most things he'll show will be taken out of context and skewed pretty badly.

Possible things to consider:
- are you making money off of this interview directly? (Good if yes, bad if no).
- is your business going to benefit or be hurt by this? (no such thing as bad publicity? Maybe... New customers from seeing the interview - maybe. Government spotlight directly on your company - maybe a bad thing...)

Try to find out the past stories this guy did and try to judge if he was fair or biased. You never know.

Who knows what this guy will do? He'll get a lot of support if he makes a fool out of "andro" supporters. BUT - maybe he can get a lot of controversy as a reporter who believes in "andro" supporters. He can stand out in a crowd that way and make a name for himself.

So to answer your question - I don't know. :) Hopefully someone else can bring more insight into this. Personally, I think you did a great thing in bringing this situation up.

Just my opinion.... and good luck in whatever you do. :)
 
As long as you feel confident that you can answer the questions in a way that shows that you are informed about the issue, I see no problem with an interview. I've seen how the media works and it would be nice to know what angle they are aproaching this from. They can edit your responses however they like to make you sound however they want. Lets just hope they aren't biased and looking to condemn this thing. Good luck bro.
 
Sir Foxx is right, he (they) will more than likely come at you with the products you sell which are in the "grey" so be prepared to defend yourself. I don't think the research products will go over too well with them...
 
I'm just terrified I will be made to look like Bill L. and his ESPN interview. I have not made up my mind yet...Defiantly need to accumulate a wealth of pre-existing articulate responses. I in no way plan on mentioning the name of my business if I do go through w/it.
 
Remember to utilize "off the record" to cover yourself, BUT you have to say this before the statement or else it's too late.
 
Bro, please do it. We need to be heard now. You won't really say anything as stupid as Bill L. did so don't worry about sounding like him, try to get it tape recorded for accuracy. Point economic impacts such as the effects it has on retailers and how it hurts small businesses. Point out that Republicans and Democrats may lose our vote because they don't represent our voice and are taking our freedoms away, they usually listen when they hear they will lose many votes since there hundreds of thousands of us that use supplements.

Good luck and be as informed as you can.
 
custom said:
I'm just terrified I will be made to look like Bill L. and his ESPN interview. I have not made up my mind yet...Defiantly need to accumulate a wealth of pre-existing articulate responses. I in no way plan on mentioning the name of my business if I do go through w/it.
Click to expand...
Smart...definetly don't want "the man" checking the site.
 
Don't Talk

custom said:
I'm just terrified I will be made to look like Bill L. and his ESPN interview. I have not made up my mind yet...Defiantly need to accumulate a wealth of pre-existing articulate responses. I in no way plan on mentioning the name of my business if I do go through w/it.
Click to expand...


Other than drawing attention to your business, you have no reason to talk with this person. Their agenda is already set: pro-hormones = steriods = menace to society. You will probably end up being edited between a "prominent" physician describing the dangers of pro-hormones ("that's right, by the time little billy got help he already had size DD breasts and had murdered his little sister and her chipmunk in a fit of roid rage") and somebody from the anti-doping agency talking about how society cannot tolerate cheaters. You will look like someone trying to make a buck no matter what the cost. Back out and let some other stooge take the heat.
 
say something to the effect of "the civil liberties of the consumers are being stripped away by the FDA at will without justifiable research..."
 
RVEXLER said:
Other than drawing attention to your business, you have no reason to talk with this person. Their agenda is already set: pro-hormones = steriods = menace to society. You will probably end up being edited between a "prominent" physician describing the dangers of pro-hormones ("that's right, by the time little billy got help he already had size DD breasts and had murdered his little sister and her chipmunk in a fit of roid rage") and somebody from the anti-doping agency talking about how society cannot tolerate cheaters. You will look like someone trying to make a buck no matter what the cost. Back out and let some other stooge take the heat.
Click to expand...

That is a very good point. I may just speak w/him about guidelines for the article first if anything, and that may be it.
 
CUSTOM-

At this point in the game I don't think the interview can hurt us anymore than were are. The gig is pretty much up, the government, media and medical industries have painted us into a corner and now have the upper hand. The end is nigh.

As long as you don't make statements to goad the FDA and the government-you should be fine. We have to fight and media is probably our last tool. All that said, make sure you cover your own ass and don't give out to much info about what you sell and who you sell it to.

I think a well articulated reponse about people's freedom to use what they wish would be, at the very least, last gesture of defiance. You could challenge their beliefs about the safety of these products. Inform them that MILLIONS of people use these compounds to great benefit and no harm. End with a warning that allowing the government to legislate what we can and can't ingest is the ultimate slippery slope.

Good luck, stay calm. We have great faith in you.
 
