• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Pyridoxamine: Jarrow Defends its Legal Rights


  • Please log in to reply
130 replies to this topic

#1 LifeMirage

  • Life Member
  • 1,085 posts
  • 2

Posted 01 September 2005 - 09:09 AM


http://www.fda.gov/o...p00001-vol1.pdf

http://www.fda.gov/o...ck0001-vol1.pdf

sad.....

Edited by LifeMirage, 25 January 2006 - 08:25 AM.


#2 Karomesis

  • Guest
  • 1,010 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Massachusetts, USA

Posted 01 September 2005 - 02:04 PM

normally my resting blood pressure is between around 100/50 now it's probably 180/90.



Where will the line be drawn? Who will stand up and fight for what they know to be an effective way to reduce some signs of the horrific aging process? The FDA approval process is slower than a tortoise on heroin eating mollasess in january [huh] What are we to make of it?
I'll tell you what...fuck em. If the government also outlaws l-carnosine, and ALCAR, what next? How about bowing before the FDA and allowing them to take my freedom to choose what to ingest and how to do so, never. I bow to no one and nothing, I make the desicions that influence my own health and prospects for exteme life extension, at the same time if I die because I chose an experimental gene mutation, tough shit for me then, I accept responsibility for my health and actions either way it goes, I am prepared to deal with the benefits as well as the consequences. I have no desire for conflict of any type, I merely want to be left to my own devices.If my choices affect only me what business is it of the FDA to ban me from ingesting a substance? prohibition didn't work, and the war on drugs is a joke that has destroyed lives for no other reason than political ends for which the culprits should be dealt with most severely. Take a stand and oppose those who would take your freedom away, if not, your cowardice will be rewarded with fear and suppression of liberties, one of the only things that will mean anything in the future is our freedom to choose our fates and pursue our dreams.


Who will make a stand?

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for SUPPLEMENTS (in thread) to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 01 September 2005 - 02:48 PM

Karomesis,

Agreed. I should be able to put anything I want in my body as long as I take responsibility for it.

Alas a country founded on self reliance has become a country of the nanny state. Alas, like an alcoholic, there is no way out till we hit bottom.

Edit: well unless one could arrange a populist revolt, but slim chance of that.

Edited by scottl, 01 September 2005 - 03:08 PM.


#4 johnmk

  • Guest
  • 429 posts
  • 4

Posted 01 September 2005 - 06:25 PM

Do they have their facts wrong? If so, I don't see how enforcement can stand.

#5 jaydfox

  • Guest
  • 6,214 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Atlanta, Georgia

Posted 01 September 2005 - 06:26 PM

So let me see. The reason for banning this isn't because it might be dangerous or unnatural (the usual bullshit reasons), it's because someone is trying to patent the health benefits and sees these supplement makers as stealing a piece of their cake?

Hey, I don't like patents much (read carefully, I didn't say patients), but they have some minimal amount of merit, and to that end, this wouldn't be such a bullshit move if BioStratum had filed suit against people for violating its intellectual property rights (which, I believe, would have failed gloriously, because as far as I know, you can manufacture copies of inventions which are "patent pending", since the patent is only enforceable from the moment it's issued, not from the moment it's filed, or even from the moment it was conceived. Of course, once they get a patent, they can then block any further sales from that date forward, but sales prior to the issue date would be entirely legal).

But no, they didn't file a lawsuit to protect their intellectual property rights; they decided to use a funky loophole to accomplish something they couldn't due through legal means (not that this move is necessarily illegal; it's just not legal, if you catch my drift). That's what is screwed up about this.

Oh yeah, and the whole you-can't-tell-me-what-I-can-and-can't-put-into-my-body-of-my-own-free-will stuff too.

#6 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 01 September 2005 - 06:35 PM

It is in the FDA approval process, thus in the eyes of the FDA IT IS AN UNAPPROVED DRUG. I believe this is the issue. The FDA ain't fond of people seeling unapproved drugs.

