The Divanil Scandal?
- Thread starter MAxximal
- Start date
MAxximal
Well-known member
agreed
wastedwhiteboy2
Board Supporter
i think the scandal is that only 5% was giving us great results and not 95%. I'd like to see someone come out with 10%.
narraboth
Member
well, but AX and Thermolife are all quite 'solid'?
It's smart that AI didn't mention the percentage on TestoPro's ingredient sheet.
bluehealer
Active member
The supplement companies that were buying the raw material that was supposedly 95% 3,4-Divanil are the ones that were scammed. Those who put 95% on their label did not know it was only 5% until, in AX's case, they had it tested themselvse's. AX has changed/will change it's label to reflect 5% 3,4-Divanil but the products which contain it will be the same.
T-AD
Well-known member
Not sure if the actual ingredient has changed in any products, so to speak, but the issue is certainly one that has not only drawn a lot of attention, but raised a lot of eyebrows elsewhere. The issue is from the source of the materials claiming what things were. When put into the product and listed on the label, the name didn't necessarily change until recently.
However, if you look at it in a positive aspect, you can see 2 good things coming from this:
1. If 5% was working this well but was mislabeled as 95%, then that's still proof that it worked well. If it were 95% as listed, that'd be 90% more than what everyone was already taking. Would it be 90% better? I dunno...apparently I've only taken 5%.
:lol:
2. The industry is indeed changing. Responsibility and culpability are the new buzzwords, not "synergy" or "-bol". Eventhough Uncle Sam may be part to blame for it, the new regulations for the industry are forcing everyone to test and retest. For a company, it's initially expensive. But in the long-run, those that do the requisite testing or go above and beyond it to assure quality will survive and thrive as having reputable products. That, my friends, is a true win for us all. No more bathtub supplements! (Well, for the most part...ideally...)
However, if you look at it in a positive aspect, you can see 2 good things coming from this:
1. If 5% was working this well but was mislabeled as 95%, then that's still proof that it worked well. If it were 95% as listed, that'd be 90% more than what everyone was already taking. Would it be 90% better? I dunno...apparently I've only taken 5%.
:lol: 2. The industry is indeed changing. Responsibility and culpability are the new buzzwords, not "synergy" or "-bol". Eventhough Uncle Sam may be part to blame for it, the new regulations for the industry are forcing everyone to test and retest. For a company, it's initially expensive. But in the long-run, those that do the requisite testing or go above and beyond it to assure quality will survive and thrive as having reputable products. That, my friends, is a true win for us all. No more bathtub supplements! (Well, for the most part...ideally...)
CROWLER
Anabolic Innovations Owner
Sorry for the delay in answering I just saw this.
Feel free to PM me with a link to a thread if I don't see it right away.
We spoke about this in the beginning of March here:
Invalid Link Removed
The problem is the standard. 1 testing facility says they have the correct standard another testing facility says they have the correct standard and they are not the same. The ingredient Divanil is a trademarked item which we receive from DS so we will do the same as they did and change the label.
narraboth
Member
even so it won't be 5% to 95% different....
I think it's either cheating, or someone has bad scientific units understanding. Maybe the latter one. Big companies should really be much more careful about what they got. Basically i doubt any natural stuff will have a 95% purity unless it's very very extracted.
If 5% works, it works, I don't mind even if it's just 1%. But what if someday their bulk ingredient is contaminated with some toxin?
We can only trust these companies, but companies SHOULD NOT trust their ingredients suppliers. It's not an excuse to say 'it's supplier's problem'. I don't want to think how much the price difference between the bulk ingredients and the final products. Companies earn a lot of money from it (maybe AI is not an exception, sorry), so it's their responsiblity really.
thesinner
Recovering AXoholic
This is a huge problem, which I don't think people quite grasp with how these sort of things are being tested.
Essentially you dissolve a fixed mass of your sample into a fixed volume of solvent. Different solvents will give different results. Then you run your dissolved sample in your chromatography device, and it generates a graph. You find a peak on that spectrum and look at how big that peak is with respect to the baseline. As concentration increases, that peak gets bigger. To generate a calibration curve, several standards are prepared. The standard is carefully prepared, and assumed to be accurate to its concentration.
Unfortunately, there's no standard to standardize your first standard, so if it is off, all your standards will be off. That's where the problem comes from. For an esoteric compound such as this one, your lab is going to need to prepare one. Hopefully its a good one, there's no quantitative analysis for it.
Essentially, there are a great many steps in the preparation of both the preparation of the standard and testing of the sample, which can botch the analysis. It seems a dispute like this comes out once a year. There have been disputes over labs on such things as this with ecdysterones, creatine, superdrol clones, and epistane.
