# Latest on andro ban



## 1Fast400 (May 27, 2004)

I'm tired of seeing people throwing things around. I will give you the most up to date info that is known. 

1: Nobody knows exactly when the ban will be. All that can be done are good guesses. 

2: The best information right now says that June 1st will be a big day. It is possible the bill will be set into motion. If this were the case it would take 3 weeks roughly to pass. As it stands now there is no grace period. Meaning when Bush signs it, it would be effective right then.

3: Senator Kennedy is trying to add DHEA to the list. Hopefully this will be met with opposition and slow down the bill. This information will hopefully be found out next week, the week of the 1st. If it is not met with opposition or if it is dropped by Kennedy, #2 will likely happen

4: These hormones will NOT be saved, they can only be delayed. The best hope is for a long grace period. As it stands now, there is no such grace period put in. This is what you should hope for.

5: You can't get into trouble for having purchased these items for the ban. They can't come and seize online records of retailers and go hunt down you for buying a bottle of 1AD or M4OHN or whatever. 

6: The rules in which the DEA works with will be cut down. This will allow them to add new compounds in a speedy fashion. Just because a compound isn't listed on the list, don't think it can't be added almost instantly. If anyone tells you they know their compound will survive is probably not aware of this. 

7: Best case, these things last till the Olympics, but will almost 100% be banned before then.


These is the best and more accurate information out there right now. Anyone saying otherwise is probably trying to blow smoke. I will update as I have more information.


----------



## brodus (May 27, 2004)

This really clears things up-->thanks for your help!

Once again, 1Fast rocks!


----------



## PreMier (May 27, 2004)

Great information.


----------



## Arnold (Jun 2, 2004)

http://www.usfa.biz/modules.php?op=modload&name=phpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=94&sid=84e6101d0889ed5522abbe525d499c10

_...if the Senate bill were to go through "unscathed" and was not "marked up" in committee, it would go to a vote in the Senate, then the House and then would go to the President's desk for a vote. We are closely monitoring the "issue" that is currently stalling the bill's approval, and we are continually lobbying to slow its passing. 

Unfortunately, best case scenario, this legislation will almost certainly go into effect by August for the upcoming Olympic games... maybe sooner. I'm sure that at this point, Congress will do whatever is necessary to ensure that this bill is in effect by Olympics._


----------



## tucker01 (Jun 3, 2004)

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=1815134

Almost over


----------



## nikegurl (Jun 3, 2004)

I never did like baseball.


----------



## Arnold (Jun 3, 2004)

We can all thank Mark McGuire when he said that he was using Andro (to cover up for his steroid use), that is what sparked all of this, and of course thank MLB too!


----------



## Arnold (Jun 3, 2004)

*Associated Press*

WASHINGTON -- The House overwhelmingly voted Thursday to limit sales of steroid precursors such as androstenedione following congressional and public pressure to stamp out performance-enhancing drug use among baseball players. 

The bill, passed 408-3, would ban over-the-counter sales of precursors, which act like steroids in the human body.

"We are here to say enough is enough by making it harder to traffic in steroids and making sure there are tough penalties for those who do," said House Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis.

The bill also would double the penalties for manufacturing or distributing anabolic steroids at or near a sports facility.

"The bill will go a long way to ensure that our nation's athletes and children will not be exposed to these dangerous products," said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas.

While protecting pro sports is important, stopping children from using those chemicals is even more important, House members said.

"Young athletes are using these drugs in the belief that they can become great in their sports and gain a lot of money," said Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va. "However, in addition to risking disqualification in their sport, they also risk stunted growth, infertility and other long-term health problems and even death."

Similar legislation, sponsored by Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., is pending in the Senate.

The House debated the bill on Wednesday but delayed the vote until Thursday.

Congress has taken an increased interest in the issue this year in the wake of reports of steroid use among athletes. A federal grand jury in San Francisco has indicted four men on charges of illegally distributing steroids, including the personal trainer of Barry Bonds.

Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig has asked the union to renegotiate its contract to include a tough steroids policy, and union chief Donald Fehr has left open the possibility of doing that before the players' collective bargaining agreement expires in December 2006.


----------



## nikegurl (Jun 3, 2004)

and i never even got to decide if i wanted to try 19Nor or not.


----------



## Arnold (Jun 3, 2004)

nikegurl said:
			
		

> and i never even got to decide if i wanted to try 19Nor or not.


you can still get it.


----------



## redspy (Jun 3, 2004)

Here's another release on this topic




> STATEMENT BY TOMMY G. THOMPSON
> Secretary of Health and Human Services
> Regarding House Action on Steroid Precursors Legislation
> 
> ...


----------



## PreMier (Jun 3, 2004)

Goddamn.. Now I need to decide on wether to stock up


----------



## brodus (Jun 3, 2004)

I just started with a huge DS order...I'm trying to decide how much to spend going forward...basically M1,4ADD is cheaper and more powerful than 1,4 andro, but the boldenone precursor (1,4 andro) has some intrinsic properties I like and want to try--but it's damn expensive.