#7 Pablo M

  • Guest
  • 636 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 02 September 2005 - 07:28 PM

Just be glad you guys live in a country where at least there is still the expectation of freedom. Here in Canada, melatonin and most isolated amino acids were illegal until recently, and Health Canada went so far as to ban SAMe a while back! It's available now, but come on! It's SAMe for crying out loud!

#8 xanadu

  • Guest
  • 1,917 posts
  • 7

Posted 02 September 2005 - 09:50 PM

The first link doesn't work for me. The second one just says they received an application to remove it from all products. It doesn't say it's banned.

Elect a green party candidate or this crap will keep going on. I don't care if you are a demo or repub, they are both basicly the same and both sell out to big money interests.

#9 wannafulfill

  • Guest
  • 275 posts
  • 4

Posted 02 September 2005 - 09:56 PM

This can still be imported right?

#10 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 02 September 2005 - 10:19 PM

This can still be imported right?


heh---out of curiousity where were you thinking of getting it?

#11 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 02 September 2005 - 10:21 PM

Just be glad you guys live in a country where at least there is still the expectation of freedom. Here in Canada, melatonin and most isolated amino acids were illegal until recently, and Health Canada went so far as to ban SAMe a while back! It's available now, but come on! It's SAMe for crying out loud!


You do not have freedom, because this is the inevitable fruit of socialism. As the US slides (further) into socialism, we also will reap these fruits.

#12 Pablo M

  • Guest
  • 636 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 02 September 2005 - 11:02 PM

Just be glad you guys live in a country where at least there is still the expectation of freedom. Here in Canada, melatonin and most isolated amino acids were illegal until recently, and Health Canada went so far as to ban SAMe a while back! It's available now, but come on! It's SAMe for crying out loud!


You do not have freedom, because this is the inevitable fruit of socialism. As the US slides (further) into socialism, we also will reap these fruits.

A weird mix of socialism and pseudo-monarchy is what we have, because technically we are still under Her Majesty's reign. But do you really think that what the US is sliding into right now is socialism?

#13 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 02 September 2005 - 11:16 PM

Read the socialism thread:

http://www.imminst.o...T&f=56&t=103&s=

Probably at least 1/3 folks here are in favor of it (I'm being conservative, may be 1/2 or more)

The next democratic candidate for president is a socialist:

"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
Democratic Party Fundraiser
June 28th 2004


Though she is now in the process of appearing to be moderate so she can get elected.

Yes the US is headed that way. Now all we need is a 21st century Edward Gibbon to document it all.

#14 johnmk

  • Guest
  • 429 posts
  • 4

Posted 03 September 2005 - 02:32 AM

The first link doesn't work for me.


Try this: http://www.fda.gov/o...p00001-vol1.pdf

#15 DJS

  • Member
  • 5,797 posts
  • 10

Posted 03 September 2005 - 06:35 AM

Though she is now in the process of appearing to be moderate so she can get elected.


GWB is just as much of a "socialist" (whatever that means) as Hillary. Let's not kid ourselves here. Both halves of the political machine are interested in nothing other than maintaining pork barrel politics and the status quo.

I did vote for Kerry, but this was really just a reflexive action against what I viewed as the rising tide of fascism in this country (which is itself a form of socialism). Now I have come to regret this vote because I was conned into the dichotomy and actually believing that my vote at the micro level had any real effect (or even potential effect) on macro-level processes. I guess if one is ratonal and supports the *principle* of democracy then he/she should vote. But the vote should be a principled one, not one operating under the delusional belief that voting according to a utilitarian ethic makes any differences whatsoever. Next time I vote for President I will probably write in Bruce Klein.

#16 eternaltraveler

  • Guest, Guardian
  • 6,471 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Silicon Valley, CA

Posted 03 September 2005 - 07:10 AM

I voted for Michael Badnarik.