The bad news with this whole ordeal is that divanil is not 95% divanillyl tetrahydrofuan. The good news is that divanil contains 95% of the mixture they wanted to make, it's not spiked with anything, and it clearly works.
T-AD
Well-known member
Leave it to Bob to blow my mind with big words... :silly: Good post, mang.
Depends on perspective or what you mean by "work properly". In the sense of a test not working properly, then yes. Without a standard, there's no ruler to mark the inches. If you're talking real-world, then I'd say that whatever % it was has been pretty proven to "work".
RoadBlocK
Well-known member
Certainly interesting.
Another thing Ive always had issue with is products with 100 ingredients, superior blend, better and higher amounts than the other guys, but theres no one testing the ingredient profile. Hell anybody could make up a list of stuff that sounds great, bottle up some crap filler, hype it with marketing, and make a killing off it before the word gets out to everybody their stuff was crap.
ie: do I even have to say ~ mus-t ~ and they are certainly not the only example
Another thing Ive always had issue with is products with 100 ingredients, superior blend, better and higher amounts than the other guys, but theres no one testing the ingredient profile. Hell anybody could make up a list of stuff that sounds great, bottle up some crap filler, hype it with marketing, and make a killing off it before the word gets out to everybody their stuff was crap.
ie: do I even have to say ~ mus-t ~ and they are certainly not the only example
monstermash
Well-known member
Not sure if the actual ingredient has changed in any products, so to speak, but the issue is certainly one that has not only drawn a lot of attention, but raised a lot of eyebrows elsewhere. The issue is from the source of the materials claiming what things were. When put into the product and listed on the label, the name didn't necessarily change until recently.
However, if you look at it in a positive aspect, you can see 2 good things coming from this:
1. If 5% was working this well but was mislabeled as 95%, then that's still proof that it worked well. If it were 95% as listed, that'd be 90% more than what everyone was already taking. Would it be 90% better? I dunno...apparently I've only taken 5%.
2. The industry is indeed changing. Responsibility and culpability are the new buzzwords, not "synergy" or "-bol". Eventhough Uncle Sam may be part to blame for it, the new regulations for the industry are forcing everyone to test and retest. For a company, it's initially expensive. But in the long-run, those that do the requisite testing or go above and beyond it to assure quality will survive and thrive as having reputable products. That, my friends, is a true win for us all. No more bathtub supplements! (Well, for the most part...ideally...)
Nicely put T-AD.
bluehealer
Active member
That would be why the more reputable companies call to the general public for beta testing.
GuyverX
Well-known member
So guys all of us has been scammed...for years with the purity of 3,4-Divanil?
look:
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
What?
I knew there was risk in supplements but this is scary all over again.
Because companies with good working products were not even aware.
Then true 95% would be overkill.
And here I was looking to try to get some bulk 95% divanil and 95% avenacosides for my own formula.
Admittedly the 5% works very well if that is what it is.
I had awesome recomp effects from 1600 mg of the Divanil solo.
But like Thermo said the dead giveaway should have been it not being white powder. Have gotten some Euro extracts of mucuna and rhamponticum and other things at high levels and had them tested when I had a friend with access to HPLC.. Most of them tested accurate in the high 90's range and almost all were white or off white in color.
Makes me think of pals I knew in a certain type of business as a youth.
They would get in trouble with customers trusting their supplier for a good product. lolz.
(note - the author did not participate nor have any actual knowledge of certain things. just what was heard in conversation and vaguely)
VaughnTrue
Well-known member
the material has been identical since it's been released. it had great results when first released, and still has great results now, regardless of the % purity.
mw1
Sponsor
Its definitely not 95%
mw1
Sponsor
Agreed you just had some companies that BSed consumers for awhile
Bnatural
AX Product Specialist
agreed.
missed you at the olympia, stopped by to say hello.
were you there (sry for thread jack).
VaughnTrue
Well-known member
missed seeing everyone as well. looks like im out of expo duty for a while though which i enjoy haha
bdcc
Legend
There will always be a special place in your heart for the BodyPower Expo.
It is marked on Vaughn's calendar as our anniversary.
VaughnTrue
Well-known member
body power = best expo i've ever been too, and i hope i can go to that one again
Bnatural
AX Product Specialist
if you start a thread on this link it here.
i've heard about body power, but that is all.
best ever = peaks my interest
VaughnTrue
Well-known member
the end users were genuinely interesting in learning about product, not just free samples. Everyone was polite/courteous and it was just a civil time all around. The O and Arnold I feel like are just people looking for handouts who don't give one crap about any one particular vendor really.
