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

Photo
- - - - -

Vice published article contain info about longecity, group buys, NSI, Dihexa and more

vice.com longecity group buys

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 neuralis

  • Guest
  • 84 posts
  • 11
  • Location:EU
  • NO

Posted 20 July 2014 - 08:20 AM


Just discovered this..

http://motherboard.v...oing-commercial

Definitely interesting read, but I wonder what will be the effect of our forums inner workings made public.
  • like x 1

#2 Major Legend

  • Guest
  • 741 posts
  • 79
  • Location:London

Posted 20 July 2014 - 09:12 AM

I really don't like mass market exposure, it will bring a completely new breed of assholes. You know those hipster types?

 

If it happens I'll leave the forum.


Edited by Major Legend, 20 July 2014 - 09:12 AM.

  • Agree x 12
  • Well Written x 1
  • Cheerful x 1
  • unsure x 1

sponsored ad

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

#3 Shamanist

  • Guest
  • 19 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Los Angeles, CA

Posted 20 July 2014 - 09:38 AM

Great link - Thanks!

 

It's been helpful for the nootropic community to stay off the radar because the FDA tends to ban anything that doesn't treat a disease. According to Forbes, clinical trials cost more than $100 Mil:  http://www.forbes.co...ting-new-drugs/

 

That is probably why JSC Lekko patented Noopept in the U.S. in 1995, but never sought FDA approval. Because of bad politics, Noopept has been unavailable to many people who might benefit from it.

 

Perhaps articles like the one you brought to our attention will motivate the public to modernize the FDA.

 


  • Informative x 1

#4 Mind

  • Life Member, Moderator, Secretary
  • 16,921 posts
  • 2,002
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 20 July 2014 - 11:32 AM

This "story" has been covered before and Imminst(LongeCity) was even mentioned in the New York Times. So far, no noticeable negative effects, unless you are one of the founders of this place and lament the fact that most of the traffic goes to supps/noos forums (instead of real life extension/anti-aging research). But the nice side effect is increased ad revenue. You take the good with the bad, I guess.

 

There have been other articles, but this one is probably the most extensive mention of LongeCity I have seen.

 

 


  • like x 4
  • Agree x 1

#5 agora

  • Guest
  • 73 posts
  • 6
  • Location:New York
  • NO

Posted 20 July 2014 - 12:48 PM

Lol, its funny because I am Nima Shariatzadeh, the guy who referenced this site to the writer of the article.


  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 10
  • dislike x 6
  • Enjoying the show x 2
  • Ill informed x 2
  • Needs references x 1
  • Cheerful x 1
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Unfriendly x 1
  • Disagree x 1

#6 abelard lindsay

  • Guest
  • 868 posts
  • 227
  • Location:Mare Serenitatis Circumlunar Corporate Republic

Posted 21 July 2014 - 03:00 AM

Saw the article.  They mentioned Longecity and some of the stuff going on here and yet no mention of CILTEP, Mr. Happy Stack or LostFalco's TULIP!   I guess those efforts don't fit the traditional narrative and would strain credulity.  


Edited by abelard lindsay, 21 July 2014 - 03:01 AM.


#7 PWAIN

  • Guest
  • 1,288 posts
  • 241
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 21 July 2014 - 03:22 AM

Just curious, why so much negativity towards lynfectious?


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 3
  • dislike x 1

#8 agora

  • Guest
  • 73 posts
  • 6
  • Location:New York
  • NO

Posted 21 July 2014 - 03:49 AM

Yeah I was kinda confused myself... It doesn't really matter though, its an online forum


  • Unfriendly x 2
  • dislike x 2
  • Disagree x 1

#9 Mind

  • Life Member, Moderator, Secretary
  • 16,921 posts
  • 2,002
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 21 July 2014 - 06:43 PM

People are probably worried because of the indecipherable web of drug laws and regulations that exist around the world. Who knows what is legal or not anymore nowadays. Early adopters kind-of fly under the radar.


