84 replies to this topic

[scottl]

Wasn't there some discussion of you testing some of unique's stuff?

If not, I have several unopened bottles of piracetam from unque FROM BEFORE THE LIFEMIRAGE MESS I'd be happy to contribute if anyone wants to get them tested.

Edit: from what 1fast400 says one has to be careful how one goes about this so as to avoid getting sued should the stuff turn out not to be top notch, though zoolander migh be safe being in a differen country.

[zoolander]

I have product from both Unique nutrition and 1400fast. I just need to purchase analytical standards from Sigma-Aldrich. I can do this for piracetam and acetyl-L-carnitine.

I have been meaning to do this but when in the lab are very busy. I think I may put aside some time to do in the next few weeks.

I will also look into any legals issues that may result.

Off the top of my head I cannot see myself being sued. If I present the raw results from the test without an opinion this shouldn't be a problem.

[scottl]

Mike 1fast400 did get sued when he ran a testing lab to test a number of different brands. The idea being that unique can say you had a grudge against them and substituted bad stuff for theirs. so do what you can to....keep records and maybe have a signed witness that the stuff you tested really was from unique. just ideas, law ain't my forte.

[scottl]

We can now say that unique suggested that we do so.

Why not test them yourself?[/b]

I'm glad you suggested that. We may just take you up on that.

[doug123]

I think it would be better for the community for us to just focus on the future. I think it's safest to buy the purest stuff out there -- and Relentless Pete's prices are reasonable enough where I don't currently see an advantage to purchasing nootropics from anywhere else -- given his current extensive and expensive quality control procedures. Some folks don't care as much about "safe" or "IQ lowering" as they do about "cheap," even with an impurity -- so we should not be worried about these individuals.

I would just stick to being as conservative as possible when considering ingesting cheap Chinese stuff that has not been independently tested.

Anyone who feels they might have been poisoned might want to see a physician and request a highly sensitive test for blood levels of heavy metals (ask for tests with limits of detection of below 10 µg per Deciliter for lead) -- and all other critical values while they are at it. I did this, and it was quite reassuring to know I am alright -- especially considering the amount of strange powders I bought from smi2le.biz without ever seeing a COA.

Relentless (Pete), 1fast (Mike), and I all show COAs (on most stuff) -- so we play a fair game -- although we (1fast and I) do not offer independent testing on all of our products (I have not independently tested the DNP Piracetam I sell -- check out the disclaimer on it though -- http://nootropics.ip...-1148158679.jpg ) Mike also sells at least one DNP product (last time I checked) but he openly displays the COA so folks can make educated decisions. To get the best deal sometimes, we have to take a chance -- I guess I am a hypocrite worrying about purity meanwhile not testing my DNP product...

With other nootropic vendors (who do not offer supplier COAs or an HPLC assay, microbiological, and heavy metal assay from an independent lab) you have no idea what you are getting into as the supplement industry is totally unregulated. I would not suggest purchasing imported chemicals from Chinese chemical factories without seeing an independent assay from a reputable US lab -- unless they are from companies whose products can always match their label claim -- such as AOR, Jarrow, Now foods, and a few others -- so if folks read that the COA of the product in question doesn't even have a company name on it they realize they are taking their chances...of course we cannot read COAs of many modern popular retail dietary supplement products -- and I don't know if that is nearly as important considering that most supplements (gingko, ginseng, etc.) are already being independently tested by consumerlab.com. But the "nootropics" are a different and special category considering how few folks consume them on a population basis -- if there are impurities, we would never know about them without independent testing.

Check consumerlab.com for companies that have the best reputation as far as matching their label claims. AOR is not listed at consumerlab.com (I do not think), but AORsupport has thoroughly convinced me that they do not play around with anything but the best (if you would like to see how he convinced me, it's a...long story; here is part of it):

R-la raw material

http://www.imminst.o...-1086033906.jpg

R-la finished product:

http://nootropics.ip...-1148158088.jpg

AOR's rejected batches of PM (Three tries, and still no good!)

http://www.imminst.o...-1093293047.jpg

I think it would fair enough to start by evaluating the supplier Certificates of Analysis on the products in question. If they look anything like the COAs I get from suppliers in China, then we speculate about their purported purity. I have seen several COAs from China that stated about 99% purity that were more like 90-95% (or less) pure in reality. I've read "Steve" claim that he uses a European company for his Piracetam. I don't really believe him, but he could easily show us otherwise by simply showing us a COA.