#17 LifeMirage

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member
  • 1,085 posts
  • 2

Posted 03 September 2005 - 08:15 AM

The first link doesn't work for me. The second one just says they received an application to remove it from all products. It doesn't say it's banned.


Link fixed. Every company selling it has received warning letters...while not offically banned it is consider a drug and not a supplement as per the FDA.

#18 xanadu

  • Guest
  • 1,917 posts
  • 7

Posted 03 September 2005 - 10:20 PM

Voting for a democrat or republican either one, is not going to change a thing. They both work on the same team and with a few exceptions, will do exactly the same things. Hillary will throw a few more bones to the minorities than a repub will and that is the extent of the difference between R's and D's. If you want real change, you better get behind a third party like the libertarians or greens. Voting for the lesser of the evils just guarantees you will end up with evil and you are the one who voted for them. Does anyone really think Kerry would have made a big difference? If so, send me a pm. I have a bridge I can let you have cheap.

#19 REGIMEN

  • Guest
  • 570 posts
  • -1

Posted 04 September 2005 - 12:33 AM

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, 2008!!!

#20 vastman

  • Guest
  • 155 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Oakland California

Posted 04 September 2005 - 09:46 AM

xandu...if you think we would be where we are now if Gore hadn't been ripped off, you are a fool. The world would be a far different place.... During the Carter years much progress was made towards understanding the possibilitys of a sustainable future. I know... I was involved and during the oil crisis we made some amazing progress in conservation, alternate energy research, environmental sanity, and economic revitalization. Indeed, by the end of his term some of the largest companies were actually considering taking the plung into some serious alternatives....nuclear power had been stopped, we were retrofitting buildings, wind farms were being created and a new beginning was sprouting...

This threat to the neo-fascist rape pillage and plunder fossile fuels monopoly was real. Unfortunately, the vested corporate interests were able to concoct a brilliantly played fantasy candidate, known as the Reagan farce, which was successfully sold to our ignorant population and perpetuated every since. Much of what had begun in the 70's has been dismantled by Republican stooges, although they still haven't torn down the wind machines yet and still haven't figured out how to bullshit their way back into nuclear power plant depoyeement.

For you to say that alternatge candidates are our only recourse should make the dark force smile...as they slowely sqeeze the last of the life force from the planet. While I've been disgusted for decades, it's not because both parties are the same...rather, it is because the right wing bullshits so well and people are too greedy and ignorant to see through it all.... they prey on human weakness.

I've never heard an effective presentation by an alternative candidate which has a snowballs chance in hell of capturing the hearts and minds of the populous... I wish I had but, no way....about the only person who has made much sense is Barry Commoner, who is not the most exciting personality around although one of the most intellegent people on the planet.

Real progress had begun after the population got sooooo discusted by the unhidable failures of the right that they gave some pretty dedicated people a chance during the 70's. To lump these groups together.... me with them.... shows your ignorance. Just what the right hopes to play upon.

That said, I hope an alternative candidate emerges...one who is inspiring enough to get us to deal with the reckless disregard for the conseqences of our actions over the past few decades. Whether thats a democrate or green candidate, I don't care.... except a democrate would have a much more likely hood of becoming elected.. A FEW MORE RIGHT WING COUPES AND IT WON'T MATTER WHO GETS IN.... .

#21 liorrh

  • Guest, F@H
  • 388 posts
  • -1

Posted 04 September 2005 - 12:46 PM

back to subject? CAN we order it from europe for now? anyone know of a good source?

#22 Guest_da_sense_*

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 04 September 2005 - 02:07 PM

I just looked it up, no commercial Pyridoxamine products in east europe :(

#23 Karomesis

  • Guest
  • 1,010 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Massachusetts, USA

Posted 04 September 2005 - 02:23 PM

I will try to get a reputable source and post it . But if lifemirage, pete(relentless improvement)and others here don't know where to get it my prospects seem dismal in the short term.Synthesis is possible though,I know a couple of shady forums where one can find a chemical synthesis for a variety of substances [sfty]

Where the will is great, the difficulties cannot be great- machiavelli, Prince

#24 lemon

  • Guest
  • 389 posts
  • -2

Posted 04 September 2005 - 03:37 PM

The FDA needs to be tied directly to the people. The people should vote directly for it's management.