Oh--and as we've seen and said for months, you can thank baseball for this whole fiasco.


----------



## Arnold (Jun 3, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> Oh--and as we've seen and said for months, you can thank baseball for this whole fiasco.


yup.


----------



## I'm Trying (Jun 3, 2004)

So I guess we are ultimatly fucked huh?? Is there anything that can come out in the future that wouldn't be under this ban or will the FDA have instant banning power?? I mean like companies like VPX etc can come up with different compounds that wouldn't be under the ban? Also does anyone have the list or link to what is getting banned??
Thanks!!


----------



## Arnold (Jun 3, 2004)

I'm Trying said:
			
		

> So I guess we are ultimatly fucked huh?? Is there anything that can come out in the future that wouldn't be under this ban or will the FDA have instant banning power?? I mean like companies like VPX etc can come up with different compounds that wouldn't be under the ban? Also does anyone have the list or link to what is getting banned??
> Thanks!!


yeah, that about sums it up.

It does not matter if anyone comes up with a "different" compound, by my understanding it will be written so that any new compounds can be added immediately as needed.


----------



## I'm Trying (Jun 3, 2004)

Shit!! Hey Robert do you have a link or list for the proposed banned supps??
Thanks!!


----------



## PreMier (Jun 3, 2004)

I'm Trying said:
			
		

> Shit!! Hey Robert do you have a link or list for the proposed banned supps??
> Thanks!!


Its EVERYTHING bro.


----------



## Arnold (Jun 3, 2004)

I'm Trying said:
			
		

> Shit!! Hey Robert do you have a link or list for the proposed banned supps??
> Thanks!!


does not really matter, the only thing *not* being banned is DHEA, yet anyway.

you can get all the info you need here: http://www.usfa.biz/modules.php?op=modload&name=phpBB2&file=viewforum&f=1


----------



## I'm Trying (Jun 4, 2004)

thanks for the link Robert!! Is DHEA worth a crap?? I'm looking for some info right now but has anyone had any experience with DHEA??
Thanks


----------



## rrgg (Jun 4, 2004)

I actually saw the ban mentioned on CNN last night (!)


----------



## Arnold (Jun 4, 2004)

I'm Trying said:
			
		

> thanks for the link Robert!! Is DHEA worth a crap?? I'm looking for some info right now but has anyone had any experience with DHEA??
> Thanks


sure.

I have heard good things baout the 7-Keto-DHEA.

but you have plenty of time to stock up, why bother with DHEA now?


----------



## topolo (Jun 4, 2004)

once again I feel like the government has just driven it in the back door!!!!!!!!!


----------



## brodus (Jun 5, 2004)

7-keto/oxo DHEA will survive the ban, and yes, it is very effective at inhibiting some of the cortisol-induced fat storage effects we all could do without.  Much better transdermal, but oral isn't usless.

Also, 6-oxo will survive the ban.

And as others have stated, I did not see 1,4 andro on the list...so if it is made available as a fresh-breath spray for me research animal, I thik I wil buy it!


----------



## Arnold (Jun 6, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> 7-keto/oxo DHEA will survive the ban, and yes, it is very effective at inhibiting some of the cortisol-induced fat storage effects we all could do without. Much better transdermal, but oral isn't usless.
> 
> Also, 6-oxo will survive the ban.
> 
> And as others have stated, I did not see 1,4 andro on the list...so if it is made available as a fresh-breath spray for me research animal, I thik I wil buy it!


initially, yes, but eventually they will be on there.


----------



## Arnold (Jun 6, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> 7-keto/oxo DHEA will survive the ban...


http://www.usfa.biz/modules.php?op=modload&name=phpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=101


----------



## Arnold (Jun 6, 2004)

`(i) androstanediol-- 

`(I) 3b,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androstane; and 

`(II) 3a,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androstane; 

`(ii) androstanedione (5a-androstan-3,17-dione); 

`(iii) androstenediol-- 

`(I) 1-androstenediol (3b,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androst-1-ene); 

`(II) 1-androstenediol (3a,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androst-1-ene); 

`(III) 4-androstenediol (3b,17b-dihydroxy-androst-4-ene); and 

`(IV) 5-androstenediol (3b,17b-dihydroxy-androst-5-ene); 

`(iv) androstenedione -- 

`(I) 1-androstenedione ([5a]-androst-1-en-3,17-dione); 

`(II) 4-androstenedione (androst-4-en-3,17-dione); and 

`(III) 5-androstenedione (androst-5-en-3,17-dione); 

`(v) bolasterone (7a,17a-dimethyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one); 

`(vi) boldenone (17b-hydroxyandrost-1,4,-diene-3-one); 

`(vii) calusterone (7b,17a-dimethyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one); 

`(viii) clostebol (4-chloro-17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one); 