I wouldn't do it at all. If you actually think this guy wants to see the other side then your fooling yourself. He will take things out of context and use them against you. This is what they do. If anything you should just contact him via email then you would have an actual copy of what you say so he cna't just randomly take things out of context. There is a reason they are going after you. No offense but you are just a retailer and are probably looking for someone who might screw up the tough or techincal questions. THey might try to portray you as the guy trying to make money off of teenagers or at the expense of peoples health. We know its not true but they will exploit you to get a better story. This is also typical of FOX. My brother used to work for them. This is what they do. If you do it, give the most generic and general answers you can think of. Just give him a bunch of cliches. Pretend your a professional athlete ;)
 
i debinetely agree on taping it yourself. and that way if your words are misconstrued you could at least sue him for slander or something. you could really do this because it would be damaging to your livelyhood and effect your income. i know this isnt really constructive advice but i think we are pretty much screwed and you should just go out in a blaze of glory. but still reperesent us well cuz anything is possible.
 
Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I think it's not a good idea. I think what I will do is see if he wants to do a discussion via email, so that I can logically think through a proper, slightly vaugue response. I'll keep you guys posted on what goes down.
 
Well here is an update:

Michael-



As I think about our pending discussion, I honestly feel a bit leery about going "on the record." Please do not take this a personal comment to you, but I am sure you are aware that the media is not portraying these substances or their supporters in a very positive light. I certainly do not want to be portrayed as someone trying to make a living off of potential scheduled III substances.



I would very much like to contribute to your piece, but I think it may better suit me, and my conscience, if we would share our ideas and opinions in a different matter other than telephone. If this is a viable option for you, please let me know. As I said earlier, I will be leaving this office at 3:00 central time, and will not have access to this email until Monday. I would greatly appreciate it if you could either call and confirm this, or forward anything to [email protected].
Click to expand...

Here is what he responded with:

Not a problem. I can understand why you might want to avoid the telephone or not want to engage with the media because of the the ban. That said, we're looking for a potential interview subject. Do you know of anyone in the community who would consider going on camera and on the record regarding andro and pro-hormones? Thanks.
Mike
Click to expand...

I just couldn't do it. Not enough trust in the media to fill a thimball for me.
 
They should read some of the studies I posted which apparently have been ignored.

Odd how female hormones (birth control) in the USA are readily available to 16 year old girls without any problems.
 
Well, since Fox News prides itself on being "fair and balanced" I think it would be a good idea to forward him those studies so he does not have to dredge through the stupidity of bb.com.
 
forward the info or contact Rick Collins, I am sure he would be interested in giving them some info.
 
I did just go ahead and forwarded these following studies Size posted at bb.com. Who thinks they will actually be used?


Here is some information that relates to anabolic steroids. Much of the typical information is based on incorrect public opinion. Here is just a small example of legitimate medical information:

One text to research in is Sports Endocrinology
by Michelle P. Warren , Naama W. Constantini

Here are some links to studies and these are only a few:

Invalid Link Removed --> Conclusion: Supraphysiological doses of testosterone, when administered to normal men in a controlled setting, do not increase angry behavior


Invalid Link Removed --> Comment: The histologic findings in our 2 cases and in the few others reported in medical literature are nonspecific and do not prove the cardiac toxicity of AAS


Invalid Link Removed --> CONCLUSIONS: Although high-level bodybuilding is associated with impaired vascular reactivity and increased arterial thickening, the use of AAS per se is not associated with significant abnormalities of arterial structure or function
 
Designer Supps said:
forward the info or contact Rick Collins, I am sure he would be interested in giving them some info.
Click to expand...

Oh hell yeah, thats a good idea...he would handle it very well I think...
 
Designer Supps said:
forward the info or contact Rick Collins, I am sure he would be interested in giving them some info.
Click to expand...

Does someone have an email addy for him?
 
John Stossel would be great for our cause. That man always presents the truth. We should try to contact him and see if we can get to take on this witchhunt.
 
Forwarding the stuff is the best move but they won't be interested in reporting that because it's truth. These guys aren't looking for truth in anything as contrversy is their game and that's what gets ratings and pays the bills. All they're interested in is adding fuel to a fire.

Just like the song 'DIRTY LAUNDRY' ;

" Bubble-headed bleach-blonde comes on at 5 ... tells you about the plane crash with a gleam in her eye ... "

Very little true reporting going on and don't expect it to start with their PH report.
 
Only thing I have to add is to keep in mind that Fox News is more of a right wing organization, conservative, and would be MUCH more likely (IMO) to report elements of truth than a liberal organization like most of the other "news"media.
 
With all due respect..even in leiu of your experiences with FOX, I totally disagree BOBO.

