Getting Ephedrine Online [Forum Archive]

-->

Pages: 1

Getting Ephedrine Online

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: cigarsteve

Hi everyone!
Can anyone recommend reliable sites selling ephedrine based on personal experience? Tons of con job out there and I don't wanna be fooled. Thanks.

Posted by: kenwood

Here stack it w/caffeine

Posted by: dg806

Pure ephedra is illegal.

Posted by: TaylorsNutrition

we sell the softgels if you don't like tablets.
http://www.taylorsnutrition.com/inde...roduct_id=1561

Posted by: cigarsteve

Thanks guys. What about those I've seen over the net like 50mg per tab types? Small little round white tab. Any comments on those?

Posted by: TaylorsNutrition

They should all be only 25mgs.....................

Posted by: cigarsteve

Thanks TaylorsNutrition. But I have seen it in 50mg like this one - http://www.hellaspharmacy.info/catal...c109e79687942d

What do you make out of it?

Posted by: BigPapaPump68

Quote:

Originally Posted by cigarsteve

Thanks TaylorsNutrition. But I have seen it in 50mg like this one - http://www.hellaspharmacy.info/catal...c109e79687942d

What do you make out of it?

Do Not Post Sources! Also that is epehdrine ma huang.

Posted by: AKIRA

Whats wrong with ma huang? out of date?

Posted by: BigPapaPump68

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKIRA

Whats wrong with ma huang? out of date?

To the best of my knowledge, it is banned and also can very dangerous. You have to be careful buying tablets becuase of the fda busting for using the ephedrine tablets to make cocaine. IMO just go with the gel caps. There is pure ephdrine hcl that sells in tablet form that is also 50mg.

Posted by: viet_jon

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigPapaPump68

Do Not Post Sources! Also that is epehdrine ma huang.

REally??? ma huang? I've been looking for that.

I think that's the same stuff the old hydroxycut formula had in them. I loved those things.

Posted by: BigPapaPump68

Quote:

Originally Posted by viet_jon

REally??? ma huang? I've been looking for that.

I think that's the same stuff the old hydroxycut formula had in them. I loved those things.

IMO don't buy from there though because you would only be wasting your money. It's bunk web site.

Posted by: semigod

BigPapa, do you have any personal experience with that particular website?

Posted by: BigPapaPump68

Quote:

Originally Posted by semigod

BigPapa, do you have any personal experience with that particular website?

No because they are not legit.

Posted by: semigod

That is the same ephedrine I bought when I was in Turkey a couple of years ago. I bought it in local pharmacies very cheap and the manufacturer stated that it was pure ephedrine hCl 50mg per tab.I still have those empty boxes. Very strong stuff, and dangerous if not used properly.

The only drawback, like BigPapaPump68 said, is that these tabs are illegal now in the US so you should be careful when mail ordering anything like this.

Posted by: the nut

It's legal as long as the dose is 10mg or less...
But, there is a product called Vasopro, which is meant for "Relief for Shortness of Breath, Tightness of Chest, and Wheezing", which is legal and contains 25mg of ephedrine hcl and an exporant. I've stacked it with @00mg of aspirin and 200mg of caffeine. Just google it!

Ephedra Ban Overturned
Court Overturns One Year Old FDA Ephedra Ban

Low Doses of 5000 Year Old Herb Not Proved Dangerous
Congressional Democrats Attack Decision

Opinion & Analysis
by Jim Turner, Chairman of Citizens for Health

What do Tom Delay, Ted Kennedy and Henry Waxman have in common? When the federal courts go against them they threaten retaliation.

On April 13, 2005 Judge Tina Campbell of the United States District Court of Utah threw out the part of the sweeping FDA ban of the herb ephedra that prohibited sale of products yielding less than 10 mg of ephedrine alkaloids (ephedra) per day.

Ephedra, the primary ingredient of the over the counter cough remedy Sudafed, has been used in Chinese Medicine for 5000 years to treat common colds, coughs, asthma, head-aches, and hay fever. Judge Campbell ruled that the FDA had failed to prove any danger from 10mg or less of ephedra daily and ordered it to do so if it wished to enforce the ban.

Immediately Democrats Senator Ted Kennedy and Congressman Henry Waxman, well known and implacable foes of dietary supplements, issued statements deploring the outcome, apparently without understanding it.

Senator Kennedy said "If F.D.A. can't take a supplement as dangerous as ephedra off the market, then Congress needs to change the law to allow it to do so." Congressman Waxman seconded the Senator saying he “hopes the FDA’s ban will be upheld on appeal”, and “if it is not, it will clearly be time for Congress to revisit [the law] and give FDA the authority it needs to protect American consumers from dangerous supplements.”

So the Judge, who carefully weighted all available evidence, presented by presumably competent FDA lawyers and their adversaries, and concluded, as had previously the Congressional Government Accountability Office and Rand an FDA retained reviewer, that the evidence relied on by FDA to ban low dose ephedra products failed to establish that these products posed a risk to consumers is set up to be overruled by congressional supplement foes.

