Think DNP Can Be Used Safely? Think Again

CensoredBoardsSuck

Master
10+ Year Member
It's the time of year when bodybuilders start looking for ways to shed body fat and the interest for many invariably turns to DNP. There are articles on the internet that suggest DNP can be used safely if you're smart about it. Nothing could be further from the truth. DNP is a poison that has lead to cataracts, renal failure and deaths due to hyperthermia. It has an extremely narrow therapeutic index, i.e. the dose of DNP required to induce weight loss is very close to its lethal dose. In addition, its effects are unpredictable. A dose that was well tolerated in a previous cycle might not be tolerated on the next. As the use of DNP continues to gain in popularity, the death rate will continue to climb. There is no safe dose of DNP.

The first two studies below note the dosage of DNP in which deaths have occurred. These dosages are the same dosages currently being advertised as safe and the ones most often used by bodybuilders.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, deaths have occurred in people who ingested 3--46 mg of dinitrophenols per kg of body weight per day (3-46 mg/kg/day) for short periods or 1--4 mg/kg/day for long periods.

Reports of DNP poisoning related to weight loss appear to be becoming more common. McFee et al. (13) reported the death of a 22-year-old male 16 h after his last DNP dose, estimated at 600 mg/day over four days for weight loss.



Journal of Analytical Toxicology, Vol. 30, April 2006

Case Report
Two Deaths Attributed to the Use of 2,4-Dinitrophenol
Estuardo J. Miranda 1, lain M. Mclntyre 2, Dawn R. Parker 2, Ray D. Gary 2, and Barry K. Logan TM


We report the cases of two individuals, one in Tacoma, WA, and
the second in San Diego, CA, whose deaths were attributed to
ingestion of 2,4-dinitrophenol (2,4-DNP). 2,4-DNP has historically
been used as a herbicide and fungicide. By uncoupling
mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation, the drug causes a
marked increase in fat metabolism that has led to its use to aid
weight loss. Both cases reported here involved its use for this
purpose. Features common to both cases included markedly
elevated body temperature, rapid pulse and respiration, yellow
coloring of the viscera at autopsy, history of use of weight loss or
body building supplements, and presence of a yellow powder at
the decedent's residence. Because of its acidic nature, the drug is
not detected in the basic drug fraction of most analytical protocols,
but it is recovered in the acid/neutral fraction of biological extracts
and can be measured by high-performance liquid chromatography
or gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. The concentration
of 2,4-DNP in the admission blood samples of the two deaths
reported here were 36.1 and 28 rag/L, respectively. Death in both
cases was attributed to 2,4-DNP toxicity. Review of information
available on the internet suggests that, although banned,
2,4-DNP is still illicitly promoted for weight loss.
Introduction


[In the paper below, McFee et al. reported the death of a 22-year-old male 16 h after his last DNP dose, estimated at 600 mg/day over four days.]

Vet Hum Toxicol. 2004 Oct;46(5):251-4.
Dying to be thin: a dinitrophenol related fatality.
McFee RB1, Caraccio TR, McGuigan MA, Reynolds SA, Bellanger P.

Abstract
2, 4-dinitrophenol (DNP) was originally used as an explosive and later introduced in the 1930's to stimulate metabolism and promote weight loss. It's also a component of pesticides still available globally. Concerns about hyperpyrexia lead to DNP being banned as a dietary aid in 1938. A 22-y-old male presented to the Emergency Department (ED) with a change in mental status 16 h after his last dose of DNP. On admission he was diaphoretic and febrile with an oral temperature of 102 F, but lucid and cooperative. He became agitated and delirious. Intravenous midazolam was initiated with mechanical cooling. Pancuronium was administered later and the patient was intubated. Over the next hour the patient became bradycardic, then asystolic, and despite resuscitative efforts, died. Advertisements claim DNP safe at the dose our patient ingested. It is widely available and with the potential to cause severe toxicity is an understudied public health concern.



Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 48 (2007) 115–1
Dinitrophenol and obesity: An early twentieth-century regulatory dilemma
Eric Colman

Abstract

In the early 1930s, the industrial chemical dinitrophenol found widespread favor as a weight-loss drug, due principally to the work of Maurice Tainter, a clinical pharmacologist from Stanford University. Unfortunately the compound’s therapeutic index was razor thin and it was not until thousands of people suffered irreversible harm that mainstream physicians realized that dinitrophenol’s risks outweighed its benefits and abandoned its use. Yet, it took passage of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act in 1938 before federal regulators had the ability to stop patent medicine men from selling dinitrophenol to Americans lured by the promise of a drug that would safely melt one’s fat away.


Cyril MacBryde, a physiologist from Washington University School of Medicine, reported ‘‘alarming functional changes’’ indicative of liver, heart, and muscle toxicity in his obese patients treated with small doses of dinitrophenol (MacBryde and Taussig, 1935).

But some physicians continued to believe that the drug was a reasonable therapeutic option for obese patients recalcitrant to dietary intervention when used in the properdose and under the care of a knowledgeable physician. Even this position, however, became untenable when young women taking therapeutic doses of dinitrophenol under the supervision of physicians started going blind (Horner et al., 1935). If the estimate of one San Francisco ophthalmologist is accurate, during a two and a half year span, as many as 2500 Americans may have lost their sight due to what became known as ‘‘dinitrophenol cataracts’’ (Horner, 1936).



Australas J Dermatol. 2014 Nov 4. doi: 10.1111/ajd.12237. [Epub ahead of print]
Cutaneous drug toxicity from 2,4-dinitrophenol (DNP): Case report and histological description.
Le P1, Wood B, Kumarasinghe SP.

Abstract
The use of 2,4-dinitrophenol (DNP) has regained popularity as a weight loss aid in the last two decades due to increased marketing to bodybuilders and the increasing availability of this banned substance via the Internet. 2,4-DNP is a drug of narrow therapeutic index and toxicity results in hyperthermia, diaphoresis, tachycardia, tachypnoea and possible cardiac arrest and death. Skin toxicity from 2,4-DNP has not been reported since the 1930s. We report a case of a 21-year-old bodybuilding enthusiast who presented with a toxic exanthem after taking 2,4-DNP, and describe the first skin biopsy findings in a case of 2,4-DNP toxicity.
 
Why use DNP ? When is its use prudent? When is its use necessary? When you are too lazy to do it naturally?
That's a good related question. And I think it's also a useful way to evaluate risk.

The bottom line is no matter how certain you or anyone else is that there is NO prudent reason to use (an elective) drug, there will still be people who choose to use it.

It doesn't matter whether it's anabolic steroids or DNP or any other drug.

They will have a reason.

It doesn't mean we shouldn't attempt to guide people towards what we think are the most informed and most educated decisions. We should by all means.

If people have decided to use the drug anyway, the best approach is to focus on reducing the associated risks.
 
I agree personal attacks need to stop what are we 10? When this thread started the debate was great. I like hearing both pointed of view I know where I stand I have run DNP before. 2 that are what I would concierge safe cycles where all I had as a side effect where temp related. Then 1 horrible enough to make me never what to touch it again.

@CBS you have contributed a lot to the mesos community since you've been here. But, I don't think it's fair that when someone doesn't agree with you. You just start to bash them with disrespectful words and personal attacks or teaming up on the member then calling them a shill for not agreeing with you.

@Sworder I'm guessing you have ran DNP before and done it with low sides. I can tell you from personal experience that every run will be different sometimes your body can handle it sometimes it cant. To me I would rather give myself a strict diet and cardio for a month lose though 10lb. Then take dnp feel like crap, hot, and shitting blood My experice last time was just that bad. Once you see blood in your shit you know shit got real.

For other meso members new and old don't be afraid to post what you think or information you have just because you are afraid to get bashed.

