It is a fact that 6-methylheptan-2-amine is NOT an old dietary ingredient. This ingredient was not marketed as a dietary ingredient previous to DSHEA in 1994.
If 6-methylheptan-2-amine qualifies as a dietary ingredient at all, which is a big if given FDA's stance on synthetic constituents of botanicals, which is also a big if, given that no one has shown the natural occurrence of this ingredient anywhere (just like with BMPEA), that it is unquestionably a new dietary ingredient that was not marketed previous to October 1994.
Further, as a new dietary ingredient, 6-methylheptan-2-amine is not an article used for food in a form in which the food has not been chemically altered, meaning that a proper ndi notification must be filed with FDA prior to this ingredient being marketed in a dietary supplement product. New dietary ingredients are subject to the ndi notification requirement in 21 U.S.C. 350b(a)(2) and 21 CFR 190.6.
Without the required ndi notification showing safety of this ingredient - it is ILLEGAL to sell as a dietary supplement. Further, since this compound has been investigated and sold as a drug, it is a prohibited act under section 301(II) of the Act (21 U.S.C. 331(II)) to introduce or deliver for introduction into interstate commerce any food to which a drug approved under section 505 of the Act (21 U.S.C. 355) has been added.
Priceplow appears to be supporting the criminal act of marketing illegal dietary supplements.