`(ix) dehydrochlormethyltestosterone (4-chloro-17b-hydroxy-17a-methyl-androst-1,4-dien-3-one); 

`(x) 4-dihydrotestosterone (17b-hydroxy-androstan-3-one); 

`(xi) drostanolone (17b-hydroxy-2a-methyl-5a-androstan-3-one); 

`(xii) ethylestrenol (17a-ethyl-17b-hydroxyestr-4-ene); 

`(xiii) fluoxymesterone (9-fluoro-17a-methyl-11b,17b-dihydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one); 

`(xiv) formebolone (2-formyl-17a-methyl-11a,17b-dihydroxyandrost-1,4-dien-3-one); 

`(xv) furazabol (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyandrostano[2,3-c]-furazan); 

`(xvi) 18a-homo-17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one (13b-ethyl-17b-hydroxygon-4-en-3-one); 

`(xvii) 4-hydroxytestosterone (4,17b-dihydroxy-androst-4-en-3-one); 

`(xviii) 4-hydroxy-19-nortestosterone (4,17b-dihydroxy-estr-4-en-3-one); 

`(xix) mestanolone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-5a-androstan-3-one); 

`(xx) mesterolone (1a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-[5a]-androstan-3-one); 

`(xxi) methandienone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-1,4-dien-3-one); 

`(xxii) methandriol (17a-methyl-3b,17b-dihydroxyandrost-5-ene); 

`(xxiii) methenolone (1-methyl-17b-hydroxy-5a-androst-1-en-3-one); 

`(xxiv) methyltestosterone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one); 

`(xxv) mibolerone (7a,17a-dimethyl-17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one); 

`(xxvi) nandrolone (17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one); 

`(xxvii) norandrostenediol-- 

`(I) 19-nor-4-androstenediol (3b, 17b-dihydroxyestr-4-ene); 

`(II) 19-nor-4-androstenediol (3a, 17b-dihydroxyestr-4-ene); 

`(III) 19-nor-5-androstenediol (3b, 17b-dihydroxyestr-5-ene); and 

`(IV) 19-nor-5-androstenediol (3a, 17b-dihydroxyestr-5-ene); 

`(xxviii) norandrostenedione-- 

`(I) 19-nor-4-androstenedione (estr-4-en-3,17-dione); and 

`(II) 19-nor-5-androstenedione (estr-5-en-3,17-dione; 

`(xxix) norbolethone (18a-homo-17b-hydroxypregna-4-en-3-one); 

`(xxx) norclostebol (4-chloro-17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one); 

`(xxxi) norethandrolone (17a-ethyl-17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one); 

`(xxxii) oxandrolone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-2-oxa-[5a]-androstan-3-one); 

`(xxxiii) oxymesterone (17a-methyl-4,17b-dihydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one); 

`(xxxiv) oxymetholone (17a-methyl-2-hydroxymethylene-17b-hydroxy-[5a]-androstan-3-one); 

`(xxxv) stanozolol (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-[5a]-androst-2-eno[3,2-c]-pyrazole); 

`(xxxvi) stenbolone (17b-hydroxy-2-methyl-[5a]-androst-1-en-3-one); 

`(xxxvii) testolactone (13-hydroxy-3-oxo-13,17-secoandrosta-1,4-dien-17-oic acid lactone); 

`(xxxviii) 1-testosterone (17b-hydroxy-5a-androst-1-en-3-one); 

`(xxxix) testosterone (17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one); 

`(xl) tetrahydrogestrinone (13b,17a-diethyl-17b-hydroxygon-4,9,11-trien-3-one); 

`(xli) trenbolone (17b-hydroxyestr-4,9,11-trien-3-one); and 

`(xlii) any salt, ester, or ether of a drug or substance described in this paragraph.'; and 

(2) in paragraph (44), by inserting `anabolic steroids,' after `marihuana,'.


----------



## topolo (Jun 6, 2004)

Michael J. DiMaggio 
USFA Executive Director 


rob, are you related to him?


----------



## Arnold (Jun 6, 2004)

no


----------



## rrgg (Jun 11, 2004)

>It does not matter if anyone comes up with a "different" 
 >compound, by my understanding it will be written so 
 >that any new compounds can be added immediately 
 >as needed.

 Yes, but just because it CAN be added immediately doesn't mean it will, especially if there isn't some political gain to be made.

 Cynically yours,


----------



## Arnold (Jun 11, 2004)

rrgg said:
			
		

> Yes, but just because it CAN be added immediately doesn't mean it will, especially if there isn't some political gain to be made.


LOL, okay you keep thinking that.


----------



## rule62 (Jun 15, 2004)

This has made me join the Libertarian Party. I am serious. All the health problems in this country and this is the answer?


----------



## rrgg (Jun 15, 2004)

No Robert, YOU just keep believing that.

Give me a break.  The implication of your statement is that politicians act out in the public self interest and do so efficiently.   Please!


