Yes, my bad, this was taken down as a part of the 5-year archiving period.
However, they are still citing bogus research, which should be retracted. Would you mind telling me the definition of the word absence?
Because the word absence is right there in the title of a document they’re citing… yet… those researchers found greater than zero DMAA in the geranium plant material. How does >0 constitute absence??? That is simply fraudulent, my friend.
They did not definitively find anything yet, as their own lab technician noted. They need better tests. I’m not saying they didn’t find it, I’m just saying their tests are not good enough to definitively say anything, so this part of the indictment, as is, is weak at best.
So setting aside the ambiguity YOU believe is there in regard to the testing of the AAS products, are you aware of any case in history in which it was demonstrated that the FDA/DEA was shown to be in error of their determination as to the presence of the anabolic steroids named in an indictment or criminal complaint? Because these charges involve scheduled drugs, absolutely DEA was involved in all details of that aspect of this prosecution.
You obviously believe whatever Jared tells you and find a “fact” path to make whatever he tells you work for you, so in this case his position is that there are no AAS in these products. Jared imports his own raw materials and does his own manufacturing and as part of GMP regulations he is required to maintain frequent testing of incoming raw materials and also of his finished products. Given that he has been using these synthetic DHEA derivatives (not metabolites, Mike…there are no sex hormones in the human body with endogenous 1,2 double bonds) since 2015 and given the number of different pro hormone products he uses these ingredients in and the volume of sales he has had, he certainly has imported tons of raw material and performed and extensive number of manufacturing runs, which means that, given he claims he operates a GMP compliant facility, there are dozens of independent lab reports on these raw materials and finished goods that would, according to Jared, show zero presence of any AAS…for that matter zero presence of any substance other than what is alleged to be on the COA for the raw materials and supplement facts panels on the finished goods. So if there are AAS in these products, what does that tell you?
That being said, let’s create a neutral environment by removing the FDA testing out of the equation. What if let’s say one of the top two certified sports supplement drug testing organizations like NSF or BSCG performed its own testing on one or more of these Hi-Tech pro hormone products and determined the tested product contained AAS not on the product label? Or even better, I suppose, at least I would think as you would perceive it to be, what if Hi-Tech had their own expert witness oversee testing at an independent lab of Hi-Tech’s choosing and it turned out the the lab concluded the tested product(s) contained AAS and Hi-Tech’s expert acknowledged that the findings were accurate. What would you say then?
So, Jeremy, I assume this a collateral response to what I directed to Mike and that you are not speaking on his behalf. I am not sure why you chimed in since your response to three very legitimate questions/thoughts that go to the heart of the matter of this adulteration issue and Wheat’s ongoing “drugs-in-dietary-supplements” fraud is to respond to nothing. Interesting…and nothing hypothetical in either instance.
You ask for an example where FDA has been in error? We wouldn’t know as they have buried them if they existed. FDA has been shown to pay for results that they need. So unless they publish full results, they can’t be trusted for certain.
So despite what’s been in the news in politics and Hollywod lately, the last time I checked, this was still an innocent until proven guilty legal system.
So how about you show some proof instead of hypotheticals???
Because right now, all I’ve seen is this joke, annotated for your pleasure:
So tell me, why should I believe this “evidence” if the test isn’t even capable of differentiating legal compounds from illegal ones?!?!
Worse, why in the world would the requesting agent not want to get quantification?!
If you were an investigator, wouldn’t you want as much data as possible?!
To me, this smells like a pile-on.
So feel free to show some real lab tests, with quantification, preferably from a third party, and I’ll say “oh shit” at that point.
Because outside of the above nonsense, I’ve only heard about one government-funded agency that a certain multivitamin had steroids in it, but they don’t share lab tests, so I hunted the lot down, had it tested myself, and… NO DETECT.
So, for the open conversation, I have a few questions for the pro-DMAA legality crowd about pretty bulletproof arguments I see for why it isn’t compliant. Mind you, this isn’t to say it should be illegal, I just don’t think it is currently legal.
Pre-1994 Issue - Was a SPECIFIC species of geranium that has had specific components of it tested for DMAA that was sold in the united states pre-1994 either as a dietary supplement or as a food specifically for human consumption. I.e. Was there a specific Pelargonium Graveolens extract from specific plant parts that have since been tested to contain DMAA that was sold explicitly for human consumption? I just do not see this.