Sincerly LYB
 
@Sworder I'm guessing you have ran DNP before and done it with low sides. I can tell you from personal experience that every run will be different sometimes your body can handle it sometimes it can't. To me I would rather give myself a strict diet and cardio for a month lose though 10lb. Then take dnp feel like crap, hot, and shitting blood My experice last time was just that bad. Once you see blood in your shit you know shit got real.
No, I haven't. Risk is too high with DNP for the reward. I feel the same exact way with clenbuterol.

The reason for my argument in this thread is:
CBS was demonizing DNP and making statements about DNP which were not supported by the studies he posted.

I am all about providing information, provide information so people can read it. However, providing information and then making statements(interpreting it for you) is WRONG.

I do not like people telling me what to think or how to feel.

In America, people are conditioned to think a certain way and feel a certain way. The news stations flood you with images and interprets everything for you, the independent mind isn't available anymore. This thread is a prime example of conditioning people with fear and misinterpreting data making you believe it.

CBS did the following:
-Created a thread with an inappropriate title.
-Wrote statements which were not supported by his studies, I have pointed out all the statements he has made and commented on them twice now.
-Posted peer-reviewed articles which to the layman may seem like his statements are true.

That's how it is done here in the US all the time on the news. Remember that Fukushima power plant leak? The news presented some evidence(in this case that there was a leak) I am okay with that. Just like I am ok with CBS posting studies. But DO NOT tell me what to think about it. I will do my own research and find out. Back to the Fukushima, the news told everybody to buy iodine supplements to protect themselves from the radiation and what do you know... I get a newsletter from my vitamin store stating they are all out of iodine... Then the news also posted a "picture" of the radiation and how it would spread to the US...
Fukushima-leak-world-infrastructure-news.jpg



The Fukashima is just one example of the fear mongering BS propaganda that is spewed.
Remember the bird flu? Swine flu? Oh yeah, H1N1 virus, can't say swine flu because that one farmer started slaughtering all his pigs 'cuz he thought he would catch it... Ebola?
The list can go on and on. I hate this type of posting and "information" in this form of delivery.

Had CBS just posted the studies and asked for interpretation it would have been a completely different story but he instilled fear, twisted the truth and made his own statements.

Here in America we swallow that really quick. Check the media, roid rage, TALIBANS, muslims, protect our country from foreign attacks, terrorism. We swallow too much and need to learn to spit that cum back into somebody's face.



The Great Dictator's Speech
I’m sorry, but I don’t want to be an emperor. That’s not my business. I don’t want to rule or conquer anyone. I should like to help everyone - if possible - Jew, Gentile - black man - white. We all want to help one another. Human beings are like that. We want to live by each other’s happiness - not by each other’s misery. We don’t want to hate and despise one another. In this world there is room for everyone. And the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way.

Greed has poisoned men’s souls, has barricaded the world with hate, has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed. We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical. Our cleverness, hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery we need humanity. More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost....

The aeroplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in men - cries out for universal brotherhood - for the unity of us all. Even now my voice is reaching millions throughout the world - millions of despairing men, women, and little children - victims of a system that makes men torture and imprison innocent people.

To those who can hear me, I say - do not despair. The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed - the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress. The hate of men will pass, and dictators die, and the power they took from the people will return to the people. And so long as men die, liberty will never perish.
.....

Soldiers! don’t give yourselves to brutes - men who despise you - enslave you - who regiment your lives - tell you what to do - what to think and what to feel! Who drill you - diet you - treat you like cattle, use you as cannon fodder. Don’t give yourselves to these unnatural men - machine men with machine minds and machine hearts! You are not machines! You are not cattle! You are men! You have the love of humanity in your hearts! You don’t hate! Only the unloved hate - the unloved and the unnatural! Soldiers! Don’t fight for slavery! Fight for liberty!