----------



## Monolith (Jun 16, 2004)

rule62 said:
			
		

> This has made me join the Libertarian Party. I am serious. All the health problems in this country and this is the answer?


Welcome


----------



## Pepper (Jun 16, 2004)

rrgg said:
			
		

> The implication of your statement is that politicians act out in the public self interest and do so efficiently.


 
huh?


----------



## brodus (Jun 16, 2004)

FWIW, Sledge from Designer Supps is pretty confident we have about 3-4 more weeks tops.  I tend to agree.  

ALSO, just so you can understand how little the manufacturers care about your ability to purchase these products, both the head of Legal Gear and Ergopharm (PA) have posted, at length, how they can't wait for the ban, that they think it's a good thing, etc...

I was more than a little surprised, but then not at the same time.


----------



## Arnold (Jun 16, 2004)

rrgg said:
			
		

> No Robert, YOU just keep believing that.
> 
> Give me a break. The implication of your statement is that politicians act out in the public self interest and do so efficiently. Please!


do you live under a rock?


----------



## Arnold (Jun 16, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> ALSO, just so you can understand how little the manufacturers care about your ability to purchase these products, both the head of Legal Gear and Ergopharm (PA) have posted, at length, how they can't wait for the ban, that they think it's a good thing, etc...


Ergopharm makes 1-AD and a Nor-Andro, why would they be in favor of this ban?

Legal Gear makes Mthyl's, again why would they favor the ban?


----------



## tomas101 (Jun 16, 2004)

i think PA is for it, b/c he feels that this indusry is getting out of hand


----------



## brodus (Jun 16, 2004)

Rob, I have no idea, but they both posted at length that they looked forward to the ban...I didn't read every post on the 8 page+ thread, but it was pretty crazy. 

They both basically expressed that "it was more trouble than it was worth" to produce/sell/defend these products and that all of the stupid questions/inexperienced users/purity battles were drivin them crazy, so they'd just as soon have them banned...But I don't understand why anyone would ever want a product they sell banned?


----------



## Arnold (Jun 16, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> Rob, I have no idea, but they both posted at length that they looked forward to the ban...I didn't read every post on the 8 page+ thread, but it was pretty crazy.
> 
> They both basically expressed that "it was more trouble than it was worth" to produce/sell/defend these products and that all of the stupid questions/inexperienced users/purity battles were drivin them crazy, so they'd just as soon have them banned...But I don't understand why anyone would ever want a product they sell banned?


okay, if they feel that way then they should stop making them, I do not see why they have to be banned, that makes no sense...*hypocrites*.


----------



## brodus (Jun 16, 2004)

I know...it makes me sick...not that I expected much more, but it's totally hypocritical.  It's part of the reason this all has gone down...the people that make it don't give a f about anything more than getting their dollar and getting out of the game.

Honestly, the only person who produces this stuff who I trust is Sledge from Deisgner Supps.  He's the only one who willing produces and pays for independent lab tests of his products, and he has good prices.  I also trust Mike at 1fast.  He's a totally legit dude...so legit that his consumer awareness site (labelclaimstesting.com) had to be put on hold b/c so many crooked manufacturers threatened lawsuits after he posted the poor test results of their products.

Other than that...Gaspari/Bruce Kellner sells PROVEN bunk shit that's overpriced...PA/Ergo and Legal Gear don't care...Syntrax doesn't meet label claims..SAN makes some good stuff, but not much in the PH department...VPX has good products but way too expensive...it's a sad industry.


----------



## Arnold (Jun 16, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> ...it's a sad industry.


yes, this is the reason for www.ironmaglabs.com


----------



## brodus (Jun 16, 2004)

BAD ASS!!

Congrats and Best of luck, man! 

I will definitely support your efforts!


----------



## topolo (Jun 16, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> yes, this is the reason for www.ironmaglabs.com


 
you can count on me as a customer Rob


----------



## I'm Trying (Jun 18, 2004)

COOL!!I'll be shopping there soon!!


----------



## rrgg (Jun 18, 2004)

Robert-- Explain. You are the one "living under a rock." You are the one who contested my claim that politicians often act out of self-interest.


----------



## Arnold (Jun 18, 2004)

rrgg said:
			
		

> Robert-- Explain. You are the one "living under a rock." You are the one who contested my claim that politicians often act out of self-interest.


indirectly, yes they do, it's all about money bro, get a clue.


----------



## rrgg (Jun 18, 2004)

Robert.  Now you're agreeing with me yet still write "get a clue."  You don't make any sense.  Is English your first language?  This must be a case of misunderstanding.


----------



## Pepper (Jun 19, 2004)

rrgg said:
			
		

> Robert. Now you're agreeing with me yet still write "get a clue." You don't make any sense. Is English your first language? This must be a case of misunderstanding.


Dude, you do need to get a clue. He has ALWAYS agreed with you. You've been rude to him from the start and you are the one with the _misunderstanding._


----------



## rrgg (Jun 19, 2004)

Pepper-- So *I* am the one who's been rude?     And not only that but rude "from the start"?  

