Research labs like RUI for example should be just fine. They have protected themselves from this by saying not for human consumption and only for test subjects and their whole disclaimer. With all that they say that we have to agree to they can't control what people use it for. They aren't illegal technically they can be sold for research purposes still so buy a mouse and keep a journal. The problems our country has are a lot bigger then things like this. But with what legal knowledge I have I do believe that RUI has protected itself well enough that it can continue to operate the same way. I will try to read through their whole disclaimer and ask a lawyer friend of mine what he thinks. Unless their is a lawyer here willing to give some input on their opinion?
I think your severely underestimating just how wide ranging this amended law is.
Lets keep this hypothetical and say that I own a research company, with synthetic compounds, designed to be tested on animals.
- Do the compounds I sell promote muscle growth? Yes.
- Are they derived from herbs or can they be classified as a dietary supplement by the FDA? No.
Immediately, this means under the law there is enough for the government to take a deeper look at my business to see exactly what I'm doing.
- Where is the majority of my customer base coming from?
- Do I have a marketing campaign and if so, where is it primarily located?
- Do I sell anything outside of anabolic compounds?
- Do I, as the owner, have other businesses that may be used as evidence to suggest I'm only targeting bodybuilders, etc?
- Am I doing anything to actively ensure that my products are only used for research?
Basically, the law is so wide open that its inevitable that most research, sarms, etc companies will be investigated further - whether anything will actually come out of it is another issue.