In the 17th Chapter of St Luke it is written: “the Kingdom of God is within man” - not one man nor a group of men, but in all men! In you! You, the people have the power - the power to create machines. The power to create happiness! You, the people, have the power to make this life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure.

Then - in the name of democracy - let us use that power - let us all unite. Let us fight for a new world - a decent world that will give men a chance to work - that will give youth a future and old age a security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power. But they lie! They do not fulfil that promise. They never will!

Dictators free themselves but they enslave the people! Now let us fight to fulfil that promise! Let us fight to free the world - to do away with national barriers - to do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness. Soldiers! in the name of democracy, let us all unite!
 
Last edited:
@Sworder you are still right that there is a lot of room for improvement. Everyone here knows how I feel about ad hominem arguments. Just stop with the personal attacks. Some people make them because they are incapable of supporting their arguments. Some people make them because it's an effective way to throw their opponent off. Some people just enjoy it. Either way, anyone who is truly motivated in advancing the debate will avoid them.

This is what frustrated me about this thread.
From the first post to the last I was constantly trying to provide counter evidence or dissect any evidence already provided, etc.

Every single time I was met with personal attacks because, as you said, the attackers either a) couldn't support their arguments or b) were simply trying to throw me off (which, to an extent, they succeeded).
IME these sort of attacks are usually due to the former.

Its not possible to create interesting debates that readers can learn from when the ad hominem arguments are as constant as they were here. Eventually someone will simply stop trying to advance the debate because it becomes an exercise in futility.
 
Worthy of note so my post isn't misinterpreted, I enjoy debates and discussions.
However CBS dropped his first post and didn't discuss his statements. I don't feel this thread was a debate in that sense. He did more deflection than discussion from the original post both from me and Zilla.
 
To be clear, my comment about personal attacks was not an invitation to point fingers. It was addressed to everyone.
 
To be clear, my comment about personal attacks was not an invitation to point fingers. It was addressed to everyone.

We are all at fault and we all contributed to the sandbox experience.
CBS is gonna get fingers pointed at him "since he started it (the thread)" lol.

"Tala är silver, tiga är guld" - Swedish saying
"Speech is silver , silence is golden"
 
This is what frustrated me about this thread.
From the first post to the last I was constantly trying to provide counter evidence or dissect any evidence already provided, etc.

Every single time I was met with personal attacks because, as you said, the attackers either a) couldn't support their arguments or b) were simply trying to throw me off (which, to an extent, they succeeded).
IME these sort of attacks are usually due to the former.

Its not possible to create interesting debates that readers can learn from when the ad hominem arguments are as constant as they were here. Eventually someone will simply stop trying to advance the debate because it becomes an exercise in futility.

At least breaking down the OP is worth it :)
 
At least breaking down the OP is worth it :)
I suppose this is the one step back after Millards post took the thread 2 steps forward. Inevitable it would come from someone so dont take it personal per se. Just my opinion of course. I personally dont come to the forums to break people down but hey thats just me.
Your doing DNP, you could be of value to the thread. You could explain your thought process as to why you think it is a prudent choice for you to use it. You could explain why in your mind it is necessary for you to use it. I dont care about statistics, Im talking your personal thought process. What makes you feel that DNP is a wise decision for you to use. What makes it necessary in your situation. What make you look at your situation and say to yourself, "I think DNP can be a valuable, prudent and necessary addition to my supplementation arsenal?"
When I ask myself that question, DNP is not an option for me personally. Why is it for you?
 
I suppose this is the one step back after Millards post took the thread 2 steps forward. Inevitable it would come from someone so dont take it personal per se. Just my opinion of course. I personally dont come to the forums to break people down but hey thats just me.
Your doing DNP, you could be of value to the thread. You could explain your thought process as to why you think it is a prudent choice for you to use it. You could explain why in your mind it is necessary for you to use it. I dont care about statistics, Im talking your personal thought process. What makes you feel that DNP is a wise decision for you to use. What makes it necessary in your situation. What make you look at your situation and say to yourself, "I think DNP can be a valuable, prudent and necessary addition to my supplementation arsenal?"
When I ask myself that question, DNP is not an option for me personally. Why is it for you?