"From the start" means message #30.  There's absolutely nothing rude about it.

I asked for an explanation, that's all.  I immediately received rude responses such as "do you live under a rock?" and "get a clue."  That kind of ad hominem comment is clearly beyond anything I said.

Look --- I did not mean for this discussion to get out of hand.  If Robert and I are now in agreement, then fine.  That's not how I read his replies.  I'm sorry he felt I was rude to him.


----------



## TopProducer (Jun 19, 2004)

Let's keep this post about Andro's now and stop disagreeing about disagreeing.


----------



## Arnold (Jun 19, 2004)

TopProducer said:
			
		

> Let's keep this post about Andro's now and stop disagreeing about disagreeing.


----------



## mikeb (Jun 21, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> both the head of Legal Gear and Ergopharm (PA) have posted, at length, how they can't wait for the ban, that they think it's a good thing, etc....


Don't believe everything you read.


----------



## topolo (Jun 21, 2004)

ok.....mikeb......i dont believe your post


----------



## brodus (Jun 21, 2004)

mikeb, I suggest you read this thread and then decide for yourself:

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?threadid=167316&highlight=finigenx


----------



## tucker01 (Jun 22, 2004)

A little update 

http://www.usfa.biz/modules.php?op=modload&name=phpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=108


----------



## nikegurl (Jun 22, 2004)

better news than usual!  (thanks Iain)


----------



## brodus (Jun 22, 2004)

Great news--to all who don't have time to read the thread, it lookslike we'll have at least another 2 months, possibly more.

With all of the beheadings and stuff going on, I'm not surprised...who feels like going after dietary supps when heads be rollin'


----------



## Arnold (Jun 22, 2004)

> *Our lobbyist organization estimates a couple of months at least!!!*


----------



## brodus (Jun 22, 2004)

Of course this is right after I dropped all my savings on a supp. stash...M4OHN...M1,4AD...the list goes on...I'll probably never even use it all!


----------



## Monolith (Jun 22, 2004)

lol, me too. 

 I guess this means i had better just do a cycle of 40mg M4OHN and 50mg M1T for 2 months straight to help widdle down my stash, right?


----------



## topolo (Jun 22, 2004)

I stored up as well!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Arnold (Jun 23, 2004)

I kept telling everyone to wait....


----------



## PreMier (Jun 23, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> I kept telling everyone to wait....


Does this mean that you waited?  I bet you have the biggest stash!


----------



## topolo (Jun 23, 2004)

lol


----------



## Pirate! (Jun 23, 2004)

So, I am thinking about stocking up on IDS 1-AD Xtreme (same as ergopharm's plus a delivery system) and 4-AD to stack (probably Ergo's 300). Anyone have a better idea on what to stock up on for good mass producing stacks? Will Aromastats like 6-oxo be illeagal too? What should I stock up on!


----------



## PreMier (Jun 23, 2004)

M1T is far superior to 1AD.  So is Methyldianalone.


----------



## tucker01 (Jun 24, 2004)

I would stock up on the powders 1-test, 4-AD.  If you can get any more powders from Designersupps M1T


----------



## Arnold (Jun 24, 2004)

glad to hear what everyone is stocking up on, but lets keep this thread on topic: *Latest on andro ban*


----------



## axle (Jun 28, 2004)

its true we can blame baseball and a few of its overpaid players but the blame can also be placed on politicans.how much money do you think the drug companies have paid these people? how many own stock in these drug companies? if am wrong in my way of thinking here please tell me.but in the end we are the ones who are getting screwed.


----------



## Danman (Jul 2, 2004)

*Things are looking bad as of today...*

http://www.usfa.biz/modules.php?op=modload&name=phpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=94

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A congressional committee on Thursday moved to ban steroid-like substances from store shelves but exempted DHEA, a dietary supplement that one lawmaker warned is as dangerous as its popular cousin "andro." 

The House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee unanimously approved the Anabolic Steroid Control Act, which would make 43 so-called steroid precursors controlled substances instead of over-the-counter supplements. 

The bill includes andro, the performance-enhancing substance made famous by baseball slugger Mark McGwire in the 1990s. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration last month sought to crack down on makers of andro, or androstenedione, but did not ban it. 

The measure excludes DHEA or dehydroepiandrosterone, a widely marketed substance that "is really not any different" than an anabolic steroid, said Rep. Henry Waxman, a committee member. 

While DHEA occurs naturally in the body as a hormone, its supplement form is derived from plant chemicals. Like andro, it produces steroidal hormones such as testosterone only after it is metabolized. 

Side effects can include testicle shrinkage, breast enlargement and aggressiveness in men. Women can grow facial hair, develop deeper voice and gain weight. It can also increase blood pressure and harm cholesterol levels. 

"My concern is that by specifically exempting DHEA, we're sending the wrong signal to the American public. We're telling them that while there may be concerns about andro, DHEA is safe," said Waxman, a California Democrat. 

