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

USPlabs Conducts Study with Indigo Biosciences: Penn State Researchers

Apparently now they are not releasing them because the participants are uncomfortable with their panels being posted............ LOL
 
joebo said:
Apparently now they are not releasing them because the participants are uncomfortable with their panels being posted............ LOL
Click to expand...

Why is that humorous?

While you often choose to type prior to digesting the material in front of you, I courteously explained that this trial was a receptor assay - that is, it contained no human participants. The blood abstracts, in this context, are entirely redundant considering the adjunct Indigo Biosciences trial on the AR revealed absolutely no possibility for intrinsic action at the AR - i.e., no androgenic action. To make a certain few individuals uncomfortable to prove a redundancy seems more humorous than not releasing them, IMHO.
 
This thread was just another hype to go nowhere post once again... Score one for WATERCHESTNUTS!!
 
joebo said:
This thread was just another hype to go nowhere post once again... Score one for WATERCHESTNUTS!!
Click to expand...

I am interested in you articulating which parts of this thread you felt were hype?

We conducted a trial in an attempt to illuminate PRIME's MoA; we will continue to do so in the future. I posted the trial, and preceded its posting with an explanation as to the gravity of the results. I do not feel your points are well proven here.
 
Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
Fortunately for the consumer, this Penn State Study is the first step in a thorough legitimization process that USPlabs is embarking on with PRIME; it (the Penn State study) will be accompanied by an objective trial of sorts (The Staley Report), where trainees were selected away from mainstream boards (and the associated biases ? positive or negative) and thoroughly recorded their progress under Charles Staley; it will also be accompanied by the release of the Beta Tester's blood abstracts which, along with this particular study, will display no cyto-toxicity and no suppression of endogenous hormones.
.



So i guess your above statement was purely BS?
 
Mulletsoldier said:
I am interested in you articulating which parts of this thread you felt were hype?

We conducted a trial in an attempt to illuminate PRIME's MoA; we will continue to do so in the future. I posted the trial, and preceded its posting with an explanation as to the gravity of the results. I do not feel your points are well proven here.
Click to expand...

You have done a great job, Mullet, of clarifying these things. Just forget these random comments and focus on substance elsewhere. Anyone that took their time to read this thread from the beginning to the end should not find anything unclear. If this individual still does, there are constructive ways to ask questions and get answers.
 
strategicmove said:
You have done a great job, Mullet, of clarifying these things. Just forget these random comments and focus on substance elsewhere. Anyone that took their time to read this thread from the beginning to the end should not find anything unclear. If this individual still does, there are constructive ways to ask questions and get answers.
Click to expand...

I did read, and yet the information was never provided...

Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
Fortunately for the consumer, this Penn State Study is the first step in a thorough legitimization process that USPlabs is embarking on with PRIME; it (the Penn State study) will be accompanied by an objective trial of sorts (The Staley Report), where trainees were selected away from mainstream boards (and the associated biases ? positive or negative) and thoroughly recorded their progress under Charles Staley; it will also be accompanied by the release of the Beta Tester's blood abstracts which, along with this particular study, will display no cyto-toxicity and no suppression of endogenous hormones.
.
 
joebo said:
Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
Fortunately for the consumer, this Penn State Study is the first step in a thorough legitimization process that USPlabs is embarking on with PRIME; it (the Penn State study) will be accompanied by an objective trial of sorts (The Staley Report), where trainees were selected away from mainstream boards (and the associated biases ? positive or negative) and thoroughly recorded their progress under Charles Staley; it will also be accompanied by the release of the Beta Tester's blood abstracts which, along with this particular study, will display no cyto-toxicity and no suppression of endogenous hormones.
.



So i guess your above statement was purely BS?
Click to expand...

Yes, in fact: I posted it merely so several months later you would be given the opportunity to p0wn me on an internet forum.

To clarify and be polite, I will state again: an adjunct Indigo Biosciences trial illuminated that PRIME has no possibility for AR-binding and accompanying intrinsic action - i.e., the possibility for androgenic activity is nil. At the time I wrote that statement, the adjunct trial was not released; afterwards, it certainly was.

Now, when faced with the opportunity of alienating the wishes of our beta testers and providing an incomplete data set, or merely releasing the AR-trial, the choice was rather obvious. Hopefully, you can see that and agree.

No matter what I say at this point, or how courteously and professionally I respond to your antagonistic baiting, you will continue to illuminate the thinly-stretched logic of your arguments; no doubt in an attempt to, in your mind, illuminate your perception of my - and by extension USPlabs' - dishonesty. However, given the completely hollow nature of your demands and your lack of desire to reach a constructive end, you will not receive that satisfaction from me.

I have clearly and politely articulated my point. That is all.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
Yes, in fact: I posted it merely so several months later you would be given the opportunity to p0wn me on an internet forum.

To clarify and be polite, I will state again: an adjunct Indigo Biosciences trial illuminated that PRIME has no possibility for AR-binding and accompanying intrinsic action - i.e., the possibility for androgenic activity is nil. At the time I wrote that statement, the adjunct trial was not released; afterwards, it certainly was.

Now, when faced with the opportunity of alienating the wishes of our beta testers and providing an incomplete data set, or merely releasing the AR-trial, the choice was rather obvious. Hopefully, you can see that and agree.

No matter what I say at this point, or how courteously and professionally I respond to your antagonistic baiting, you will continue to illuminate the thinly-stretched logic of your arguments; no doubt in an attempt to, in your mind, illuminate your perception of my - and by extension USPlabs' - dishonesty. However, given the completely hollow nature of your demands and your lack of desire to reach a constructive end, you will not receive that satisfaction from me.

I have clearly and politely articulated my point. That is all.
Click to expand...

ouch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top