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

USA Today getting ready to run an article on AMP Citrate

De__eB said:
In theory sure, in practice, the FDA has repeatedly said that a synthetic copy of a constituent of a botanical was never a part of the botanical, and thus can't be a constituent thereof.

We've been waiting what, 3 years for them to issue their revised enforcement guidelines in response to commends on the draft guidelines for NDIs, and I'm not really crossing my fingers for the FDA to make the right call on that issue any time soon.
Click to expand...

if you read our last warning letter on DMAA (public record), they dropped that issue….
 
mw1 said:
Snitched that you own PES? Commonly known fact...congrats on your "recent" acquisition of Athletix. ;)
Click to expand...

you snitched to USA today several times on PES trying to associate them with us so they would take a fall. Gutless act. Scum.
 
USPlabsRep said:
you snitched to USA today several times on PES trying to associate them with us so they would take a fall. Gutless act. Scum.
Click to expand...
First off no I've never spoke with her..trust me there are more than enough people willing to.

Second would you like to deny any association? I know there are former reps than will say the opposite
 
USPlabsRep said:
if you read our last warning letter on DMAA (public record), they dropped that issue….
Click to expand...

the last ones in 2013?

I haven't read those resources in a while, did you guys make any sort of argument about the synthetic nature in your response, or did they just drop it because they decided they could arbitrarily dismiss all evidence you provided about DMAA being natural, and just only include evidence that said it wasn't, so they didn't need to argue synthetic vs. extracted any more?

I suppose the synthetic ingredient vs. natural ingredient issue hasn't come up for anything since DMAA.

It would really be nice if the FDA would stop sitting on their hands and write something definitive either way though...
 
mw1 said:
How about the last letter they sent concerning pesticide contamination? Care to comment on how that was safe?
Click to expand...

read the letter its clear that it was purely a documentation issue at the inception of gMPs when everyone was getting letters because there was no clear direction. Think if you are not going to read objectively. If pesticides was found the product would of been recalled.
 
De__eB said:
the last ones in 2013?

I haven't read those resources in a while, did you guys make any sort of argument about the synthetic nature in your response, or did they just drop it because they decided they could arbitrarily dismiss all evidence you provided about DMAA being natural, and just only include evidence that said it wasn't, so they didn't need to argue synthetic vs. extracted any more?

I suppose the synthetic ingredient vs. natural ingredient issue hasn't come up for anything since DMAA.

It would really be nice if the FDA would stop sitting on their hands and write something definitive either way though...
Click to expand...

that division is limbo with all the recent changes.
 
So what is your question OP? Haha or just a statement?
 
Just a statement. I wanted to give everyone a heads up as to what was going on and get everyone's opinions. Lots of good opinionated individuals here. Thank you all for contributing. We will see how it plays out when the article is released.
 
So what the general consensus on the best Amp citrate Pre-workout, I would like to try one before they get removed to know if I'll need to order more lol
 
IFNutrition said:
Just a statement. I wanted to give everyone a heads up as to what was going on and get everyone's opinions. Lots of good opinionated individuals here. Thank you all for contributing. We will see how it plays out when the article is released.
Click to expand...

Good luck with the article, please link us or let us know how it turns out!
 
De__eB said:
This has nothing to do with the government making money off it. Based on the law as written, the ingredient is illegal (among dozens of others being sold, but not many are being touted as a replacement for an ingredient the FDA literally just went after last year)

It is the FDAs job to enforce regulations, Young makes the FDA look worse than the makes the supplement industry.



It's not naturally occurring ;)

And AMP Citrate hasn't been on the market for the better part of 20 years ;)



What is it with people who have science in their username not grasping science



Without any scientific validity? The ingredient is objectively non-compliant.

Sell non-compliant ingredients all you want, the onus is on the FDA to come after you, but doing so and crying when that happens is just stupid.



That's what happens when you take a non-compliant ingredient and mass market it as a replacement for the last (arguably) non-compliant stimulant the FDA went after.
Click to expand...

While I agree with you, it does come down to money, why do u thing anything "new" is non compliant, because its not going thru good ol pharma, lets keep it real rules and regulations are meant to protect society but sometimes they get outlandish to make others happy and by others I am referring to ignorant parents.
 
I very much dislike the CRN and I am not at all surprised by them pushing for the removal of amp citrate.