I don't think that many people actually purchased Unique's product in the first place without seeing a COA in the first place. And after that whole...ordeal...I don't know how many folks will in the future.

It would be also quite impossible for us to test Unique's products and have the results be particularly credible given the lost chain of custody. I trust Scott (I have known him for a couple of years) and zoolander (just met him) --- but I can see already a lot of hysteria if a product comes out low in purity (and judging from the independent assays I have seen, this is highly likely).

Peace.

Edited by nootropikamil, 20 May 2006 - 09:15 PM.

[scottl]

"I don't think that many people actually purchased Unique's product in the first place without seeing a COA in the first place. And after that whole...ordeal...I don't know how many folks will in the future."

I don't think this is necessary true. but I'll certainly defer to group wishes. I'm more concerned with an analysis coming out 50% and contaminated then a few points off.

As long as what zoolander does is honest and he checks out the legalities, I don't know that Steve can do anything to him given where he lives and given that Steve would have to explain all to a court.

[doug123]

I am going to state the obvious: we have zero evidence from which we can draw any conclusion about the quality of Unique Nutrition's products. Therefore, it is in Unique Nutrition's best interest to provide their potential customers with evidence that supports the claim that they sell quality products. It is a claim they have made, correct? Just because someone tries to sell something to us doesn't mean we have to believe everything they say without seeing some "real" proof.

I think I am going to go see The Da Vinci Code tonight...maybe....

[zoolander]

All people can rely on in this situation is my word for it. I am fortunate to have the equipment and know how in regards to testing the items. I will most likely be using HPLC.

I have piracetam from Unique Nutrition, Smart Nutrition and 1400fast. I am sure that Edward had/has association with the first 2.

I will look at purchasing the analytical standards this week. I will most likely be testing piracetam as I have it from all 3 sources.

The DaVinci Code? Is that the same as 'The Edward Younun code?'

Edited by zoolander, 21 May 2006 - 10:46 PM.

[DJS]

I must say that I am rather excited about the idea of independent testing taking place. This kind of thing should be encourage and hopefully, with time, we can start a trend.

[scottl]

Zoolander,

It is good that you are testing material from 3 sources. That adds credibility and makes it less likely to be seen as anything personal.

[doug123]

Well, if we only have one sample, we can't really make a worthwhile conclusion about the overall line. Is Piracetam the only sample you plan to test? I would not assume the results from a single product could possibly be representative of the entire population -- it is very likely to be biased due to the small sample size. And if you choose a product like Piracetam (which is in large commercial production) you probably would get higher purity on the assay than you would if you did a (more) rare compound, such as Oxiracetam or Aniracetam.

[Shepard]

I've got some pyritinol that I can donate for testing (pre Life Mirage fiasco).

[xanadu]

I don't think being sued is a concern here. It's true that anyone can sue anyone with or without grounds. However, suing and winning are two different things and frivilous lawsuits can bring sanctions against those who initiate them. Doing a test and publishing the results on an internet forum is not a crime and not the basis of a tort or wrong, in my opinion. That's true even if the test were done poorly or the samples were contaminated. I'm not implying anything of the sort about your abilities or the test you plan to make, zoolander. I'm saying we do have a first amendment in our constitution and what has been talked about here would fall in the realm of free speech.

The parties being tested would have to show bias or errors to dispute the findings. Or would have to show a pattern of malice. For example, if some group hired by gm did a flawed study on fords and published the results in various media while concealing their connection to gm, that could be the basis of a lawsuit. But none of those things exist here. Zoo is not selling any competing noots, far as I know, and has no axe to grind. But what if the results show Unique's stuff as being just as good as the best? Will that be suppressed or will that be posted all over? I have no axe to grind either, I just am an interested consumer. I look forward to the testing.