  • Agree x 6

#10 noot_in_the_sky

  • Guest
  • 287 posts
  • 17
  • Location:Mex

Posted 21 July 2014 - 08:38 PM

Saw the article.  They mentioned Longecity and some of the stuff going on here and yet no mention of CILTEP, Mr. Happy Stack or LostFalco's TULIP!   I guess those efforts don't fit the traditional narrative and would strain credulity.  

 

Yep, it seem they where going for the more sensational parts of the forum NSI, Dihexa, and so on. (Strange they didn't mention c60)

 

Nonetheless, I'm not to sure it would end up bad after all similar thing have happen to steroids forum, and steroids are still selling and the forum are operating.  I guess it will only increase the traffic for a while and the profit of noot companies.

 

As for $100mil, well with that kind of money it would be better spend lobbing Congress for nootropics and longevity research, or at the very least to keep them off our backs.

 

 

Pwain, people probably see lynfectious as a trader, a judas, for giving up what's going on here especially the group buys.


Edited by noot_in_the_sky, 21 July 2014 - 08:42 PM.

  • like x 3

#11 agora

  • Guest
  • 73 posts
  • 6
  • Location:New York
  • NO

Posted 21 July 2014 - 10:39 PM

If I am a traitor that means I gave this up for some benefit. Thats not true, however. I think telling people about communities who experiment with the latest and greatest compounds could potentially increase our resources and open more people's minds to experimental medications and push them away from the typical FDA treatments available. Our pet rats are all trying these chemicals to rid themselves of various disorders modern psychiatry has failed to treat. Why would we not add people to our mission? If there is legal action, I would say the people on this forum should have taken better measures to prevent that from happening in the first place. There's a reason why websites like drugs-forum still exist. If we are going to be scared of legal action, we can't grow as a community and we will ultimately leave many people uneducated about potential, life changing treatments


  • dislike x 3
  • Disagree x 2
  • Unfriendly x 1
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • like x 1
  • Agree x 1

#12 PWAIN

  • Guest
  • 1,288 posts
  • 241
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 21 July 2014 - 11:44 PM

Why don't we get notifications anymore of votes and who did the voting?



#13 chemicalambrosia

  • Guest
  • 393 posts
  • 59
  • Location:Minnesota, USA
  • NO

Posted 22 July 2014 - 02:09 AM

If I am a traitor that means I gave this up for some benefit. Thats not true, however. I think telling people about communities who experiment with the latest and greatest compounds could potentially increase our resources and open more people's minds to experimental medications and push them away from the typical FDA treatments available. Our pet rats are all trying these chemicals to rid themselves of various disorders modern psychiatry has failed to treat. Why would we not add people to our mission? If there is legal action, I would say the people on this forum should have taken better measures to prevent that from happening in the first place. There's a reason why websites like drugs-forum still exist. If we are going to be scared of legal action, we can't grow as a community and we will ultimately leave many people uneducated about potential, life changing treatments

 

I'm one of the people that gave you a "dislike" on your post. There are a number of reasons why many of us may not like this extra publicity. As Mind pointed out, there are potential criminal or civil actions that could be taken against people for being involved in some of these group buys. The chances of that happening are extremely low(and probably beatable), but letting "outsiders" know is only likely to increase that. "Spreading the word" to grow the community won't change patent law, but it certainly could get law enforcement or regulatory bodies involved.

 

People that have interest in these subjects, or need help, usually can find their own way here through search engines. Some tiny percentage of people might read that sensationalistic piece and want to jump on here and join us, but most are just going to adopt a negative view based on that article. If it was a balanced piece, and talked about how many people have been helped by these forums it would be different. Instead it only focused on a few of it's most controversial subjects. A lot of people here talk more about their favorite vegetables than they do about novel research drugs, but that isn't the impression one would get reading that article. There is quite a bit of balance on these forums, with skeptical people willing to speak their minds and warn others about the dangers of what they are doing. That article didn't have much balance, in my opinion, and was negative publicity.