"The tests showed the amount of the stimulant varied greatly among the products. AMPilean, marketed as a fat burner by Lecheek Nutrition, contained the highest level per serving: 120 mg. Three products delivered 110 mg per serving: Frenzy, a preworkout from Driven Sports; AMPitropin, sold as a brain enhancer by Lecheek Nutrition; and MD2 Meltdown, a weight-loss product sold by VPX Sports.

Other products contained a fraction of those dosages per serving: Contraband, from Iron Forged Nutrition, 50 mg; OxyTHERMPro from deNOVOLABS, 39 mg; and Evol from Genomyx had just 13 mg, the tests found.
In two products labeled as containing the stimulant — Preamp by Hybrid and Genomyx's AMP Citrate — tests were unable to detect it, according to the study."
 
Very simple win...just post the article or paper showing it to be in plants. Even circumstantial would be better than nothing.

I haven't looked at the compound at all just saying if it is natural then there should be no issue with it.

Anyone have the studies?
 
Royd The Noyd said:
I very much dislike the CRN and I am not at all surprised by them pushing for the removal of amp citrate.

"The tests showed the amount of the stimulant varied greatly among the products. AMPilean, marketed as a fat burner by Lecheek Nutrition, contained the highest level per serving: 120 mg. Three products delivered 110 mg per serving: Frenzy, a preworkout from Driven Sports; AMPitropin, sold as a brain enhancer by Lecheek Nutrition; and MD2 Meltdown, a weight-loss product sold by VPX Sports.

Other products contained a fraction of those dosages per serving: Contraband, from Iron Forged Nutrition, 50 mg; OxyTHERMPro from deNOVOLABS, 39 mg; and Evol from Genomyx had just 13 mg, the tests found.
In two products labeled as containing the stimulant — Preamp by Hybrid and Genomyx's AMP Citrate — tests were unable to detect it, according to the study."
Click to expand...

Wait...Genomyx single ingrediant Amp supp didn't test out to have any Amp citrate in it? :doh:
 
Some companies have some explaining to do ;)

I'd sure be interested to see the MMR records of people whose products came up way short on testing, or are we just going to do the usual 'oh, those actual scientists were using flawed methodology, our products are flawless' approach to things.
 
All I got from this article is what we already know. DS is the most honest of the bunch when it comes to ingredients matching up with the profile of the product. Nothing new here ;) no but srsly. "Companies have some splainin to do"
 
Royd The Noyd said:
What's worse - actually having AMP in your product, or claiming to have it but actually failing to even get detectable amounts in it?
Click to expand...

If a product is openly advertised as containing an ingredient, and actually contains said ingredient, regardless of the compliance of that ingredient, I really don't find that morally objectionable.

If people want to buy steroids, and are getting products labeled as steroids, I don't see a problem.
If people want to buy stimulants, and are getting products labeled accurately as such, I don't see a problem.

If labels are accurate, and risks however small are accurately portrayed, it is very easy to push responsibility largely to the users of products.

This is just going to turn into another instance of the industry shooting itself in the foot, and then whining later when the FDA comes to call.

Not authenticating your own products to contain what they are supposed to is absurd and inexcusable, especially when it comes to potentially dangerous categories of product such as stimulants.
 
I have some VPX MD2 Meltdown ??
 
The Engineer said:
Are we to assume that these companies have also deceived the consumer on some of their other products?

Ex: Lecheek Andro 5A, Neuropump/F1 Test, even the new line from vpx?
Click to expand...

It is bad to assume but I will never use any of their products.

Duywayne said:
Damn man, what weasels. Cant trust anybody these days
Click to expand...
There are plenty of trustworthy companies but I agree with this.
 
De__eB said:
I guess it's a good thing that 'dumb reporter' wrote this article without any scientific validity right?
Click to expand...

No, she does come across as well educated, but what's her thesis? I guess you can say that she's expressing concern over the testing, but that's not only it. She's crying over spilled milk when no one has reported any medical problems over amp citrate.

And of course the researchers will advise to stop taking products with it because that's they're job. If they didn't that'd be complete negligence and a dismissal of the research conducted on the products.

It just burns me that because of reporters like her we have to buy ephedrine as an otc med and give our id. Because of her the government knows how much ephedrine I buy/might've consumed. And don't get me started on phenylpropanolamine -the original hitter in the NYC stack. A lot of us are too young to remember those days.I only found it out research curiosity.