[scottl]

Da Sense,

I personally am less worried about a point or few here or there, then something indicating gross negligance. Alas from what Nootropi says testing piracetam may not be...a great test. STill better then nothing.

[doug123]

Testing two samples of Edward's products would have a largely useless result. Sure, I am interested in seeing the results, but they would have zero significance unless we were to study a large number of random samples. That is, of course, unless a single sample comes out relatively poorly. A 90% result for an unexpired product such as the racetams (which are not particularly volatile and are relatively stable for several years after production -- given room temperature) is unacceptable. That means a vendor is selling deficient material. We have a lot of "Theories" about how safe expired drugs may be, but there is not enough data to assume that a 10% contaminant could not affect your heath adversely. The idea with taking compounds is to take the compound, not unknown contaminants. It's better to be safe and try to avoid all possible contamination. That being said, if we did find a 5-10% contaminant, that would tarnish the company in question's reputation severely. Pharmaceutical standards are set for a reason -- and a 5% impurity is grossly impure. Selling deficient material is unethical as a seller producing consumables intended for human consumption. But then what could we do? Nothing, without a significant loss of our valuable time. And no one wants to even hear about Edward because then comes up his...identity issues. But we learned a good lesson about Edward, that's for sure.

I think it would be more...efficient...for everyone taking the products from that...honest (cough)...and...ethical...vendor to do what they should be doing...getting an appointment with your primary care physician or psychiatrist, and tell him or her you feel you may have been consuming dietary supplements contaminated with heavy metals and possibly...who knows what else. Ask for a Complete blood count, lipid profile, differential/platelets, Comprehensive metabolic panel. heavy metals, the works!

Your Doc will whip out this little script paper, and write it up with ease. Go have blood drawn for God's sake and take it easy...once they identify levels of toxic heavy metals, then we will start some real hysteria. Oh! And ask the MD to test for levels of lead less than 10 µg per deciliter -- because even these so called "safe" blood levels of lead are inversely associated with IQ.
[thumb]
http://content.nejm....act/348/16/1517

Volume 348:1517-1526  April 17, 2003  Number 16
Intellectual Impairment in Children with Blood Lead Concentrations below 10 µg per Deciliter


Richard L. Canfield, Ph.D., Charles R. Henderson, Jr., M.A., Deborah A. Cory-Slechta, Ph.D., Christopher Cox, Ph.D., Todd A. Jusko, B.S., and Bruce P. Lanphear, M.D., M.P.H.
Background Despite dramatic declines in children's blood lead concentrations and a lowering of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's level of concern to 10 µg per deciliter (0.483 µmol per liter), little is known about children's neurobehavioral functioning at lead concentrations below this level.

Methods We measured blood lead concentrations in 172 children at 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months of age and administered the Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scale at the ages of 3 and 5 years. The relation between IQ and blood lead concentration was estimated with the use of linear and nonlinear mixed models, with adjustment for maternal IQ, quality of the home environment, and other potential confounders.

Results The blood lead concentration was inversely and significantly associated with IQ. In the linear model, each increase of 10 µg per deciliter in the lifetime average blood lead concentration was associated with a 4.6-point decrease in IQ (P=0.004), whereas for the subsample of 101 children whose maximal lead concentrations remained below 10 µg per deciliter, the change in IQ associated with a given change in lead concentration was greater. When estimated in a nonlinear model with the full sample, IQ declined by 7.4 points as lifetime average blood lead concentrations increased from 1 to 10 µg per deciliter.

Conclusions Blood lead concentrations, even those below 10 µg per deciliter, are inversely associated with children's IQ scores at three and five years of age, and associated declines in IQ are greater at these concentrations than at higher concentrations. These findings suggest that more U.S. children may be adversely affected by environmental lead than previously estimated.]

Source Information

From the Division of Nutritional Sciences (R.L.C.) and the Department of Human Development (C.R.H.), College of Human Ecology, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.; the Departments of Environmental Medicine (D.A.C.-S.) and Biostatistics and Computational Biology (C.C.), University of Rochester School of Medicine, Rochester, N.Y.; the Division of Epidemiology, Statistics, and Prevention, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Md. (C.C.); the Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle (T.A.J.); and Cincinnati Children's Environmental Health Center, Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati (B.P.L.).