Bc the risk of death is vastly overstated as is the issue of cataracts. I'm not saying those aren't significant consequences just that the realistic probability of them happening affects me not in the least.

The other sides the Jim listed like fatigue, headaches, dehydration, etc I hope I don't have to explain why most of those don't worry me.

I in no way shape or form think it's necessary. I think it is worth it for what I want to do with it. Are there other options, yes of course there are, but I also don't see any good reason not to use it.
 
Bc the risk of death is vastly overstated as is the issue of cataracts. I'm not saying those aren't significant consequences just that the realistic probability of them happening affects me not in the least.

The other sides the Jim listed like fatigue, headaches, dehydration, etc I hope I don't have to explain why most of those don't worry me.

I in no way shape or form think it's necessary. I think it is worth it for what I want to do with it. Are there other options, yes of course there are, but I also don't see any good reason not to use it.

Just because death is overstated as a risk is not a reason to use it. The risk of death is overstated with many things, most of which I would never use.
What can you accomplish with it that you cannot accomplish without it? Since we know the answer is nothing you can just do it faster, then why do you need to do it in say 2 weeks instead of 4 ? What makes it a prudent decision? Of course dehydration and headaches and fatigue come into play. Why would you subject yourself to these potential effects for really no good reason? Why would you subject yourself to having to add additional supplementation measures and protocols not to potentially incur such things. Do you feel the need to push the bounds of your physical comfort and potential well being (small risk or not). To be a maverick? To fly in the face of conventional wisdom? OK but why? Do you honestly need to lose an amount of bodyfat so quickly that DNP is a good, prudent choice for use given all the factors mentioned? If so then I can only again wonder why? You see for me it makes no sense. I dont want to feel like shit and feel tired and get head aches and risk dehydration and cramping etc to accomplish something I could without incurring any of those things. I certainly would not want to be one in how ever many thousands that might actually cause myself physical harm no matter how small thee risk for something I can accomplish 100% without taking this "supplement".
All my opinions of course.
 
Just because death is overstated as a risk is not a reason to use it. The risk of death is overstated with many things, most of which I would never use.

I didn't say it was a reason to use it but like I did say, the way the statistics pan out, it's not enough of a reason for me not to use it. And this is the difference between you and I, I've probably used most of the things that you list as having an overstated risk of death whereas you haven't. You take the more risk averse side and I don't, you'd pick the stock with the lower return but lower risk and I'd pick the stock with the higher return but higher risk would be a decent analogy.

What can you accomplish with it that you cannot accomplish without it? Since we know the answer is nothing you can just do it faster, then why do you need to do it in say 2 weeks instead of 4 ? What makes it a prudent decision?

I know you were just picking numbers but with traditional dieting it would take more than double the time most likely. I'm on a timeline with specific meet dates for future powerlifting competitions. I'd like to drop weight as fast as possible to allow myself time to bulk back up to weight with more muscle mass and time to increase the intensity and volume of my workouts which suffer significantly when cutting through traditional means. It's prudent bc it will allow me more time under the bar with a higher working intensity and training volume bc the meet dates are not that far off in the future.

Let me ask you this, why would it not be prudent to use it, considering it is the most effective fat burning supplement out there?

Of course dehydration and headaches and fatigue come into play. Why would you subject yourself to these potential effects for really no good reason? Why would you subject yourself to having to add additional supplementation measures and protocols not to potentially incur such things. Do you feel the need to push the bounds of your physical comfort and potential well being (small risk or not). To be a maverick? To fly in the face of conventional wisdom? OK but why? Do you honestly need to lose an amount of bodyfat so quickly that DNP is a good, prudent choice for use given all the factors mentioned? If so then I can only again wonder why?