  • Agree x 8
  • like x 3

#14 agora

  • Guest
  • 73 posts
  • 6
  • Location:New York
  • NO

Posted 22 July 2014 - 02:53 AM

So your logic is lets stay small to protect what we already have. You see the problem with that?

 

Idk, personally I have always been outspoken with my opinions and strive for change in society. Dallas buyers club was based off a true story. And yes while people *can* find their way here through search engines, not many people think to do that.

 

To be straightforward, what the guy said in the article was true. Yes, most of this forum does not participate in this kind of experimentation, but a part of it does. Instead of hiding it, I think it is more important to support what we do. The negative publicity comes from the fact that generally, people think chemical experimentation even on oneself is bad. Obviously, those of us who do experiment think that that social stigma is not accurate. So instead of retreating, I believe we should be more aggressive in what we do, because personally I think everyone needs to know their options. Sure you may still think this is negative and bad publicity and what have you, but I do not regret what I did because I will not allow someone else or a group of people to tell me I cannot do what I want with myself.


  • Disagree x 4
  • Ill informed x 2
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • like x 1

#15 tritium

  • Guest
  • 384 posts
  • 68

Posted 22 July 2014 - 05:24 AM

If I am a traitor that means I gave this up for some benefit. Thats not true, however. I think telling people about communities who experiment with the latest and greatest compounds could potentially increase our resources and open more people's minds to experimental medications and push them away from the typical FDA treatments available. Our pet rats are all trying these chemicals to rid themselves of various disorders modern psychiatry has failed to treat. Why would we not add people to our mission? If there is legal action, I would say the people on this forum should have taken better measures to prevent that from happening in the first place. There's a reason why websites like drugs-forum still exist. If we are going to be scared of legal action, we can't grow as a community and we will ultimately leave many people uneducated about potential, life changing treatments

 

The FDA's mission is not to improve the wellbeing of the population, but to improve the assets of drug companies.  If there is more publicity of this, then there will be more regulation.  Thanks for trying to screw us all over.
 


  • Good Point x 7
  • Agree x 2
  • Disagree x 1

#16 Spinlock

  • Guest
  • 53 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 22 July 2014 - 03:49 PM

My concern is there will be an influx of new members trying to get in on these groupbuys. The companies that can file legal action already know about us.
  • Good Point x 1

#17 agora

  • Guest
  • 73 posts
  • 6
  • Location:New York
  • NO

Posted 22 July 2014 - 06:03 PM

 

If I am a traitor that means I gave this up for some benefit. Thats not true, however. I think telling people about communities who experiment with the latest and greatest compounds could potentially increase our resources and open more people's minds to experimental medications and push them away from the typical FDA treatments available. Our pet rats are all trying these chemicals to rid themselves of various disorders modern psychiatry has failed to treat. Why would we not add people to our mission? If there is legal action, I would say the people on this forum should have taken better measures to prevent that from happening in the first place. There's a reason why websites like drugs-forum still exist. If we are going to be scared of legal action, we can't grow as a community and we will ultimately leave many people uneducated about potential, life changing treatments

 

The FDA's mission is not to improve the wellbeing of the population, but to improve the assets of drug companies.  If there is more publicity of this, then there will be more regulation.  Thanks for trying to screw us all over.
 

 

I'm not sure if you're serious

 

What I am trying to get across with that we need to educate those about the truth, and try to stop the FDA from doing what it does. Most importantly, we need to fight against stronger regulation and keeping quiet does absolutely nothing 


  • Ill informed x 3
  • like x 1

#18 FW900

  • Guest
  • 341 posts
  • 131
  • Location:VMAT2
  • NO

Posted 22 July 2014 - 06:59 PM

Lol, its funny because I am Nima Shariatzadeh, the guy who referenced this site to the writer of the article.

 

 

To be straightforward, what the guy said in the article was true. Yes, most of this forum does not participate in this kind of experimentation, but a part of it does. Instead of hiding it, I think it is more important to support what we do. The negative publicity comes from the fact that generally, people think chemical experimentation even on oneself is bad. Obviously, those of us who do experiment think that that social stigma is not accurate. So instead of retreating, I believe we should be more aggressive in what we do, because personally I think everyone needs to know their options. Sure you may still think this is negative and bad publicity and what have you, but I do not regret what I did because I will not allow someone else or a group of people to tell me I cannot do what I want with myself.

