Full disclosure vs Prop Blend

Status
Not open for further replies.
Chuck, buy this:
Invalid Link Removed

Read it, come back to this thread, and point out the number of fallacies in your posts. Everyone will have their preference on label styles and each has their merits. However, a shotgun formula is still a shotgun formula.
 
Just a simple question for Chuck or anyone else. In your vitamin/ multi, you have all your vitamins listed out but why not the herbs and everything else i:E why half full disclosure and half prop? Just asking..
 
double s said:
Just a simple question for Chuck or anyone else. In your vitamin/ multi, you have all your vitamins listed out but why not the herbs and everything else i:E why half full disclosure and half prop? Just asking..
Click to expand...

Full disclosure of nutritional content is the law. Anything w a DV has to be disclosed.
 
Rodja said:
Chuck, buy this:
Invalid Link Removed

Read it, come back to this thread, and point out the number of fallacies in your posts. Everyone will have their preference on label styles and each has their merits. However, a shotgun formula is still a shotgun formula.
Click to expand...

It says page not found. There are no fallacies in my post. One thing I do is I don't post unless I know what I am talking about. Customers can call a formula shot gun or not. I still make some of the best stuff out. No one on earth that has used my brand will come on here and say thats not a true statement. Not one person. So "shot gun" works.

I dont know what we still talking about. You guys saying over X amount of ingredients in a prop blend is a garbage product and/or no product should contain over X ingredients?? Not really sure.

We haven't even went into the full disclosure garbage raw material industry out there.
 
Whats the effective dose for Long Jack or Maca?? Anyone...

Depends on the supplier. Extract potency. Standardization process and country of origin. Full disclosure can't help you with that. Even if they state some BS extract potency. Its usually BS btw.
 
ma70 said:
Well, I mostly like it because I like finding out which specific ingredients are beneficial to me, then stack them later. I can't speak for the others.

Example: I'm using LJ100 solo right now because I want to see if LJ100 benefits me. Then later, maybe I'll stack LJ100 with something else, but if LJ100 does enough for me, then I'm good to go.
Click to expand...

its harder these days to do this and i sometimes feel the same way. do i really need to take a prop of 3,5 or 50 ingredients when i can simple use 1 or 2? maybe most of the prop blends are needed because they compliment each other or help to facilitate other ingredients, but at some point it gets a little crazy. Especially if you have a bad reaction, what do you cut out?
 
Chuck Diesel said:
Whats the effective dose for Long Jack or Maca?? Anyone...

Depends on the supplier. Extract potency. Standardization process and country of origin. Full disclosure can't help you with that. Even if they state some BS extract potency. Its usually BS btw.
Click to expand...
You make some good points, but full disclosure can still help. For example, if I see KSM-66 (not tongkat or maca, I know) in a prop blend, I don't necessarily know how much there is, but if it lists 300mg, then I know how much I'm getting, and that many studies use 300mg 2x per day. You can say similar things (knowing what a decent dose is) with Physta tongkat Ali for example, or Bacognize bacopa, or SHR-5 rhodiola, etc.

Yes, lots of extracts are poorly standardized, but that applies to prop blends and fully disclosed blends (lots of products don't even list standardization), but that's not really relevant here. All things equal (extract quality, manufacturing, etc), a fully disclosed formula allows you to better see if the product is dosed well. I don't see how you could argue that really. Now, I agree that having a disclosed label doesn't inherently make a product good, and having a prop blend doesn't inherently make a product bad, but I don't see how you can deny that a fully disclosed label makes it at least somewhat easier for a consumer to know if the product is dosed well. Is it necessary to have a disclosed formula? Of course not, and a prop blend can still be a great product, but if you apply quality issues to fully disclosed labels, you also have to apply them to prop blends.
 
Chuck, all valid points and obviously you are one of the good ones as your products do have good reviews. I guess at the end of the day more and more people are hiding behind their prop blends to save on ingredients thus making the most margins.

Earlier this week on one of the FB groups I belong to, guy was promoting his super concentrated PWO

Creatine, Citrulline, Agmatine, glutamine and a few others. His big sell was stim free. The prop blend was 8 gms TOTAL and what was sad was people were lining up asking where to send money.
 
muscleupcrohn said:
You make some good points, but full disclosure can still help. For example, if I see KSM-66 (not tongkat or maca, I know) in a prop blend, I don't necessarily know how much there is, but if it lists 300mg, then I know how much I'm getting, and that many studies use 300mg 2x per day. You can say similar things (knowing what a decent dose is) with Physta tongkat Ali for example, or Bacognize bacopa, or SHR-5 rhodiola, etc.

