10-17-2007, 08:46 PM
|
#21
|
|
Status: Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 18
Rep Power: 0

|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinoiii
Jacob, I do NOT believe we have interacted much, if at all...I am not here too jump on the barrage of USP haters, I could care to take part in that exercise...my time is much more valuable, however...I would encourage alternate language when trying to convince people to join in your plight. I have highlighted a few areas below:
Studies LIE all the time! Their essential funding and various vested interest groups is probably the biggest rationale, but there are also others we could discuss, and then perhaps there remains a dearth of existing toxicology data that could certainly confound a valuably-discussed efficacy if the LD50 doesn't seem to match up.
221% - ...Compared to?
Careful with this statement...this is not only overstepping in the realms of particular delivery systems, but also a completely fallous statement. Your studies may "support" your claims...but "proving without a shadow of a doubt" - hmmmm, I have mine...
Anectdotally, do you think people who have used GHB would choose your product over the actual drug? If the answer is no, then you got some "splainin'" to do.
Have you actually read that anti-Parkinsonian research?
Again...my full encouaragement would be to be very careful with your language usage here.
D_
|
Didn't you write the Blue print article for MAN or am I mistaken?
|
|
|
|