 

I'm willing to bet that you are friends with the writer of the article or he happens to know you? If not, I find it strange that he sought you out only having around 50 posts and worse would mention that you are a 17 year old. You and the Vice author should have known better.

 

You need to understand that your age paired with Q-Did-It's video in the article, makes it look like a bunch of teenagers (some under the age of 18 as the author pointed out...)  are popping these "smart drugs" and therefore these nootropics are a danger in the (incorrect) view of many people. I imagine that the FDA possesses emergency classification abilities. If they see a bunch of underage people taking these drugs, then they at the very least will threaten manufactures of them. National media attention.

 

I can see it now:

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

TODAY ON DOCTOR OZ

 

"Smart drugs.....Adderall..  Ritalin, we all have heard about these before.... but have you ever heard the term NOOTROPIC------the new dangerous drugs that kids are taking now. SOME HAVE NOT EVEN UNDERGONE CLINICAL TRIALS"  "But first.......The new weight loss sensation that's sweeping the nation"

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

You, Vice and the author, could have opened a pandora's box by mentioning this site, as it redirects to many sites selling nootropics and mentions new ones that the FDA may act on. Increased media coverage would lead to calls for action on the part of the FDA. Imagine if the FDA started cracking down on Nootropic vendors? Imagine now, our only options are Chinese vendors or illegal domestic sales or group buys----all of which would not be as safe as a vendor with third-party testing. Now imagine further, instead of there being a larger market there will be a smaller one of people taking substances with purity issues and legitimacy concerns. Instead of helping people, this Vice article may well do the opposite.

 

I downvoted you not because of you had mentioned Longecity but rather, based on how you contributed to an article that attracts major attention to obscure nootropics that have an unknown safety profile and further decide to mention your age without considering at the time the potential repercussions that may arise from doing so.


  • Agree x 8
  • like x 1

#19 agora

  • Guest
  • 73 posts
  • 6
  • Location:New York
  • NO

Posted 22 July 2014 - 08:40 PM

Not at all. He contacted me because I had just been hired to work for Alternascript. Personally, I don't see a real threat because there are other articles on the same subject matter online. 

 

Furthermore, I personally believe that more people should know about this, so our end goal can be to change the general consensus of the population against the FDA and other large corporation-funded companies. I understand you guys may not agree, but that is what I saw and the decision I decided to make because it is a movement I support. I am sorry if you guys are not outspoken and aggressive about your opinions and do not agree with me


  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 6
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Unfriendly x 1
  • dislike x 1
  • like x 1

#20 chemicalambrosia

  • Guest
  • 393 posts
  • 59
  • Location:Minnesota, USA
  • NO

Posted 23 July 2014 - 03:25 AM

So your logic is lets stay small to protect what we already have. You see the problem with that?

 

Idk, personally I have always been outspoken with my opinions and strive for change in society. Dallas buyers club was based off a true story. And yes while people *can* find their way here through search engines, not many people think to do that.

 

To be straightforward, what the guy said in the article was true. Yes, most of this forum does not participate in this kind of experimentation, but a part of it does. Instead of hiding it, I think it is more important to support what we do. The negative publicity comes from the fact that generally, people think chemical experimentation even on oneself is bad. Obviously, those of us who do experiment think that that social stigma is not accurate. So instead of retreating, I believe we should be more aggressive in what we do, because personally I think everyone needs to know their options. Sure you may still think this is negative and bad publicity and what have you, but I do not regret what I did because I will not allow someone else or a group of people to tell me I cannot do what I want with myself.

 

Look, when we're talking about group buys we are often talking about drugs that aren't approved by the FDA or any other regulatory body. Some have had limited human studies, and others have only had animal studies. Normal, "average", healthy people should not be trialing these drugs. Some people have exhausted many options and have treatment resistant conditions and turn to these in desperation. Other people do heavy research, become aware of the risks, weigh said risks, and decide to experiment. Unapproved research drugs aren't for casual use, and even though it appears some of that has already happened, a lot of publicity could increase that casual use significantly.