In preparation for my meet the other week, I trained through multiple injuries and setbacks (forearm and elbow pain/tendinitis, severe wrist pain, tendinitis in the knee, an infection that required antibiotics, a fist so swollen I couldn't close it half way, a sprained intercostal muscle, a ruptured blood vessel in my eye, twisted ankle, God knows what I'm forgetting, full time school and working a very physical job for anywhere from 40-55hrs a week all while sleeping like shit most nights). Was all that pain and discomfort worth having my total written in the books and me going 7/9 in my first meet? You bet your ass it was. Pain and discomfort don't bother me, I've suffered much worse. Likewise, I respect DNP but it doesn't scare me and it's benefits outweigh it's risks for myself.

Should you go through a peaking cycle in preparation for a meet you'll see what real discomfort is. I had headaches and fatigue daily from the effort I was exerting. I got a bloody nose on a heavy pull. I've been in so much pain after a couple sessions it took me over an hour to feel good enough to head home after training. If I skip a day of foam rolling or lacrosse ball work I can't even bend over to tie my shoe laces bc my hips are so tight. The mobility in my left arm is so shot it's what's causing my elbow and forearm pain but I continue to press, bench, etc no matter how bad it hurts. Call it being masochistic, or being a maverick, or an idiot, reckless, etc. At the end of the day I want to break records and I will not allow some discomfort to stop me from pursuing that.


You see for me it makes no sense. I dont want to feel like shit and feel tired and get head aches and risk dehydration and cramping etc to accomplish something I could without incurring any of those things. I certainly would not want to be one in how ever many thousands that might actually cause myself physical harm no matter how small thee risk for something I can accomplish 100% without taking this "supplement".
All my opinions of course.

You're opinion and you're entitle to it. I guess if you're not on a timeline (assuming?) it changes some things but nobody can force you to use it. You made you're choice and I've made mine and there's nothing wrong with that.
 
Trying to dump something interesting into this thread.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4104686/
Reversal of Hypertriglyceridemia, Fatty Liver Disease and Insulin Resistance by a Liver-Targeted Mitochondrial Uncoupler
Dr. Scally posted this in February. Aside from the fact that researchers are eyeing DNP for a potential therapeutic (health-promoting) purpose, of particular interest in terms of harm reduction is the discussion of a time controlled-release oral version of DNP referred to as CRMP.

https://thinksteroids.com/community...ould-combat-liver-disease-diabetes.134363040/
 
Dr. Scally posted this in February. Aside from the fact that researchers are eyeing DNP for a potential therapeutic (health-promoting) purpose, of particular interest in terms of harm reduction is the discussion of a time controlled-release oral version of DNP referred to as CRMP.

https://thinksteroids.com/community...ould-combat-liver-disease-diabetes.134363040/

Controlled-release mitochondrial protonophore reverses diabetes and steatohepatitis in rats
  1. Rachel J. Perry1,2,3,
  2. Dongyan Zhang1,
  3. Xian-Man Zhang2,
  4. James L. Boyer2,4,
  5. Gerald I. Shulman1,2,3,*
+Author Affiliations

  1. *Corresponding author. E-mail: gerald.shulman@yale.edu
Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a major factor in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). The mitochondrial protonophore 2,4 dinitrophenol (DNP) has beneficial effects on NAFLD, insulin resistance, and obesity in preclinical models but is too toxic for clinical use. We developed a controlled-release oral formulation of DNP, called CRMP (controlled-release mitochondrial protonophore), that produces mild hepatic mitochondrial uncoupling. In rat models, CRMP reduced hypertriglyceridemia, insulin resistance, hepatic steatosis, and diabetes. It also normalized plasma transaminase concentrations, ameliorated liver fibrosis, and improved hepatic protein synthetic function in a methionine/choline–deficient rat model of NASH. Chronic treatment with CRMP was not associated with any systemic toxicity. These data offer proof of concept that mild hepatic mitochondrial uncoupling may be a safe and effective therapy for the related epidemics of metabolic syndrome, T2D, and NASH.