The National Institutes of Health is studying DHEA as an alternative HIV/AIDS therapy. California-based Genelabs Technologies, Inc. is also funding several studies of it as a possible treatment for lupus. 

It is often touted as an anti-aging remedy as well as a sexual performance booster because DHEA levels decrease with age. 

Committee Chairman Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican, said the AARP, the nation's largest lobbying group for seniors, opposes banning the supplement. AARP did not immediately return a request for comment. 

Waxman said evidence shows DHEA is risky but "pressure from the dietary supplement industry to protect a highly profitable product" has kept it out of the legislation. 

Barton and other lawmakers said DHEA could be addressed, possibly in a later amendment. 

The bill, which would allow the Health and Human Services Secretary to recommend future supplement bans, now moves to Rules Committee before a possible House vote. 

check out the original message here: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=4913116


----------



## Arnold (Jul 25, 2004)

*Steroids bill 'held hostage' in Senate 
Sponsor blames a fellow Democrat * 


Edward Epstein, Chronicle Washington 
Wednesday, July 14, 2004 

Washington -- The sponsor of a bill to toughen penalties for steroid abuse said wrangling in the Senate could doom the widely supported legislation that would outlaw the designer steroid at the heart of the BALCO doping scandal and the muscle-building substance Mark McGwire used when he hit 70 home runs in 1998. 

"My bill is being held hostage by a Democratic colleague,'' Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., said Tuesday at an informal hearing held by the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control. 

Biden said Sen. Richard Durban, D-Ill., wanted to attach a controversial amendment to the steroids bill, adding, "I would publicly urge my colleagues .. . to let us move on this legislation.'' 

Biden has pushed for more than a decade for tougher laws banning the use or sale of steroids without a doctor's prescription. Congress first banned steroids for nonprescription uses in 1990. 

His measure would ban the designer steroid THG, the supplement androstenedione (pronounced andro-STEEN-die-own) used by McGwire during his record-breaking home-run season and about two dozen other so-called steroid precursors. The House approved a similar version by a 408-3 vote in early June, but the Senate hasn't acted on its bill. 

Only 13 scheduled legislative days are left for the Senate this year, so despite all the publicity surrounding Olympic athletes and baseball players implicated in the BALCO scandal, the legislation could die and have to be reintroduced next year in the new Congress. 

"Time is running out,'' Biden said Tuesday. 

Biden said the problem was Durbin's proposal to require increased "adverse event'' reporting by makers of dietary supplements on cases of users suffering such health problems as heart attacks, strokes, pregnancy complications or even death. 

The possibility that Durbin may attach the measure to the steroids bill has drawn criticism from supplement makers and a coalition of medical groups and sports organizations who want it passed without any controversial amendments. 

Biden's co-sponsor, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said he hoped there was enough time to pass the bill and send it to President Bush, who has announced his support. 

"We still need to put some pieces in place, but the timing will be tricky, '' Hatch said in a statement. 

Durbin spokesman Joe Shoemaker said Hatch, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Durbin were negotiating on a way to move forward with the bill. "We are zeroing in on language and hope to go forward,'' Shoemaker said. 

The proposal by Durbin, a longtime critic of what he sees as lax safety requirements in the booming supplement industry, grew in part out of health problems tied to ephedra, a substance once widely used in some weight-loss pills. Because makers weren't required to report serious health problems, the issue lingered until ephedra was banned. His proposal would cover the makers of sports supplements, including steroid precursors, and herbal remedies. 

The steroids bill would add THG, andro and other products to the banned list of steroids, which invokes criminal penalties for making, selling or possessing such substances 

In October, the Food and Drug Administration ruled that THG is a steroid, making it illegal to sell for nonprescription purposes. 

The Drug Enforcement Administration banned andro last April, but the proposed legislation would allow the DEA to criminally prosecute sellers. 

The issue of steroids and the health effects gained attention in Congress in the aftermath of the federal criminal investigation into the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative. Four men, including the former trainer for San Francisco Giants star Barry Bonds, have been indicted in connection with illegal steroid distribution. A variety of sports stars testified before a federal grand jury, including Bonds, Olympic track athletes Tim Montgomery and Marion Jones and former Oakland Raiders linebacker Bill Romanowksi. 

Members of Congress have said it's important to act because of the example such stars set for young people whose health can be hurt by steroid use. 

"This is a health issue for our teenagers. This stuff is creeping down to our middle and grade schools,'' the Senate hearing was told Tuesday by Terry Madden, chief executive of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, the group that screens Olympic team members for banned drugs. 

"We need a sea change in the American public's position on drugs in sports,'' added Madden.


----------



## PreMier (Jul 26, 2004)

Do you see why its fucking useless to talk to my rep?  (orin hatch)


----------



## Monolith (Jul 26, 2004)

The timeline in that article doesnt look right... the senate is in august recess right now, but theyll be back september 7th untill they adjourn sometime around october 1st.  Or am i missing something?