The judge ordered FDA to undertake new efforts to determine if evidence exists that low does ephedra poses a danger to consumers. The Congressional members said forget the evidence ban the products. Clearly the effect, if not the intention, of Messers Kennedy and Waxman is to change the law so that consumers cannot purchase low does ephedra dietary supplements even if the evidence fails to establish that they pose a danger. It is unclear how the fact that the substance banned by the FDA exists in more expensive drugs made by the pharmaceutical industry influences the Kennedy/Waxman position.

In her order Judge Campbell wrote “The plain language of “the 1994 law does not require a comparison of benefits and risks.” The FDA’s requirement that the company “demonstrate a benefit is contrary to the clear intent of Congress … the FDA’s definition of ‘unreasonable’ risk entailing a risk-benefit analysis is also improper...if food producers were required to show a benefit as a precondition to sale, the sale of foods such as potato chips might be prohibited," she wrote.

This ruling’s implications are unclear. An appeal is expected. The case applies only to low-dose ephedra. But it clearly heats up the Congressional debate about regulation of dietary supplements and the viability of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA).

The two major government funded studies examining ephedra data, including adverse events reports, for proof of harm, a 1999 GAO report and a more recent Rand study, both cited by the Judge, determined that the relationship of ephedra to cases of asserted harm is not proven. FDA concluded in a Feb. 28, 2003 White Paper that, regarding evidence that ephedra causes reported major adverse effects, “there is no smoking gun.”

The adverse events reports, FDA’s primary evidence against ephedra, fail to meet FDA standards for use as evidence of harm for a drug. Faced with a lack of proof of harm FDA tried to rely on the “unreasonable risk” standard in the devices and toxic chemicals law—any possible risk is too much without proof of benefits—and the judge caught them. Another court found FDA, once again, overstepping its regulatory authority.

Citizens for Health supports DSHEA, passed when 2.5 million consumers contacted Congress to protect their health rights. DSHEA gives FDA ample authority to protect public health if it can prove a product puts public health at risk. For now, it appears that evidence of harm from low doses of ephedra hasn’t been adequately proven. FDA got caught trying, in violation of DSHEA, to apply its drug standard to a supplement. The court blocked this dangerous precedent.

For now FDA cannot ban dietary supplements because it has a suspicion, rather than actual evidence, of harm. From its passage in 1938 until now the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act has defined and treated dietary supplements as foods. DSHEA gave FDA increased authority to regulation these foods. It did not allow the risk-benefit analysis, created to regulate new and potentially dangerous substances like food additives, drugs, pesticide residue and devices to be used for dietary supplements. When FDa tried to use the inappropriate risk/benefit standard the curt caught them.

Congress should stand by its carefully balanced 1994 determination, memorialized in its unanimous passage of DSHEA, that the public has the right to use dietary supplements that FDA cannot prove harmful. To Congress: Support the courts. Hands off DSHEA.

Posted by: angelo212

Quote:

Originally Posted by cigarsteve

Thanks TaylorsNutrition. But I have seen it in 50mg like this one - http://www.hellaspharmacy.info/catal...c109e79687942d

What do you make out of it?

That web site is not legit. Trust me.

Posted by: semigod

How can you say that they are not legit? did you have any experience with them?

Posted by: TaylorsNutrition

Like I said before, we sell it as cheap or cheaper than anyone else here:
http://www.taylorsnutrition.com/inde...roduct_id=1561
We are legit and sell all of Robs products also. If you find it Cheaper than us including shipping, shoot me a PM and I will take care of it. We sell around 144 boxes a week, so I can guarantee you we are legit and cheap.

The only thing that sucks for us (all ephedrine sellers) now is that for every "first time" customer, they have to fill out a form

mandated by the DEA that has their contact info along with their license attached. Most people don't like that so they go somewhere else to buy because some places don't do it yet. I wouldn't won't to be them when the DEA comes a knocking. John

Posted by: semigod

Yeah TaylorsNutrition, you are right. But I was curious that people with just one post go out and post that a website is not legit without even justifying it.
Especialy when a website makes you agree to the following before entering:

Quote:

- I am not a Law Enforcement officer nor I am affiliated with a law enforcement officer or agency.

- I am not accessing this site to gain information to use against the website's operators, its affiliates or any other person or entity in any conceivable manner.

Anyway, I will be probably trying your stuff TaylorsNutrition in the very near future... peace

Posted by: TaylorsNutrition

Understood. Thanks, John

Posted by: the nut

Here's another site in tab form..... A few bucks more than Taylor's, but I perfer tabs.

http://www.netnutri.com/browse.cfm/4,1807.htm

Posted by: TaylorsNutrition

Quote:

Originally Posted by the nut

Here's another site in tab form..... A few bucks more than Taylor's, but I perfer tabs.

http://www.netnutri.com/browse.cfm/4,1807.htm

Tabs were the shit but North Carolina has banned them unless you run a pharmacy. The gels aren't that bad. You don't have the taste of the tabs, plus they are liquid which most say gets into your system much quicker.

Posted by: angelo212

Quote:

Originally Posted by semigod

How can you say that they are not legit? did you have any experience with them?

They are on a list at a web site as known rip offs and go by six other names. I'll get the site to you by this weekend.

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.1.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37