 

In my opinion this isn't about being outspoken versus being complacent. It is about promoting a minimum of responsibility and making sure that the people that have easy access to these substances have done their due diligence. Bringing in a crowd of people that might be making decisions based on soundbites just isn't going to help anybody.


  • Agree x 7
  • like x 1

#21 FW900

  • Guest
  • 341 posts
  • 131
  • Location:VMAT2
  • NO

Posted 23 July 2014 - 03:57 AM

Not at all. He contacted me because I had just been hired to work for Alternascript. Personally, I don't see a real threat because there are other articles on the same subject matter online. 

 

Furthermore, I personally believe that more people should know about this, so our end goal can be to change the general consensus of the population against the FDA and other large corporation-funded companies. I understand you guys may not agree, but that is what I saw and the decision I decided to make because it is a movement I support. I am sorry if you guys are not outspoken and aggressive about your opinions and do not agree with me

 

 

You act as though there are no outspoken critics of the FDA.

 

http://en.wikipedia...._Administration

 

Even if you did change the general consensus of the population against the FDA, The FDA is not run by public opinion nor should it be. Take the media nonsense regarding "prescription drug abuse" as a prime example of this-- There are many people who claim to be addicts, there are many doctors who say that opiate pain killers and psychostimulants shouldn't be prescribed like they are now, and your average person will agree with most of this and blame the FDA. Yet, even with such vehement public support, these drugs continue to be allowed by the FDA. This is a good thing! If the FDA was open to public influence, then many drugs would be taken off the market and many would haphazardly be placed on it.

 

Medicine and drugs in current usage are for the treatment of a symptom or a disease. With nootropics, we are talking about the enhancement not treatment of ourselves in most cases. And the issues I raised above have backings from people with PhDs and MDs; there are no medical doctors on the nootropics forum here. It is hard to broach the topic of nootropics with a doctor let alone find an outspoken proponent of them. If you were an actual medical doctor rather than a young person lacking experience, you may be able to gather a small following.

 

What you are speaking of requires major legislative actions to alter the FDA. It will be hard to garner support for any changes let alone an abolishment of the FDA. There is even more hatred for other regulatory agencies such as the IRS, yet they continue to exist. It is extremely difficult to change the general consensus of the population, look at the number of people who believe in creationism for example.

 

You have good intentions and you look at things extremely idealistically; it is important to maintain a more realistic and practical viewpoint as most of the people here are trying to address.


  • Agree x 2

#22 Major Legend

  • Guest
  • 741 posts
  • 79
  • Location:London

Posted 23 July 2014 - 08:27 AM

Dude, you are arguing with an 17 year old. His psyche isn't even 100% formed yet, he obviously has no idea how dangerous and disastrous misinformed government regulations can be. He believes that small growing minority can oppose the government and the opinions of a mainstream audience uneducated about these chemicals we talk about. He thinks that the mainstream will somehow be accepting that teenagers taking experimental unapproved drugs is acceptable...He thinks people actually have democratic powers, I give you a protest example such as occupy wallstreet, people generally have very little power to sway the government, unless they completely revolt.

 

No I don't think the FDA have a secret agenda, but IT IS in their best interest to regulate as many drugs that they can classify as dangerous as possible to protect 1) people from harming themselves 2) protect the long term interest of the drugs industry indirectly, for government profits which can then be spent on the state.

 

No offense to Lyn, but you wouldn't have been able to convince me to change my beliefs if I was 17 either, he is simply way too young to see the argument of the other side, as he is too young to have experienced being treated unfairly by the law or the state. 

 

The paranoia is unjust though, it would take a lot more to convince the FDA to take legal action to ban nootropics or associated chemicals, though publicity of vice and all those life dudes like that tim ferris guy, isn't helping stem the tide. 