----------



## Pirate! (Jul 26, 2004)

"criminal penalties for making, selling or possessing such substances" So, as soon as it goes into effect they can prosecute people for possesion. Ex Post Facto laws still exist, don't they? And what the hell does this mean: "We need a sea change in the American public's position on drugs in sports,'' added Madden.? That better be a typo.


----------



## Pirate! (Jul 26, 2004)

PreMier said:
			
		

> Do you see why its fucking useless to talk to my rep?  (orin hatch)


 You got something against right-wing Mormons? Don't you want 10 wifes? I think you got the balls for it?


----------



## PreMier (Jul 26, 2004)

Im mormon, and you are talking about polygamists... NOT mormons.

Hatch is an extremest though, and I have talked to him via letter a few times.  I definately dont agree with him when it comes to supplements.


----------



## Pirate! (Jul 26, 2004)

PreMier said:
			
		

> Im mormon, and you are talking about polygamists... NOT mormons.
> 
> Hatch is an extremest though, and I have talked to him via letter a few times.  I definitely don't agree with him when it comes to supplements.


 I know, it was a joke. I am LDS. That is how I am familiar with Orin. I don't understand--the conservatives should stick up for individual liberties. The Republican party has sold out. I should leave politics out of this, though. I understand why they are pushing this bill. Wrongly used, these substances are more dangerous than many medications that already require a prescription. But, the whole system is screwed. We can prescribe ourselves tobacco and alcohol, but not certain allergy meds or cortisone creams. It wasn't until small companies starting making serious $$ that people decided that you must let doctors and pharmacies make the $$. I think Tabacco should require a prescription if all this other stuff does. It probably would if anyone could find any medicinal applications for it. At least pot has many medicinal applications. Can't even get a doc to prescribe that. OK, I'll stop and leave this post for "the ban", but this is the real issue: Who makes the money, not improving the nations health. If it was, french fries and ice cream would require a script, too.


----------



## Monolith (Jul 26, 2004)

Vote libertarian.


----------



## Pirate! (Jul 27, 2004)

Monolith said:
			
		

> Vote libertarian.


 The Libertarian presidential candidate lives down the street from me. http://www.badnarik.org/


----------



## Monolith (Jul 27, 2004)

No shit?

 Get his autograph for me.


----------



## Pirate! (Jul 27, 2004)

Don't know him. He is just a local. I like him better than Bush or Kerry. Limit goverment interference in our personal lives! To keep on topic, I bet he would oppose the ban. Someone should ask.


----------



## g4ud1n (Jul 27, 2004)

voting anything other than democratic or republican is basically a waste


----------



## rrgg (Jul 27, 2004)

Hmm.. Should this (political) thread be moved? 

I agree with g4ud1n.  The US does NOT have a parliamentary system, nor does it have Australians run-off elections.  Otherwise it might be worthwhile to vote for a 3rd party.


----------



## PreMier (Jul 27, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> lets keep this thread on topic: *Latest on andro ban*


..


----------



## Monolith (Jul 27, 2004)

By voting for a third party you increase their influence on the major political parties.  The more libertarian constituents, the less republican/democrat.


----------



## Pirate! (Jul 28, 2004)

Monolith said:
			
		

> By voting for a third party you increase their influence on the major political parties.  The more libertarian constituents, the less republican/democrat.


 Exactly. And this improves our chances of stopping the ban, or at least similar infringements on our individual liberties.   Very much on topic here.


----------



## mikeb (Jul 28, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> mikeb, I suggest you read this thread and then decide for yourself:
> 
> http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?threadid=167316&highlight=finigenx



brodus,
Wish id' seen this sooner but..well, busy and don't get to post as often as I'd like. 
I honestly do not have the stamina to read those posts at bb.com where 2 or 3 different mfrs will sit there and piss at each other.  Arnold saying Kneller's stuff is crap, vice versa, this supp sucks, no yours does...yatta yatta.
The bottom line to ask yourself is this:  Do you really believe that a company like VPX who makes most of it's revenues on a particular item actually WANT that item to be banned?  Or how about Legal Gear.  I mean really.  You think they're gonna survive on selling creatine?  PA same thing.  It's disingenuous.  At best.  And it makes zero sense on any business level.  I have NO inside info on these guys other than what WE order and what WE sell and I can tell you that nobody is knocking the door down for VPX Micellean...LOL.
If these guys were so happy about the ban, why not just stop making it.  These statements are bullshit.


----------



## Arnold (Jul 28, 2004)

mikeb said:
			
		

> If these guys were so happy about the ban, why not just stop making it.



good point.


----------



## luke69duke69 (Sep 9, 2004)

just another thing our govt is missing out on for a taxable product.  just legalize them and tax them like alcohol and cigarettes.  Hell they don't really have a positive effect and they're legal.  They've proven cigarettes do nothing but kill you, and they're legal.  I hate to say it but just tax steriods and pro-hormones the same way, put big fuckin warning labels and be done with it.  Problem solved!