I've had a fair amount of experience with the media and PR dogging some of my clients.
I think not doing interviews is just as bad as the "possibility" of the media twisting the truth. If we remain silent they get to report and say what they want about PH and the industry. If we can get a REASONABLE spokesman out there fronting the media and making our case we'd be much better off. We NEED good PR. To be silent is to basically roll over.

The John Stossal idea is good. Go to him, go to O'Rielly, go to every talking head out there and take your chances with how they're going to portray the info you present. At the very least you can get the media to question the notions that PH are evil.

Now Custom may not be comfortable with taking on this task and I don't blame him at all. In the big picture of things we absolutely need more representation from people who knwo their **** and are good with PR.
 
custom said:
I did just go ahead and forwarded these following studies Size posted at bb.com. Who thinks they will actually be used?


Here is some information that relates to anabolic steroids. Much of the typical information is based on incorrect public opinion. Here is just a small example of legitimate medical information:

One text to research in is Sports Endocrinology
by Michelle P. Warren , Naama W. Constantini

Here are some links to studies and these are only a few:

Invalid Link Removed --> Conclusion: Supraphysiological doses of testosterone, when administered to normal men in a controlled setting, do not increase angry behavior


Invalid Link Removed --> Comment: The histologic findings in our 2 cases and in the few others reported in medical literature are nonspecific and do not prove the cardiac toxicity of AAS


Invalid Link Removed --> CONCLUSIONS: Although high-level bodybuilding is associated with impaired vascular reactivity and increased arterial thickening, the use of AAS per se is not associated with significant abnormalities of arterial structure or function
Click to expand...

Thank you
 
None of those links are working b/c when you copy and paste it does not follow the link.

I have them all if you need them.
 
Just wanted to let you guys know that I sent an email to my congressmen, since I'm from Massachusetts, hopefully the future president gets it.

Congressman Olver & Senators Kerry & Kennedy,

My name is Jeremy Strait and even though I am in Afghanistan right now, I consider Westfield, Massachusetts my home. I am writing you concerning the pending "andro ban". As a soldier it is part of my job to be strong and tough. For the past 5 1/2 years I have tried many forms of exercises to increase my strength and stamina. I have recently been researching prohormones in an attempt to find an alternative means to strength gain. Since I am currently deployed, I have been unable to do a cycle yet and was planning one when I returned home this summer. Then the "BAN" started. If I am in Afghanistan and can easily discover, from the experiences of others, that the only harm from prohormones is misuse, why are Congressmen, with an army of researchers, failing to differentiate between ?the good, the bad, and the ugly.? I know prohormones are a potent ?drug? and can cause serious damage, but so are cigarettes and alcohol. That is why they are regulated. So why ban supplements and not cigarettes, or alcohol? Cigarettes and alcohol are regulated to protect the youth of America, so why not regulate supplements. If you were to visit some of the online forums concerning prohormones you would consistently see ?veterans? telling those under 21 to stay off of prohormones until they were 21. Why punish those that are trying to better themselves? I personally try not to drink soda or eat fast food any more because I know how detrimental they are to my health. That is the beauty of America. Being able to choose. As an American adult we should be able to choose what we put in our bodies if the ?good? outweighs the ?bad.? And with prohormones there is no ?bad? if you don?t misuse the product. So please take my words into consideration when you stand on that floor and decide the fate of your fellow Americans, and give them the right to Choose.

SSG Jeremy Strait
A Company, 41st Engineer Battalion
SAPPERS FORWARD!!!!!


Just my attempt to bring sense to the world.
 
Bobo said:
I wouldn't do it at all. If you actually think this guy wants to see the other side then your fooling yourself. He will take things out of context and use them against you. This is what they do. If anything you should just contact him via email then you would have an actual copy of what you say so he cna't just randomly take things out of context. There is a reason they are going after you. No offense but you are just a retailer and are probably looking for someone who might screw up the tough or techincal questions. THey might try to portray you as the guy trying to make money off of teenagers or at the expense of peoples health. We know its not true but they will exploit you to get a better story. This is also typical of FOX. My brother used to work for them. This is what they do. If you do it, give the most generic and general answers you can think of. Just give him a bunch of cliches. Pretend your a professional athlete ;)
Click to expand...
Couldn't have said it better. FOX is anything but "fair and balanced". They're incredibly conservative and that's how most of they're reports are skewed. I would decline.