Address reprint requests to Dr. Canfield at the Division of Nutritional Sciences, College of Human Ecology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, or at rlc5@cornell.edu.

Edited by nootropikamil, 22 May 2006 - 05:19 AM.

[scottl]

Adam!

Not recommended, and not likely to be positive. And if positive, no way to know where the heavy metals came from.

Edited by scottl, 22 May 2006 - 10:02 AM.

[doug123]

Scott, dude; all I am saying is largely a waste of our time to worry too much about being damaged by Edward's products. We should just focus on the future, as I suggested earlier. Most folks I know won't buy rare Chinese imported consumables from small companies such as UN without seeing a Certificate of Analysis. Seeing an MD and being tested for contamination is just the most efficient thing to do, considering Edward's evasiveness.

Testing one or two products might be a good idea, but that also might be a total waste of time. If Edward wanted to be seriously considered a high quality provider of nootropics, he would have presented some evidence of this, such as I have, or Pete has -- by performing some independent testing. After Edward's recent display of...honesty and integrity...I don't think anyone will trust him...at least until he comes clean.

[xanadu]

Adam, its gotten to be a joke anymore. Every one of your posts seem to start or end with mention of heavy metals. That and trying to slam any potential competitors. Of course it is good to be concerned about quality and contaminants. But, since we have not seen even one report that any vendor used by people here have had any heavy metals in their products, don't you think you could stop hyping that for a little while? It has gotten to be almost a monomania with you.

" Testing two samples of Edward's products would have a largely useless result. Sure, I am interested in seeing the results, but they would have zero significance unless we were to study a large number of random samples. "

Is it your contention that he sneaks heavy metals into random batches of products? And you base that on what? It seems logical that testing a few samples would tell you the purity and composition of what he is using.

"We have a lot of "Theories" about how safe expired drugs may be, but there is not enough data to assume that a 10% contaminant could not affect your heath adversely."

More scare talk. Stick to specifics and things you can prove. I'm not defending unique, I'm defending scientific procedure, which you claim to be such an advocate of. I've never ordered from UN.

[doug123]

Adam!

Not recommended, and not likely to be positive.  And if positive, no way to know where the heavy metals came from.

What are you saying Scott? Aren't I being positive enough as it is? [lol]

[Mike M]

I spent over 50,000 dollars in lawsuits due to testing. If you think you can't be sued you're living in a fantasy world. If someone chooses, they can make your life a living hell in litigation.

Remember the people suing you will be seeking damages, so they'll get a lawyer to take it % basis. You on the other hand get to nut up a retainer fee, usually around 10k and then pay your fee's as they happen.

Testing is an art. If the lab screws up your test and gives you a false result YOU can still be sued. Hell, I got sued for a test I didn't even do.

[DJS]

I spent over 50,000 dollars in lawsuits due to testing.  If you think you can't be sued you're living in a fantasy world.  If someone chooses, they can make your life a living hell in litigation. 

Remember the people suing you will be seeking damages, so they'll get a lawyer to take it % basis.  You on the other hand get to nut up a retainer fee, usually around 10k and then pay your fee's as they happen. 

Testing is an art.  If the lab screws up your test and gives you a false result YOU can still be sued.  Hell, I got sued for a test I didn't even do.

Couldn't you acquire and distribute testing results anonymously?

[Mike M]

Nothing is anonymous when you involve lawyers. They eventually find out what they want. I'm will to be 50% of the people on this board have no clue that their emails are still on their hard drive in some capacity. Even if your computer is clean, someone else's involved isn't. The internet has changed everything.

[doug123]

I think zoolander is cool and I don't think he has any plan to discredit Mike or Edward. That being said, I do not think it would be fair to be posting testing results from Mike or Edward's (or any other company for that matter) nootropic products without a clear chain of custody and their consent.

Plus, if zoolander is running the assay, and he does not have extensive experience running an HPLC, I would worry that might be a problem as well if we don't know his (or his lab's) SOPs. HPLCs require a lot of calibration and require an expert to run it to get a credible result. These HPLC tests cost at least $200 at an FDA registered lab with SOPs that can make the result credible in a court of law.

