The senate just passed the "Designer Steroids Act"

[halfwit]

I can't think of anything that RC companies carry that actually is anabolic or androgenic outside maybe albuterol. Peptides/AI/SERMs/syringes/DAs/beta agonists aren't anabolic or androgenic in themselves as far as I know. If I had an RC business, I'd certainly pay attention, but I doubt this would impact me much.

However, I'm sure other businesses like SARM companies or PH/DS companies may have to adjust their business model. I honestly haven't read the entire thing, but that's my take on it.

Either way, we'll find out.

 

[Harnold]

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.

I'm in Canada and we just follow pretty much whatever you guys do in the USA, so it will become the same here I'm guessing. What strikes me as funny, or not so funny is the room they give these huge drug companies promoting all these junk dietary supplements. They make all of these false claims, are not healthy in any way, but operate freely. it fcking pisses me off severely. end of rant.

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

I can't think of anything that RC companies carry that actually is anabolic or androgenic outside maybe albuterol. Peptides/AI/SERMs/syringes/DAs/beta agonists aren't anabolic or androgenic in themselves as far as I know. If I had an RC business, I'd certainly pay attention, but I doubt this would impact me much.

Either way, we'll find out.

You make a good point as always half but under the new law the compound does NOT have to be anabolic, the company selling it simply needs to CLAIM that it is.
You see a lot of these claims in regards to certain peptides, but I agree that PCT ancillaries are probably safe.

Another big change is that in the past the DEA had to prove that a compound was anabolic/ androgenic, now the burden of proof will be on those attempting to claim exemption.
This means they can come after you even with no proof of the compound actually being anabolic - that's a pretty big deal.

I agree that research chem sites should be safe depending on their business model but as for prohormones & sarms - completely fucked.

 

[Mprtz]

With the following wording, anything (including ancillaries) can be called a steroid and included in the ban:

1) The Attorney General may issue a temporary order adding a drug or other substance to the definition of anabolic steroids if the Attorney General finds that--
...(B) adding such drug or other substance to the definition
of anabolic steroids will assist in preventing abuse or misuse
of the drug or other substance.

 

[Megatron28]

I think people here have spent more time reading and understanding this bill than nearly all of our elected officials.

 

[cybrsage]

I sent the bill to a lawyer friend of mine who read over it. He takes steroids and such to improve his quality of life, not to become a body builder...so he has an interest in the bill. Anyway, after his normal "lawyer disclaimers" he told me the bill basically says $1,000 fine for use. No criminal sanction. Importing or exporting up to $500,000 fine. Prohormones are most likely no longer legal unless they can find a way to repackage them and they do not include the new list of banned items. He also said anabolics and androgenics are still permitted for lab research use. He said the labeling exception means they are also not banned. Places like RUI, where they explicitly state the items are for laboratory use only and not for human consumption, cause them to fall into the exception category.

My take on it is that it also depends on whether the executive branch decides to actually follow the law the President signs or if he decides to do his own thing like he has done so many times. He is a loose cannon wrt the separation of powers, so who knows what he will decide the law actually means.

 

[anzel]

As far as RC go. From what I was able to dig up is that a long time ago BB were hitting up the RC for IGF. The labs started to catch on and before long required good proof from buyers that they themselves were doing real research. To test this out I located what I would call a "real" research lab company and inquired via email about buying IGF. The prices for their IGF were higher than RUI. The responded back in 2 days and wanted to know what research group Iwas with and what kind of project we were working on. Along with that they also made sure that I understand that they will not send me igf for personal use. Any other labs like this one make only recombinant IGF which RUI claims they do.
So RUI doesnt filter out those seeking peptides to use on them selves per say. They just offer the disclaimer and its out of there hands. But these other labs go one or two steps farther to ensure their products do not fall into our hands. So if RUI is anything like these other labs then its a matter of how deep they look into their customers , meaning they are good to go, cause they are in the same field as the "real" or "legit" labs. But if RUI is more or less not quite underground but not quite "aboveground" with these labs then they can be in trouble.

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

I think people here have spent more time reading and understanding this bill than nearly all of our elected officials.

Makes you proud of some of the members we have over here doesn't it

Now if only we can get people to spend as much time reading & understanding the stickies...

 

[GynoPuff]

I can understand the concern of kids using stuff like superdrol and dmz and what not I GET THAT it should be bann. BUT! peptides?!!??!?! SARMS????? SERMS???? WHO CARES about those? that really makes me mad now im going to end up screwed by customs because ill be ordering all this bs from overseas.

 

[505jules]

Thank god this is what the senate is spending time on.

 

[siq]

Well its nice to know the government's concerns are in the right places.. (rolls eyes)

 

[MBB]

There's a petition against it. But it needs 100K signatures by 11th January.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...ne-or-veto-anabolic-steroid-act-2014/LlfvJ9Vg

Maybe one of the mods could send out a mass PM to all ology members.

 

[WorkingOT]

Honestly, this sucks for a lot of people, not me for one since I can PHs at a ugl in my own country and I just ordered a double stack of Helladrol/Katandrol/Formastanzol/PCT on mrsupps black friday sale, super cheap. To pretty much anyone that pins, this is a home run, slam dunk, against the Oral Only community and it makes me happier that these stupid kids won't fuck up their hormones by thinking these pills are magic, much like the supplement community making outrageous claims like HGH/IGF gains, Hydroxycut, its all garbage that does nothing, like penis pills. For the rest of us, life goes on as if nothing happened if you have a ugl.

 

[halfwit]

You make a good point as always half but under the new law the compound does NOT have to be anabolic, the company selling it simply needs to CLAIM that it is.
You see a lot of these claims in regards to certain peptides, but I agree that PCT ancillaries are probably safe.

Another big change is that in the past the DEA had to prove that a compound was anabolic/ androgenic, now the burden of proof will be on those attempting to claim exemption.
This means they can come after you even with no proof of the compound actually being anabolic - that's a pretty big deal.

I agree that research chem sites should be safe depending on their business model but as for prohormones & sarms - completely fucked.

Very good point in that the burden of proof definitely does change things. I know all too well how fast the FDA can ruin things; anyone else remember primordial performance? Had claims about the potency of their products and used the word 'anabolic' - boom, out of business. They had good stuff too, but couldn't fight the full brunt of the law in its silly quest to "save the children". Makes me ill thinking about it.

With the following wording, anything (including ancillaries) can be called a steroid and included in the ban:

1) The Attorney General may issue a temporary order adding a drug or other substance to the definition of anabolic steroids if the Attorney General finds that--
...(B) adding such drug or other substance to the definition
of anabolic steroids will assist in preventing abuse or misuse
of the drug or other substance.

That second line does bother me. I take letro for TRT and have to buy it from an online source because my doctor doesn't understand TRT, or the management of estradiol. Sure, I buy other stuff for blasts, but that could potentially mess with a legitimate need.

The nanny state at its finest. Ughh.