So would you consider this as evidence that shows DNP being safe? I mean if they're saying the time release properties is what helps make it a "safe and effective therapy" then you could accomplish similar results with dosage restriction as I think RippedZilla pointed out.
 
Dr. Scally posted this in February. Aside from the fact that researchers are eyeing DNP for therapeutic (health-promoting) purposes, of particular interest in terms of harm reduction is the discussion of a time controlled-release oral version of DNP referred to as CRMP.

I was personally excited to see researchers looking at ways to reduce the risks of dnp.

The problem we have, in terms of the risk of death, is that there is no "self defence" mechanism for the body to use against dnp.
At the right toxic dose, once the cells in your body start producing ATP, and temperature starts to rise - it is simply a matter of time before you have full blown hyperthermia.
In theory, a controlled-release version should make combatting these symptoms easier. Basically, you have more time to act.

Of course the problem of cataracts (the reason the FDA banned DNP) still remains.
The risk of cataracts also appears to be neither dose or length of use dependent - that's a major issue if you intend on bringing a drug to the legal market.

IMO until this risk can be completely eliminated, I don't see CRMP hitting the market anytime soon because the FDA wont consider it "safe".
 
IMO until this risk can be completely eliminated, I don't see CRMP hitting the market anytime soon because the FDA wont consider it "safe".

The risk will never be completely eliminated, with ALL drugs there is risk. Lets not use the word safe, SAFE is the wording of the OP whom isn't around because he doesn't know how to back up his own statements and is out investigating labs.

The FDA will look at the drug:
What is it treating? - Is it life threatening?
What are the risks? - Is the life threatening risk of dying of the drug outweighed by the life threatening risk of the Condition or Disease it is treating?

Think about cancer and chemotherapy.

The FDA doesn't consider chemotherapy to be risk free. But the FDA considers the life threatening cancer to be a larger threat than the drug...


Keep in mind too I fucking hate the medical system and the way people get medical treatment.

Heart disease is still number 1 on cause of death but nothing is done(from my point of view) to tell fat people whom are abusing their own heart to lose weight and stop the intentional suicide they are committing.

Heroin addicts are frowned upon as they are hurting themselves and poisoning their body. But a fat ass at McDonald's with high cholesterol eating more burgers is fine. From statistics, who is larger risk of death. Heroin addict or Fat Ass at McDonald's?

BTW I wrote a paper on the heroin/fat ass risk assessment before, it was frowned upon :(

Absolutely! Rat data always applies to humans. :rolleyes:

WHOOOP! Look who it is that jumps in the thread he started to continue to deflect. Remember this statement CBS
DEFLECT DEFLECT DEFLECT
DO NOT DISCUSS WHAT IS PRESENTED, MAKE HUMOROUS COMMENTS, CHANGE THE SUBJECT BUT ALWAYS
DEFLECT DEFLECT DEFLECT

It's like when there is a fire, stop drop and roll.
 
Last edited:
The risk will never be completely eliminated, with ALL drugs there is risk. Lets not use the word safe, SAFE is the wording of the OP whom isn't around because he doesn't know how to back up his own statements and is out investigating labs.

The FDA will look at the drug:
What is it treating? - Is it life threatening?
What are the risks? - Is the life threatening risk of dying of the drug outweighed by the life threatening risk of the Condition or Disease it is treating?

Think about cancer and chemotherapy.

The FDA doesn't consider chemotherapy to be risk free. But the FDA considers the life threatening cancer to be a larger threat than the drug...

That all sounds great to people like me and you - but we both know that isn't how the FDA operates.

When DNP was banned originally, it wasn't due to the risk of death, it was due to cataracts.
The FDA knew the risk was only 1%, they also knew that DNP was extremely effective for fat loss - they still banned it.

Why ban something because of a specific side effect only to later on reinstate a modified version of the same drug that has the exact same side effect?
I just don't see it.
 
Back
Top