6-OXO is being pulled from the shelves because it was found to contain androstenedione…
I bet it was trace ammounts but still another black eye for Pat Arnold.
This is why illegal>legal?
Ive had two bottles of the stuff sitting in my cupboard fromr ages back when someone told me that they could be used as PCT for havoc…
Now I guess I can sell them on and make a little bit of profit haha!
Why oh why did I buy that junk?
lol.
Its always been useless crap, now people are going to think its “steroids”.
Very amusing.
Its been pulled for a while now. Rumour also has it the owner was or is in jail. I havent been able to order it from my supplier for my store for likely close to a month now.
I was advised by a respected nutritionist (will not post name) to order 6-OXO but it has been on back order for 4 weeks now. I guess that is why?
Any other suggestions?
Nolvadex is not on back order.
[quote]BulletproofTiger wrote:
Nolvadex is not on back order.[/quote]
Im not sure what this means.
Nolvadex is an SERM.
OXO was marketed as an AI.
SERM =/= AI.
Are you saying that Nolvadex, which can be used to raise test production for a time, can and should be used instead of oxo ?
Certainly your not referring to the use of 6oxo for a PCT drug, because no one in their right mind would consider it for that purpose.
Or did you simply mispell and ment to write nolvedex which is that bullshit Gaspari makes.
You sir are an enigma.
So true Westclock, but I’m guessing that Bulletproof was just alluding to the sad fact that many actually do use 6oxo for PCT.
Btw, I’ve read elsewhere that the DEA “visited” Ergopharm (PA’s company… the mfr of 6oxo) back in January. Supposedly this happened after that Phils pitcher, JC Romero, received a 50 game suspension after using 6oxo. Not sure what he actually tested positive for… a listed ingredient or an adulterant like andro.
It wouldn’t be possible to detect ingestion of trace quantities of androstenedione.
My expectation is that the quantities would have been only trace.
It’s an unfortunate situation.
We had a similar problem about 8 or 9 years ago, when ethers of testosterone or nandrolone actually would have been letter-of-the-law legal, in efforts to bring such to market. We were never able to get levels of non-etherifed T or N down to absolute zero and thus did not bring the product to market, though it would have been most excellent.
I would actually wonder if what happened was that androstenedione actually was undetectable by means used at the manufacturer, but detectable by GC/MS. And so what appeared absolutely fine by a legitimate chemical technique, and was fine by any standard related to any possible actual biological effect, was capable of being deemed a violation of law by a technique capable of detecting parts per billion.
I’ve long said that an athlete using a nutritional supplement product and then falling under public suspicion for steroid use would result in crucifixion for any company manufacturing the product that in any sense could be said to have violated the letter of the law.
Very unfortunate.
Furthermore, consider how ridiculous this is:
Other companies are selling liver-toxic synthetic steroids that also are illegal under the letter of the law, but get away with it on account of procedures the DEA chooses to follow. But meantime, a non-toxic product that is legal under the letter of the law except for, perhaps, parts per billion (or likely some other small value) trace quantities of a prohibited but naturally occurring and harmless substance with no performance-enhancing effect – as if that would be a bad thing anyway – yields a raid and, I suppose, prosecution.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
It wouldn’t be possible to detect ingestion of trace quantities of androstenedione.
My expectation is that the quantities would have been only trace.
It’s an unfortunate situation.
We had a similar problem about 8 or 9 years ago, when ethers of testosterone or nandrolone actually would have been letter-of-the-law legal, in efforts to bring such to market. We were never able to get levels of non-etherifed T or N down to absolute zero and thus did not bring the product to market, though it would have been most excellent.
I would actually wonder if what happened was that androstenedione actually was undetectable by means used at the manufacturer, but detectable by GC/MS. And so what appeared absolutely fine by a legitimate chemical technique, and was fine by any standard related to any possible actual biological effect, was capable of being deemed a violation of law by a technique capable of detecting parts per billion.
I’ve long said that an athlete using a nutritional supplement product and then falling under public suspicion for steroid use would result in crucifixion for any company manufacturing the product that in any sense could be said to have violated the letter of the law.
Very unfortunate.
Furthermore, consider how ridiculous this is:
Other companies are selling liver-toxic synthetic steroids that also are illegal under the letter of the law, but get away with it on account of procedures the DEA chooses to follow. But meantime, a non-toxic product that is legal under the letter of the law except for, perhaps, parts per billion (or likely some other small value) trace quantities of a prohibited but naturally occurring and harmless substance with no performance-enhancing effect – as if that would be a bad thing anyway – yields a raid and, I suppose, prosecution.
[/quote]
The government doesn’t bother to actually worry about your silly “logic”, or “protecting the public” or “common sense”.
They are elected officials, they respond only to the retarded monkey “media coverage” that steers the boat of public opinion.