Yes, lots of extracts are poorly standardized, but that applies to prop blends and fully disclosed blends (lots of products don't even list standardization), but that's not really relevant here. All things equal (extract quality, manufacturing, etc), a fully disclosed formula allows you to better see if the product is dosed well. I don't see how you could argue that really. Now, I agree that having a disclosed label doesn't inherently make a product good, and having a prop blend doesn't inherently make a product bad, but I don't see how you can deny that a fully disclosed label makes it at least somewhat easier for a consumer to know if the product is dosed well. Is it necessary to have a disclosed formula? Of course not, and a prop blend can still be a great product, but if you apply quality issues to fully disclosed labels, you also have to apply them to prop blends.
Click to expand...

Yes it can help. I didn't and don't think it can't help. One place full disclosure comes in to play in the Canadian market. Their products usually are very week. And full disclosure shows the more supplements educated consumer how weak they are. You see stuff in Canada like "ultra mega test booster" then it says 2.5mg of LJ100.

What you said is true. I never implied prop blend means high quality. My point is full disclosure doesnt mean more effective than prop blend. Thats more my point is I could never use a product based on the label versus if it does what it is inteded to do. Some ppl on here seem like their mentality is fck results. I just care abt the label.
 
Chuck Diesel said:
Yes it can help. I didn't and don't think it can't help. One place full disclosure comes in to play in the Canadian market. Their products usually are very week. And full disclosure shows the more supplements educated consumer how weak they are. You see stuff in Canada like "ultra mega test booster" then it says 2.5mg of LJ100.

What you said is true. I never implied prop blend means high quality. My point is full disclosure doesnt mean more effective than prop blend. Thats more my point is I could never use a product based on the label versus if it does what it is inteded to do. Some ppl on here seem like their mentality is fck results. I just care abt the label.
Click to expand...
I've seen that sort of product before. The sad truth is that probably 90%+ of consumers will see LJ100 and assume it's an effective dose. I've used prop blend supplements that I really liked (some forum favorites are prop blends), and there are a plethora of fully disclosed formulas I wouldn't use if someone gave them to me for free.
 
Chuck Diesel said:
It says page not found. There are no fallacies in my post. One thing I do is I don't post unless I know what I am talking about. Customers can call a formula shot gun or not. I still make some of the best stuff out. No one on earth that has used my brand will come on here and say thats not a true statement. Not one person. So "shot gun" works.

I dont know what we still talking about. You guys saying over X amount of ingredients in a prop blend is a garbage product and/or no product should contain over X ingredients?? Not really sure.

We haven't even went into the full disclosure garbage raw material industry out there.
Click to expand...

No fallacies, huh? For someone that has an alleged MBA, you sure don't know anything about how to straightly answer questions.
 
Rodja said:
No fallacies, huh? For someone that has an alleged MBA, you sure don't know anything about how to straightly answer questions.
Click to expand...

Dude get out of here w that. "Alleged?" No need to reply to you.
 
I do what I'm good at. You guys do what you're good at. The way yall come at me lets me know I'm doing something right.
 
Chuck Diesel said:
I do what I'm good at. You guys do what you're good at. The way yall come at me lets me know I'm doing something right.
Click to expand...

You throwing a fit like an autistic child is not a sign that you're doing something right especially when you simply deflect and use erroneous analogies.
 
Rodja said:
Chuck, buy this:
Invalid Link Removed

Read it, come back to this thread, and point out the number of fallacies in your posts. Everyone will have their preference on label styles and each has their merits. However, a shotgun formula is still a shotgun formula.
Click to expand...

Some people in here are not on that reading level yet.
 
Rodja said:
You throwing a fit like an autistic child is not a sign that you're doing something right especially when you simply deflect and use erroneous analogies.
Click to expand...

Yeah ok. Im actually not throwing a fit. I could care less. Your alleged and autistic child comments lead me to believe there isnt an ounce of professionalism in you. Rest of your post to me will be ignored.
 
My money on this thread being closed by Monday w these types of comments
 
Would love to see laws in place for full disclosure lables. Not knowing the % of an ingredient sucks, mainly because if it works you have no idea what you responded well too (and what you are putting in yourself). Plus seeing companies claim they have the highest dose, or its fully "clinically dosed" more then everyone else is... Well, just their opinion. Open lable would solve a lot, and let the best mixologist win!
 
double s said:
In your professional opinions, do you think it will ever be mandated that companies have fill disclosure labels??

Speak on this...
Click to expand...

Potentially depending on future legislation.

The downside is the potential for a company to just completely knock off a product, and sell at razor thin margins.

This has happened already with brick and mortar vs etailers. Someone decides to abuse the system, and make razor thin margins effectively screwing the system and brick/mortar can no longer compete with online retailers. This is why many brands have storefront only brands, and then have online brands. It allows them to sell products at a higher margin to brick/mortar stores and in turn the brick/mortar stores still have enough room to have proper markup to turn a profit.
 
ma70 said:
Know what would make this thread even better?