In the food supply ‘non-chemically altered’ Read the FDAs guidance? They have a pretty narrow definition of chemically altered that would actually exclude a lot of essential oils from counting. Mind you, this issue destroyed the advantra-z brand because the FDA whined about them standardizing for higher synephrine.
NDI Issue - Assuming the previous issues can’t be proven, one of these would obviously be required, and to my knowledge, no NDI was ever submitted.
Safety Issue - Even if you submit an NDI, can you actually overcome FDA safety complaints? Jared has alluded to how other drugs cause thousands of deaths a year and are considered safe, but those are ‘drugs’ meant for treating ‘medical issues’. The safety threshold there is always going to be a bit different. Since the argument will be that drugs are NECESSARY and so some safety threshold has to be allowed for. The FDA doesn’t even really have defined guidelines in place for what safety means to approve an NDI. As long as they can find anti-supplement scientists somewhere to say ‘this aint safe’ how can you fight that?
I believe it was proven that that claim was falsified. All products came back from 3rd party Labs from the same lot batch clean. You seem to be very involved in this case. Bad experience with Hi-Tech? I don’t believe anything unless I either see it with my own two eyes, or whatever the evidence says. Both sides of every story have a motive, and an agenda. Let me state for the record though, that I’m no longer infatuated with “exotic stim” whilst using them every so often. I’ve been enjoying the simple combo of caffeine+Theanine/Teacrine/nootropics.
Appeal to amend terms and get DMAA back can be found here
New information has come to light from the USPLabs case (which we don’t have access to):
These documents, which were produced by the Government in an unrelated case captioned USA v. USPLabs LLC, et al., No. 3:15-cr-4796 (N.D. Tx.) (the “USPLabs action”), reveal that, as far back as 2010, the FDA considered DMAA a dietary ingredient under DSHEA and that it did “not have any evidence to show a hazard” related to the use of DMAA. Doc. 252-1 at 12-14 in USPLabs action, attached hereto as EXHIBIT A (March 29, 2010 emails between Quyen Tien and James Lin). In 2011, the FDA again reiterated that it lacked evidence to conclude that DMAA is “harmful” or “adulterated”.
We don’t have access to those emails. The blog post shows a bit more too.
Hi-Tech makes the point that DMAA is still not officially illegal. Their recent loss in the case was regarding the seizure in 2013, but there’s still no law on the books against the ingredient.
If it was truly illegal, they argue that the FDA would have filed an immediate injunction last year.
So this is the last stand on the “short term” side of this case.
Now I really want to see what the hell’s going on with this USPLabs case though!!!
meso with dmaa is going for 70-80 on ebay… a few online stores also jacked up the prices on their remaining DMAA inventory when this 1st went down, think Suppz still have inventory of meso for $75, but most places are sold out of products with DMAA.
So, it’s been well documented that DMAA really does exist, in trace amounts, in geranium plants and perhaps it is a constituent of a botanical but let’s talk about the elephant in the room. Do we all believe that DMAA is really safe?? I’ve not had any terrible side affects that I don’t think is worth the risk but I have it to a buddy of mine who took it and went for a run. He became dizzy nauseated and collapsed on the side of the road. When the ambulance showed up his blood pressure was through the roof and he spiked a fever. I’m not sure that I didn’t damn near kill him. Has anyone else wondered about the true safety of DMAA products? Do we all really believe that it’s not possible that it could cause really bad side affects?
Not to my knowledge, plus i highly doubt that law enforcement is going to even bother with anything supplement wise, seeing as the majority of officers in my area use DMAA containing preworkouts
The FDA issued warning letters to supplement companies years ago, but never actually scheduled DMAA. That was one of Hi Tech’s arguments was that the FDA’s warning letters didn’t constitute “final action” or something (I forget the actual term used for this situation). This clearly must be the case, as no one has actually been punished for the sale of DMAA containing products. The FDA has resorted to all kinds of crazy tactics to try and stop Hi Tech, but if it had just been made illegal in the first place, they would have avoided this whole situation in the first place. Personally, I think the FDA knew they didn’t have much of a case, which is why they issued warning letters instead of just writing it into law, not to mention they still haven’t scheduled it, they’re just bullying Ho Tech, hoping they’ll eventually give in. But no, it’s not yet illegal.
Dietary supplements are allowed anything in the food supply unless stated otherwise, except in some edge cases.
Something is illegal to have if it is a scheduled drug, which needs to be signed into law, This was never done with DMAA so it is, depending on your perspective, in a grey zone or a legal supplement. Either way it is not illegal to buy or own