Banning a naturally occuring vitamin is beyond tolerable.

#25 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 04 September 2005 - 04:07 PM

The FDA needs to be tied directly to the people.  The people should vote directly for it's management. 

Banning a naturally occuring vitamin is beyond tolerable.


except I beleive it is a synthetic derivative, not a naturally occuring form.

#26 lemon

  • Guest
  • 389 posts
  • -2

Posted 04 September 2005 - 04:17 PM

Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2005 Jun;1043:807-16. Related Articles, Links


Pyridoxamine: the many virtues of a maillard reaction inhibitor.

Voziyan PA, Hudson BG.

Division of Nephrology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, S-3223 MCN, 1161 21st Avenue South, Nashville, TN 37232-2372. paul.voziyan@vanderbilt.edu.

Pyridoxamine (PM) is one of three natural forms of vitamin B(6). It is a critical transient intermediate in catalysis of transamination reactions by vitamin B(6)-dependent enzymes. The discovery eight years ago that PM can inhibit the Maillard reaction stimulated new interest in this B(6) vitamer as a prospective pharmacological agent for treatment of complications of diabetes. PM application in diabetic nephropathy has now progressed to a phase III clinical trial. Investigation of the PM mechanism of action demonstrated that PM inhibits post-Amadori steps of the Maillard reaction by sequestering catalytic metal ions and blocking oxidative degradation of Amadori intermediate. PM also has the capacity to scavenge toxic carbonyl products of sugar and lipid degradation, and to inhibit reactive oxygen species. These multiple activities position PM as a promising drug candidate for treatment of multifactorial chronic conditions in which oxidative reactions and/or carbonyl compounds confer pathogenicity.

PMID: 16037308 [PubMed - in process]

I repeat. The FDA has made a naturally occuring vitamin illegal except for allowing one company to sell it. This is beyond reproach.

#27 LifeMirage

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member
  • 1,085 posts
  • 2

Posted 04 September 2005 - 06:18 PM

I will try to get a reputable source and post it . But if lifemirage, pete(relentless improvement) and others here don't know where to get it my prospects seem dismal in the short term. Synthesis is possible though,I know a couple of shady forums where one can find a chemical synthesis for a variety of substances 


Now I didn’t say I can’t get it or know of sources of it….but I can’t publicly state them as they would quickly receive warning letters. There are a few interesting developments coming up in a month or so….

Except I believe it is a synthetic derivative, not a naturally occurring form.


You may be thinking of benfotiamine….

#28 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 04 September 2005 - 06:41 PM

My mistake, I had thought both were.

#29 xanadu

  • Guest
  • 1,917 posts
  • 7

Posted 04 September 2005 - 07:14 PM

What about getting a mix of b6 forms? Sort of like getting mixed tocopherols. Couldn't a manufacturer sell b6 with all 3 forms of it included in the mix? That might be a way to get around the ban. If it was just sold as a b6 supplement and in the fine print you see that all three are present, that should be legal.

vastman, you keep on thinking that the demos are the good guys and won't rip you off. They are both bad guys.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for SUPPLEMENTS (in thread) to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#30 lemon

  • Guest
  • 389 posts
  • -2

Posted 04 September 2005 - 09:48 PM

Republicans concentrate wealth into the hands of the few with irregard to anyone besides themselves. Maybe not? Here we have a self proclaimed "Compassionate Conservative" and "Uniter" in George W. Bush.

[wis]

But this is digressing... back to the topic of a banned, naturally occuring B vitamin that our FDA has made illegal except for sale and distribution by one company.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users