Peace.

[jaydfox]

I think zoolander is cool and I don't think he has any plan to discredit Mike or Edward. That being said, I do not think it would be fair to be posting testing results from Mike or Edward's (or any other company for that matter) nootropic products without a clear chain of custody and their consent.

A chain of custody, I can see a need for. As for consent, independent watch groups independently test stuff all the time without consent. Consent was granted the moment you sold your products to the public without a signed agreement stating that testing can't be done, and even that probably wouldn't hold up in a court of law when the public's health is at risk.

That said, independent testing groups probably consult proper legal counsel before pursuing such tests, to make sure they've dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's when it comes to reducing exposure to lawsuits. Even if there is no legal basis for a lawsuit, that doesn't mean one can't be filed. If someone has the money and the time, they can sue you for anything they want, at least in the U.S. Gotta love this country...

[eternaltraveler]

Zoolander, I wouldn't recommend that you publicly publish (negative) results without first learning about what the Australian law is on the matter. US law shouldn't concern you unless you have assets in the states that can be sued.

A chain of custody, I can see a need for. As for consent, independent watch groups independently test stuff all the time without consent. Consent was granted the moment you sold your products to the public without a signed agreement stating that testing can't be done, and even that probably wouldn't hold up in a court of law when the public's health is at risk.

grrrr, beat me too it )

[Mike M]

The problem is that you have a consumer doing testing. If things are ordered by a lab and shipped directly from supplier to lab, then you have a lot better ground to stand on. Trust me, I've been through this to many times. Once a person touches it, outside of a fully accredited, then you're just asking to have your ass handed to you in court.

His location makes no difference. The transaction happened here. If anything, it would be an even LARGER pain in the butt to do. Just my thoughts.

Is there a lab within the US that has the piracetam standard? I'm not currently aware of one. I'll gladly do my own testing and publish the results. With no prior standard testing done, it isn't like I have a super secret sample that I can send in place of the material I ship out on a daily basis with.

[xanadu]

BN is a business and it's a lot easier to sue a business than an anon internet personna. I doubt personally that any lawyer would take a case like that on a percentage basis. About the only time they will do that is if they think there is a large payday waiting for them. All others pay in advance. They will do a percentage deal on a personal injury case but first they check to see if the other person has money or insurance. If they don't, the client may be asked to pay a retainer.

How would someone sue zoolander anyway? They first have to find out his true name, and address. Then, they have to be able to prove that is the person who said the things they are suing about. This illustrates one good reason to not give out your name or personal info on the net. Use a proxy all the time and a firewall.

I can give my opinion anytime i want with no fear of lawsuits and so can zoo. This is a free country and the only grounds i could see for a suit here would be libel. To prove libel, you would have to prove the person lied, acted in malice or acted in a reckless manner disregarding the truth. You basicly have to prove they lied, not that the lab messed up or that the sample was old. A few disclaimers would reduce the likelyhood of even that holding up.

I'd like to see someone sue me for anything i've said on this board. It was all my honest opinion and even if I was wrong, who are you going to sue? Zoo, don't let anyone bully you or push you around.

BN, I'm not disputing what you said here. I'm sure you have been sued but that is a different situation entirely. I'd like to see a lawyer who would take a case like that without a retainer in advance. If the lawsuit fails, there is the possibility of receiving damages from the person who sued you if it is determined that the suit was frivilous and without merit. Far from being able to sue for free and walking away if it fails, the person who sues will put up their own money almost every time and runs the risk of being ruined if they lose. I've seen it happen lots of times.

[zoolander]

From reading the posts above its appears that I need to tread with caution.

For the record, I have no grudge or any associations with supplement companies or individuals involved with supplement companies. There are members here at this forum who have purchased product from particular companies. As a result of recent events, these members have concerns about the quality of the product that they purchased. I am simply offering a means by which they can independently test the product.

To avoid bias, I will not be testing the product myself. I will be contracting someone to test the product. The test with most likely involve HPLC and perhaps GC.

I need to look into the whole scenario at little further. One thing is for sure......I need to have my base covered. Hence, this may take some time