The_Old_Guy
Click to expand...


Oh gee thanks ma70 ... here I was getting ready to head out to my NEW GYM!!!! to do cardio, and now a huge thread :D

Ok, real quick, as I don't want my 40mg of bulk Y-HCL to wear off:

The only reason for a prop blend, is to hide something from the customer. Full stop.

Now, that doesn't mean the hiding is bad (but I still say it's weak sauce) - for instance: You need 300mg of -(-)epi if you swallow it, but only 100mg if you complex it with Phosphatidylcholine for the same effectiveness. But Joe dumba$$ will just look at the amounts on two bottles, and pick the higher amount. Only in cases like this, could I see a smidgen of acceptance - but I'd rather just educate my customer with the label.

Everything else is because they want to hide the amount. This "I don't want my stuff copied" excuse is so laughable, I hope someone seriously posts a defense of it. You want to sell a supplement, you scour PubMed, you find a study on your ingredient, they used an amount that was effective.... What, you going to use something different? Less=ineffective and More=waste of profit, so why hide the amount? All anyone else will do is find the same public research and dose what the study dosed if they want to sell an effective amount. Copying... LOL

Which brings us to: Anyone that could impact your sales by out-marketing and undercutting your SKU price... Can afford to take your pills and powders and have them analyzed by a lab. Whoops, there goes another nail in the "Copying" coffin. Anyone here think that Hi-Tech can't copy your stuff *exactly*? (And lets get real here, the absolute only thing that is hidden, is the amount - so they don't even have to assay for ingredients). Anyone who can't out-market you, and under cut your price - isn't going analyze it - they'll just make the same dang prop blend! Sure the amounts may be different, but they are all hidden so it doesn't matter :D And the only amounts that matter, are the effective ones in the public research anyway, so what does hiding do again?

"Clinical Doses" is such a big buzz word - so if you use the amount used in whatever backing study you are basing it on, you're proud to list the amount. So if the amount is hidden in a prop blend, why do *you* think that is? Caveat Emptor. Time for cardio...
 
Bottom line is, no one consumer, manufacture or brand can say "all products with full disclosure should work better than prop blend products." Or something to the tune of "prop blend products are weak sauce."

The lab test statement is only relevant to anything without herbs in it. You cannot send a product with 10 herbs to chromadex and they tell you how
much of x y z herb is in the product.

I saw a "clinical dose" product that had clinical dose all in the marketing, but to get the clinical dose numbers they mentioned on the front of the bottle, you would have to take 2x the daily recommended amount. The consumers lack of knowledge on this is what is often prayed upon.

Often "clinical dosed" directions for use is always overlooked on here and in general. What is the clinical dose? Its using some conversion ratio from mice? I'm 238lbs 5'8" multiple sport athlete, been training since I was 12 yrs old. My "clinical dose" I am sure is way dif from the average AM member not training at over 80% max effort 4x a week.

The clinical dose party is all marketing just as the "scientific pubmed crazy" write ups were on here 10 yrs ago. 10 yrs ago this same thing was going on with AM members except, it wasn't show me the sup facts, it was show me the pubmed references. The more references in the write up, the "better" the product was in the eyes of the AM consumer. Do all clinical dose products suck? nope. But "weak sauce" for all prop blend products just do not apply.

Scivation and everything Hi-Tech makes has
prop blends. Are you saying The_Old_Guy those brand's products are automatically "weak sauce?"


This thread is 5yrs old:
Invalid Link Removed

Same stuff 5 yrs later. Just a dif tone 5yrs ago (more respectful) depending on the company's "fan base" being discussed.
 
Very interesting to read the posts in that thread. Some people ripping prop blends in here had no problem with them 5 years ago.

Many posters also say they were fine with prop blends if they trusted the company. So there's the other unasked/unanswered question that should coincide with this thread - why do you/don't you trust company X?
 
1Fast400 has prop blends because he's one of the few people in the industry who is actually trustworthy and further spends a ton of money on actual, peer reviewed studies and is protecting that investment. That's completely reasonable to me.

What's not is when companies prop blend a product with 6 "OutrageousPump" or the like names and the prop blends are 2.5g with 6 ingredients when none of them can actually be properly dosed in a prop blend that size..

Piston Honda said:
Very interesting to read the posts in that thread. Some people ripping prop blends in here had no problem with them 5 years ago.

Many posters also say they were fine with prop blends if they trusted the company. So there's the other unasked/unanswered question that should coincide with this thread - why do you/don't you trust company X?
Click to expand...

It's also funny cause there's a few big manufacturers so if you don't trust a large company, there's also a chance they produce the products you do trust.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top