Yes, people were dying from ECA because they were overdosing, but it's her tone and bitchy demeanor to want to throw someone under the bus that riles me up.

Just wait for one or two underage kids to take halo or epi and wait for the ****storm that will ensue on the prohormone industry.
 
There's two groups she's trying to throw under the bus:

-Companies not following existing regulations
-The FDA doing a ****ty job of enforcing existing regulations

Both groups deserve the criticism.

People like her have nothing to do with why you have to give your ID to purchase ephedrine.

That restriction is in place because people were synthesizing meth out of pseudoephedrine

--
 
Royd The Noyd said:
I very much dislike the CRN and I am not at all surprised by them pushing for the removal of amp citrate.


"The tests showed the amount of the stimulant varied greatly among the products. AMPilean, marketed as a fat burner by Lecheek Nutrition, contained the highest level per serving: 120 mg. Three products delivered 110 mg per serving: Frenzy, a preworkout from Driven Sports; AMPitropin, sold as a brain enhancer by Lecheek Nutrition; and MD2 Meltdown, a weight-loss product sold by VPX Sports.

Other products contained a fraction of those dosages per serving: Contraband, from Iron Forged Nutrition, 50 mg; OxyTHERMPro from deNOVOLABS, 39 mg; and Evol from Genomyx had just 13 mg, the tests found.
In two products labeled as containing the stimulant -- Preamp by Hybrid and Genomyx's AMP Citrate -- tests were unable to detect it, according to the study."
Click to expand...

De__eB said:
There's two groups she's trying to throw under the bus:

-Companies not following existing regulations
-The FDA doing a ****ty job of enforcing existing regulations

Both groups deserve the criticism.

People like her have nothing to do with why you have to give your ID to purchase ephedrine.

That restriction is in place because people were synthesizing meth out of pseudoephedrine

--
Click to expand...

This.

Ephedrine has never been allowed to sell OTC here because of meth. IMO that is a good thing. What you must realise is that like 0.000001% of the population (made up stat) actually has any idea as to what they ingest on a daily basis and the correct dosage of such (whether by own research or Doctors advice). The majority of people may have no clue that 1g of caffeine may seriously f them up. The govt' agencies assume the majority of people are idiots and thus enforcement exists.

The rules are their to protect us, hate them or love them. I for one think we are turning into a govt controlled society but then I remember that there's a guy sitting next to me not knowing that writing homophobic slurs in an academic essay will fail him.

Edit: Actually I hypothesize that we have tougher restrictions because our healthcare is almost entirely subsidized and its costly to see every tom dick and harry that uses too much of sometjing
 
The Engineer said:
Just wait for one or two underage kids to take halo or epi and wait for the ****storm that will ensue on the prohormone industry.
Click to expand...

This already exists. And a whole lot more. There's numerous documented cases of serious adverse events from Prohormones. Some in teens. Some in adults. Some with PHs that are no longer on the market and same that are.

Nothing has ever been done about it and the dangers of these prohormones (in some cases they are actually steroids) are far more dangerous than stimulants. Yes a stimulant can be dangerous after one dose. A steroid can't. But when your heart is ****ed up in 15 years from your 10 week M-drol cycle, you're going to be a lot worse off than how a stimulant made you feel for 8 hours. Because the side effects aren't instant they get ignored.

It's highly likely that the new steroid bill will pass and that should remove them all from the market. But it's a shame it's taken this long
 
"A representative for Driven Sports spoke with Live Science and defended Frenzy by saying that the new study was not peer-reviewed, meaning that it wasn't reviewed by scientists other than the authors."

:23:

:chairfall:
 
nattydisaster said:
This already exists. And a whole lot more. There's numerous documented cases of serious adverse events from Prohormones. Some in teens. Some in adults. Some with PHs that are no longer on the market and same that are.

Nothing has ever been done about it and the dangers of these prohormones (in some cases they are actually steroids) are far more dangerous than stimulants. Yes a stimulant can be dangerous after one dose. A steroid can't. But when your heart is ****ed up in 15 years from your 10 week M-drol cycle, you're going to be a lot worse off than how a stimulant made you feel for 8 hours. Because the side effects aren't instant they get ignored.

It's highly likely that the new steroid bill will pass and that should remove them all from the market. But it's a shame it's taken this long
Click to expand...