-2z-
 
imo, fox is not "incredibly conservative". fox is, otoh, biased to the right. no more than, for example, CNN is biased to the left. and i wouldn't call CNN "incredibly liberal". also, imo, CNN moved a bit rightwards to compete with the new kid on the block.

the problem with "lay" reporters reporting on scientific issues (like prohormones, etc.) is that they almost never get it right. this isn't an issue of political bias, as much as overall ignorance, etc. frankly, in any field where i know a lot, i find the lay media accounts to be pretty worthless - with some exceptions.

i brought stossel up for a reason. he IS good at traipsing through the bull and understanding more complex issues, imo.

the reality is this- the industry has shot itself in the foot, to a large extent. i do not think prohormones should be scheduled, however, the industry has been grossly irresponsible in not

1) limiting sale of same ot adults
2) even possibly sponsoring legislation to criminalize the act of providing pro's to a minor.

the sports lobby is powerful, but much of the push is from the "do it for the children" crowd. imo, it IS wrong that kids can buy prohormones (let alone methylated ones) OTC. that is insane. i don't think ANY dshea supp's (with the possible exception of water soluble vitamins and stuff like that) should be sold to minors. of course, minors can buy dangerous drugs like tylenol, however, the impulse to "take a lot for added effect" is minimal compared to the impulse to "get hyooge" from gulping a whole bottle of m-1t for some HS kid.
 
Good move on your part, and it's good that you sent over the studies. Problem is the media in general loves "dirty laundry" just like the song says. I fear they would have turned that interview against you.
Of course we all know it's complete bullshit but sheople know only what they are told.
 
we need someone to go on record to say they've used the stuff and it didn't cause any (significant) adverse side effects. the guy should also say that no one (to the best of his info) has ever died or been hospitalized b/c of andro products. preferably this person should be in good shape (in case they do a background check) and articulate.

he should emphazise the potential health benefits of andro products (weightloss, fitness, potential anti-aging benefits for elderly and their use as alternatives for expensive pharmaceutical sex aids such as viagra). the person keep it real too and that admit andros can be harmful if abused and that people have to follow the instructions on the label. 1-test and methyls should not be mentioned unless mike brings them up first.

the interviewee should in addition emphasize the importance of a HEALTHY diet and hard work in the gym so they don't get portrayed as some gym desperado looking for the magic pill. it should be stated that andro products are just a small part of the game, but they still have some benefits and there's no reason for government regulation.

in fact, governement regulation hurts the consumer's right to choose and will also hurt small business owners at a time when the economy really does not need it. lastly, the person should also talk about the fact that professional atheletes really do not use andro products b/c they will show up in drug tests and that's why these atheletes just use real steroids and try to beat the testing or just look for designer steroids that the regulating orgs have not designed tests for yet.

main thing is to come across as a regular american that is just trying to lead a healthy life and put on a little muscle in the gym - hopefully people can relate to that.

-5
 
O'Reilly might be good. He's in favor of decriminalizing marijuana. At least it shows his propensity for open thought.
 
John Collins is your best bet in this for legal info, and I would think if done threw him it would be in our best intrest to get our side told...Like someone else said, make the case that p/h p/s without dedacation, hard work and proper diet will not make a monster out of a sissie.......
 
The problem is that even if the reporter goes in with the intent to do a fair story, the editor is really the one in control. Often times they are just telling you want you want to hear so you will do the interview. You could do an hour interview with him in print or television and they could use 5 seconds of it or one quote. They could have you saying prohormones are safe followed by the music from Halloween with a reporters narrative talking about liver failure and road rage. The only way you can be sure you are going to be going treated fairly would be to do a live show or an O'Reilly type of format where there is some kind of debate going on that they don't edit. The only way to protect your self would be to tape the interview and transcribe it and compare it what they actually reported. The problem is that if they do a take out piece on you ( which is highly likely) the damage is done. Even if you do cover your ass it's not like they are going to print it or report on it. The main stream media misquotes and distorts all the time and rarely do you hear about it. The corrections are on the last page of the paper ( it's almost non existent on TV) and they sure as hell won't print a letter to the editor from you.
That being said, the supplement companies and consumers need to start fighting back. The first thing they need to do is to bypass the mainstream media. The only type of show that should be done is either a debate or one on one format. A talk radio blitz and taking out ads in papers would be a good idea. Who ever is being interviewed should be intelligent and articulate (or not stupid enough to brag that pro hormones are better than or equal to steroids). The main focus should be on distancing prohormones from steroids, economic issues, and consumer freedom. They should probably start lobbying the government again as well. Unfortunately this takes money and is largely up to the companies.
For consumers the best thing they could to is organize in their states and start bothering their representatives allot.If the consumers are well organized Informing their local reps. that they have formed a voting block and will be watching how they vote it will get their attention.
Keep in mind this is all useless if the FDA steps in and banns it like ephedra which will probably end up happening. The FDA is just as much a threat as the bills out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top