Edited by Major Legend, 23 July 2014 - 08:30 AM.

  • Agree x 3
  • Good Point x 2
  • like x 2

#23 Ames

  • Guest
  • 316 posts
  • 50
  • Location:Cloud 7

Posted 09 August 2014 - 06:58 AM

1. Thats not true, however. I think telling people about communities who experiment with the latest and greatest compounds could potentially increase our resources and open more people's minds to experimental medications and push them away from the typical FDA treatments available.....

 

2. Our pet rats are all trying these chemicals to rid themselves of various disorders modern psychiatry has failed to treat. Why would we not add people to our mission?....

 

3. If there is legal action, I would say the people on this forum should have taken better measures to prevent that from happening in the first place......

 

4. There's a reason why websites like drugs-forum still exist. If we are going to be scared of legal action, we can't grow as a community and we will ultimately leave many people uneducated about potential, life changing treatments

The numbers were added for purpose of my response.

 

1. You are reckless and naive.

 

2. I'm not on a mission and it isn't up to you to attach me to yours. Again, you are naive and also entirely misguided. Do you know how much stuff is discussed on this forum that likely has a long-run net harmful effect? Pointing people toward discussions like these is your mission? You haven't thought this through. This forum is largely about figuring out what works, discussing it, sharing experiences, and acquiring hard to acquire suupplements; not some strange mission that you have dreamt up. Many people here are here to help combat debilitatiting issues. They aren't on your mission, and it isn't likely that the more mature and less strangely idealistic of those amongst us are either. You're better served channeling your idealism to a real, crystalized cause than to your stated pseudo-mission. Or you are better served just donating money to the forum if you really wish to further life extension research.

 

3. You're an arrogant something that I can't state due to forum rules. This statement of yours, alone, would have you banned if I ran this forum.

 

4. There is no "we" as you are using the term. There is only the "we" that is crystalized by group discussion, and there it ends. I'm not in your "we" and its likely that many here aren't either. So, don't make unilateral decisions that could possibly affect me as if I were in your club. I might feel slightly better if you had over 1,000 posts. You haven't broken 60 posts as of yet and all of a sudden I'm in your club and you make a unilateral decision to open the forum up to likely undesireable media attention? Socially speaking, that's a poor decision that smells of attention whoring and an outsized ego.

 

 

 

1. So your logic is lets stay small to protect what we already have. You see the problem with that?

 

2. Idk, personally I have always been outspoken with my opinions and strive for change in society. Dallas buyers club was based off a true story. And yes while people *can* find their way here through search engines, not many people think to do that.

 

3. To be straightforward, what the guy said in the article was true. Yes, most of this forum does not participate in this kind of experimentation, but a part of it does. Instead of hiding it, I think it is more important to support what we do.

 

4. The negative publicity comes from the fact that generally, people think chemical experimentation even on oneself is bad. Obviously, those of us who do experiment think that that social stigma is not accurate.

 

5. So instead of retreating, I believe we should be more aggressive in what we do, because personally I think everyone needs to know their options.

 

6.Sure you may still think this is negative and bad publicity and what have you, but I do not regret what I did because I will not allow someone else or a group of people to tell me I cannot do what I want with myself.

 

1. I don't see the evidence that you have the sense to be able to parse what is logical as far as this forum is concerned.

 

2. You being outspoken doesn't obligate me nor anyone else to be on your bus. This isn't an HIV medication forum, and you are living in a serious delusion if you think that it equates. Forget all of the other illogical and omitted reasoning behind your decision for a second. This forum doesn't have they political sympathy that an HIV forum/medication club would pull should anyone decide to do anything about it. And it never will. Your misperception outlined in your statement highlights the lack of sense behind your total perspective and decision.

 

3. You're an immature person for thinking that you can make that decision unilaterally.

 

4. Wrong. Some people don't think that they have a choice. Others do it for other reasons, while still thinking that its likely bad. Many of us have had bad side effects. Others believe what you believe. Again, you are incorrectly generalizing and made a bad, immature decision based on your incorrect, poorly reasoned assumption about others on this forum.