----------



## brodus (Sep 10, 2004)

It's called an exit strategy; it's product lifecyle management 101.  It's also a legal strategy. 

I work with companies who are folding all of the time, and this makes total business sense.  This is a classic example of companies exploiting a legal loophole and then milking it for all its worth before getting in trouble...and attempting to save face.

BTW, I referenced Legal Gear and Ergopharm, and if you didn't read their posts then you can't accurately call judgement on my analysis.  FWIW, P. Arnold has been upset about all of the 1-T and Methyls for a long time, b/c he felt they all pulled a major violation of DSHEA and hence brought the heat to a boil, effectively ruining the PH segment.  So I'm not surprised he wants it over...but he also has a product that IS hormonal that will survive the ban, and I'm sure you sell a lot of it -- 6-OXO.  Again, from this standpoint, to be the only company to still sell essentially a PH (although they changed the marketing and label) post-ban makes good business sense.

Legal Gear's problems stem from initial inexperiecne, quality control issues, and bunk shipments.  Perhaps the "I can't wait for the ban," was said as a half-joke out of frusturation, but if you file Bankruptcy and then all of your saleable assets become illegal, wow, you're bills just got cut in a major way.

Since the rhetorical questions are being asked, ask yourself this:

If these companies really cared about preserving their ability to sell this stuff, why aren't the major players involved in any joint effort to leverage influence on legislators?


----------



## rrgg (Sep 10, 2004)

I mostly agree Brodus, but your last comment doesn't make much sense.  If the AMA and pharm. companies lobby this bill then any efforts from Ergo and the like are basically David fighting Goliath.


----------



## Arnold (Sep 10, 2004)

luke69duke69 said:
			
		

> Hell they don't really have a positive effect and they're legal.



that is not true at all.


----------



## brodus (Sep 10, 2004)

David and Goliath situations happen all of the time; it's the bushido code--better to die in battle than roll over and get trampled defenseless.  Of course, you have to care about something to fight for it, which is my point.

I can give you many examples--one being the few manufacturers who actually fought the ephedra ban; I'm too tired to reference more, but it happens all the time.  If you care about something as an industry, you stand up for it, you don't just throw in the towel....unless of course your only motivation was to make money and get out ASAP.  Plus, David does win sometimes--look at the tobacco lawsuits.  Largest bankroll for a defendent in history vs. underfunded gov't lawyers, yet the gov't won.

I personally believe Ergopharm had a good case, but the other companies did not. 

Anyways, this is moot.  

What's up with the ban?  I think it's very close, based on "liquidation sales" @ places like Hardcore Labs, the fact the the Black Star Labs website disintegrated, the fact that 1fast says most products are gone when their gone (i.e. no new orders), and the fact that suppliers are making life difficult for Designer Supps (Sledge) who is trying to get a few products out.

Anyhow-->I'm off for a little vacation--staying in a cabin on a lake with my g/f, fishing, relaxing, recouperating.  Have a good weekend, ya'll.


----------



## shutupntra1n (Sep 10, 2004)

I say stock up anyway... If the ban is far away then you are prepared and if it's close and you end up with extra then sell it to those that didn't buy in time. Either way you are going to spend your money. Doing it now rather than later is not only legal but cheaper.


----------



## Arnold (Sep 10, 2004)

I really do not see anything happening before January, that is my personal prediction.


----------



## rrgg (Sep 10, 2004)

You have a point Brodus, but there are times when it makes more sense to choose your battles.  For example, instead of fighting the bill outright as you suggest, the supplement industry could be lobbying for a pared down version of the bill instead.


----------



## ZECH (Sep 10, 2004)

I think many knew they were a small fish in a BIG ocean coupled with the fact they knew it was a GREY area to start with and knew it would not last, thus get in, make as much money as you can and get out! Sad....


----------



## rrgg (Sep 10, 2004)

> the fact that 1fast says most products are gone when their gone (i.e. no new orders)



Are you sure 1fast said this?  I thought it was only true for 1AD bulk powder, but Mike made that clear before deciding to stock it last month.


----------



## Pirate! (Sep 10, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> of course your only motivation was to make money and get out ASAP.


That is exactly what we have seen this industry do. It has self-destructed. None of these PH manufacturers thought it would last. And the truth is: most people are too irresponsible to use them safely, and real gear is more effective with much more supporting research. I won't miss PH/PS. These guys that have been peddling this stuff should leave the country with their $$ after the ban, because lawsuits will be flying around like crazy.


----------



## Purdue Power (Oct 25, 2004)

Just wanted to throw in a little CollegeHumor.com pic that ties into all of our prohormone problems.


*Barry Bonds giving credit where credit is due.*


----------



## rrgg (Oct 26, 2004)

Pirate, Are you sure you aren't overgeneralizing?  I don't feel that all PH/PS "peddlers" are con artists.


----------