Lol no there are actually very few case studies on any prohormone causing adverse issues. Stop making **** up. And 90% of published case studies from designer steroids were from methasterone (now controlled) and not one death has ever been reported (unlike multiple deaths from designer stimulants).

In one year AEGELINE killed more livers than 5 years of SuperDrol case studies.

And the links between steroids and heart growth are almost all correlational. And the issue is almost always exacerbated by....stimulants.

Save the children!
 
De__eB said:
"A representative for Driven Sports spoke with Live Science and defended Frenzy by saying that the new study was not peer-reviewed, meaning that it wasn't reviewed by scientists other than the authors."

:23:

:chairfall:
Click to expand...

Yeah what person tried that angle lol. The Journal has a great impact factor to top it off.
 
Royd The Noyd said:
Lol no there are actually very few case studies on any prohormone causing adverse issues. Stop making **** up. And 90% of published case studies from designer steroids were from methasterone (now controlled) and not one death has ever been reported (unlike multiple deaths from designer stimulants).

In one year AEGELINE killed more livers than 5 years of SuperDrol case studies.

And the links between steroids and heart growth are almost all correlational. And the issue is almost always exacerbated by....stimulants.

Save the children!
Click to expand...

now you are making **** up..If you play one scientific angle you have to play it with your attack argument. Show me the data on Aegeline and liver toxicity??

before you post media reports that's not considered scientific data...
 
USPlabsRep said:
now you are making **** up..If you play one scientific angle you have to play it with your attack argument. Show me the data on Aegeline and liver toxicity??

before you post media reports that's not considered scientific data...
Click to expand...

I'll give you the aegeline thing. I haven't seen the data suggesting it is or is not hepatotoxic. But something in those products (counterfeit or whatever) was killing livers and I don't believe it was a designer steroid.

My point on stimulant related deaths vs Prohormones still stands.

And as I mentioned earlier in this thread no supplement kills more people than the most popular supplement in the world - caffeine.
 
Royd The Noyd said:
I'll give you the aegeline thing. I haven't seen the data suggesting it is or is not hepatotoxic. But something in those products (counterfeit or whatever) was killing livers and I don't believe it was a designer steroid.

My point on stimulant related deaths vs Prohormones still stands.

And as I mentioned earlier in this thread no supplement kills more people than the most popular supplement in the world - caffeine.
Click to expand...

You are smart. I like your take and explain from this quote how you can conclude its an aegeline issue:

The letter summarized the results of FDA’s review of 46 medical records of cases from the outbreak. The reviewed records indicated that 27 of the 46 patients, or 58 percent, had taken a dietary supplement labeled as OxyElite Pro prior to becoming ill. Seventeen of these 27 patients (or 63 percent) reported that OxyElite Pro was the only dietary supplement they were taking. One death had occurred among these patients, another patient had required a liver transplant, and others were awaiting liver transplants. Based on review of the medical records and other evidence obtained in FDA’s investigation, the letter concluded that there was a reasonable probability that the OxyElite Pro dietary supplements listed in the letter were adulterated and that use or exposure to the dietary supplements would cause serious adverse health consequences or death to humans.

Invalid Link Removed
 
USPlabsRep said:
You are smart. I like your take and explain from this quote how you can conclude its an aegeline issue:

The letter summarized the results of FDA’s review of 46 medical records of cases from the outbreak. The reviewed records indicated that 27 of the 46 patients, or 58 percent, had taken a dietary supplement labeled as OxyElite Pro prior to becoming ill. Seventeen of these 27 patients (or 63 percent) reported that OxyElite Pro was the only dietary supplement they were taking. One death had occurred among these patients, another patient had required a liver transplant, and others were awaiting liver transplants. Based on review of the medical records and other evidence obtained in FDA’s investigation, the letter concluded that there was a reasonable probability that the OxyElite Pro dietary supplements listed in the letter were adulterated and that use or exposure to the dietary supplements would cause serious adverse health consequences or death to humans.

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

Huh so 1 of the 3 liver transplants patients weren't even using OEP Pro? Or do they not count the death who had a transplant?

The new paper from the doctors in Hawaii suggests all three were using OEP.
 
Royd The Noyd said:
Huh so 1 of the 3 liver transplants patients weren't even using OEP Pro? Or do they not count the death who had a transplant?

The new paper from the doctors in Hawaii suggests all three were using OEP.
Click to expand...

you can also read that the patient that died had breast cancer and was severely overweight...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top