 

5. There is no "we".

 

6. Do to your phrasing here, I cannot quite interpret what you mean to say. If you are attempting to state what I think you are, then you may have a serious personality issue. Sincerely, I hope that you can empathize with the fact that the world exists outside of your own mind and that other people have differing personal interests, motivations, and problems than do you.

 

Yeah I was kinda confused myself... It doesn't really matter though, its an online forum

 

This forum matters to many of us. Your assertion that it "doesn't really matter" to you highlights your thoughtlessness toward this forum when you made your decision. Whether you were speaking of the hostility toward you of the forum itself is irrelevant. If you don't think that the hostility matters because it's just a forum, then you don't care about the forum enough to be entrusted with that decision. Only people that think this forum matters should have felt entitled to be in on a group decision that you made unilaterally.

 

 

 

What I am trying to get across with that we need to educate those about the truth, and try to stop the FDA from doing what it does. Most importantly, we need to fight against stronger regulation and keeping quiet does absolutely nothing 

 

 

There is no "truth" and there is no "we". There also is no "stopping the FDA" (ever) and, for the most part, you wouldn't really want to although i concede that there are several FDA laws that infringe on individual rights.

 

In summary, bad idea. I know that you have soothed your conscience with righteous indignation but, I'm here to tell you, you effed up.
 


Edited by golgi1, 09 August 2014 - 07:20 AM.

  • Agree x 3
  • Well Written x 1
  • like x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#24 fairy

  • Guest
  • 143 posts
  • 27
  • Location:Italy
  • NO

Posted 28 May 2015 - 11:40 AM

BUMP
 
Not about Longecity but nootropics in general: [...] Adderall e il Modafinil, che invece contengono anfetamina e causano l'assuefazione. Translation: Adderall and Modafinil, which instead contain (N.d.T. both of them) amphetamines and cause addiction. Is that true for Modafinil? goo.gl/7JT9Vo.
 
Edit
 
Some background: goo.gl/aHg1KV and these substances here are all but mainstream.


Edited by fairy, 28 May 2015 - 12:34 PM.


#25 Fenix_

  • Guest
  • 183 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Longecity
  • NO

Posted 28 May 2015 - 07:58 PM

Yep, it seem they where going for the more sensational parts of the forum NSI, Dihexa, and so on. (Strange they didn't mention c60)

 

Sensationalist clickbait articles on Vice? No way! Agora, no thanks for shitting on this community.


Edited by Fenix_, 28 May 2015 - 08:02 PM.


#26 Junk Master

  • Guest
  • 1,032 posts
  • 86
  • Location:United States

Posted 28 May 2015 - 09:55 PM

Good thing is no one under 20 will remember the article in a day or two...IMO.  

 

Move along, nothing to see here...



sponsored ad

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

#27 nowayout

  • Guest
  • 2,946 posts
  • 440
  • Location:Earth

Posted 30 May 2015 - 03:03 PM

Look, when we're talking about group buys we are often talking about drugs that aren't approved by the FDA or any other regulatory body.

 

...

 

It is about promoting a minimum of responsibility and making sure that the people that have easy access to these substances have done their due diligence. Bringing in a crowd of people that might be making decisions based on soundbites just isn't going to help anybody.

 

I understand your concerns, but this is the internet, and you know these group buys aren't secret, right?  Messages in this forum are often among the top Google search results. 

 

(Even longecity itself "helpfully" makes a link of the phrase "group buys" that takes anyone to this discussion, which is basically on "how to hide stuff we do from the FDA via obscurity.")  Not a smart decision on the part of longecity if we want security through obscurity, is it?    

 

In other words, that barn door was left open long ago.

 

As for the Vice article, really it is overly long and it is not concise enough for an online read.  I stopped reading before any mention of longecity, as I'm sure 99.9% of other online readers did.  If I were to worry about something, I would worry more about Google than this obscure article. 
 


Edited by nowayout, 30 May 2015 - 03:08 PM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: vice.com, longecity, group buys

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users