(03-15-2016 7:28 AM)theLaw Wrote:  As much as I hate to admit it.......I agree with this.

I've already received an angry email from Chris.......so it looks like nothing has changed.

Looking forward to this new line of research!!!

I know you shouldn't share the email, but I'd love to know what he was angry about...

(03-15-2016 8:39 AM)MMM Wrote:  I know you shouldn't share the email, but I'd love to know what he was angry about...

I assume he read some of my open criticism of him and his business practices.

Here it is in its entirety :

"Hello "TheLaw"

How's it feel to kick someone when they're down? You feel good, you enjoy that? Maybe if you suffered adversity and knew pain and endured struggle you would be more kind? You have little concept of the real world, my friend.

Here is a quote I like, relevant:

"Pay no attention to toxic words. What people say is often a reflection of themselves, not you." -Christian Baloga

Sincerely,

Christopher S. Schraud
President, Science Officer, Wholesale Director
Alpha Dream Technologies, inc. (2012)"

Maybe he just can't help himself.......

Well, he seems to be in good health.

(03-15-2016 6:55 AM)Ekscentra Wrote:  I'm going to have to agree with this. We've tried this route before, and it never works out. Luv Essentials seems not to be budging again. Our best bet is to get an enthusiast on board with this product. thundr or myself would be able to develop a better sledgehammer product than what's currently on offer, matching or even surpassing the mixes of old in quality.

Just a thought. Enthusiasts like us are more willing to go the extra mile to ensure the product works as it should. Perhaps Luv Essentials is telling the truth, but what happens when their lab delivers poor-quality androstenone again? Will we be seeing the same process attempting to bring back the original formula for a few years?

I'd prefer to look beyond old MAG. Great as the mixes of the past may have been, that's no reason to halt progress. At best (and this seems hughly unlikely), you can expect the return of old MAG, exactly as it was back then. That's where it ends. Despite how much V-nice praises this mix, I'm not convinced there's any mix in the history of this industry that can't be improved upon in some way.

And I agree totally with you guys.

My main reason for this mess, was to bring about
awareness. The awareness that I'm definitely no fool, and witnessed such mix, so I know that type of power is possible.
And I'll shake my head again because I know a lot of guys never had such blatant hits nor even think it's possible. IT IS!

I'm over MAG... But not over those hits.

Wow those 16 pages appeared in the blink of an eye.

So old MAG was no more than a concentrated version of AM pre-2011. Why did Chris reformulate AM towards the end of 2011 ? Perhaps that holds the reason why old MAG cannot be brought back.

M.

(03-15-2016 3:07 PM)moe Wrote:  Wow those 16 pages appeared in the blink of an eye.

So old MAG was no more than a concentrated version of AM pre-2011. Why did Chris reformulate AM towards the end of 2011 ? Perhaps that holds the reason why old MAG cannot be brought back.

M.

We don't know that for certain. Chris could have changed the dose of any number of components in the mix, altering (or possibly throwing off) the balance. All we have at this point is hearsay at this point.

I asked Chris in 2013 in a PM in another forum about old MAG, old New Pheromone Additive, old A314 and other mixes that they all mysteriously changed formula around 2011 and nobody admits it.

It to me it always seemed relevant with the steroids band around that year.Why would they admit that they had dangerous and unstested components in their mixes?They could still have because it's legal at the moment.

He thanked me for my PM and promised he will reply about these matters, he never did.I think I PM'd him because there was a thread there implying that there are secret illegal components on those old mixes and I might remember Chris implying that this was true.I will look at it later and let you know.

Also LE is probably bullshitting us.After Chris' PM I send them an email asking about MAG's changes in formulation and they denied it.They said it's the same product, it never changed.

My question is, why so many changes in that specific year?This is probably about one specific molecule, legal or not.

Edit:Also do you remember Chris threaten a competitive company by sending the DEA to them?That implies that the pheromone business don't want DEA's attention.Even if everything is fine and legal that could cause costly disruptions or even new bans in currently legal molecules.Androstadienone is illegal in Australia.

If the illegal steroid theory is real then even if we figure out the missing ingredient(s) we couldn't recreate this through one of the companies or through the forum.A few lucky ones who would have a friend with proper scientific backround could manufacture this illegaly and then add it to AM or any other mix.

The companies aren't stupid, they are after the money, they wouldn't change anything by mistake and not fix it again.The also watch the forum.The changes in formulas must have been forced.

(03-16-2016 7:21 AM)stefdude Wrote:  I asked Chris in 2013 in a PM in another forum about old MAG, old New Pheromone Additive, old A314 and other mixes that they all mysteriously changed formula around 2011 and nobody admits it.

It to me it always seemed relevant with the steroids band around that year.Why would they admit that they had dangerous and unstested components in their mixes?They could still have because it's legal at the moment.

He thanked me for my PM and promised he will reply about these matters, he never did.I think I PM'd him because there was a thread there implying that there are secret illegal components on those old mixes and I might remember Chris implying that this was true.I will look at it later and let you know.

Also LE is probably bullshitting us.After Chris' PM I send them an email asking about MAG's changes in formulation and they denied it.They said it's the same product, it never changed.

My question is, why so many changes in that specific year?This is probably about one specific molecule, legal or not.

Edit:Also do you remember Chris threaten a competitive company by sending the DEA to them?That implies that the pheromone business don't want DEA's attention.Even if everything is fine and legal that could cause costly disruptions or even new bans in currently legal molecules.Androstadienone is illegal in Australia.

If the illegal steroid theory is real then even if we figure out the missing ingredient(s) we couldn't recreate this through one of the companies or through the forum.A few lucky ones who would have a friend with proper scientific backround could manufacture this illegaly and then add it to AM or any other mix.

The companies aren't stupid, they are after the money, they wouldn't change anything by mistake and not fix it again.The also watch the forum.The changes in formulas must have been forced.

I would love to hear other vets weigh-in on this........if the steroids were the secrets, then that could explain the bs explanations from vendors.

(03-16-2016 8:06 AM)theLaw Wrote:  I would love to hear other vets weigh-in on this........if the steroids were the secrets, then that could explain the bs explanations from vendors.

Maybe the vendors didn't change their formulas, maybe the quality of the molecules that they were getting from their suppliers changed.

I hear "molecule quality" a lot as an explanation, but what does that really mean? Dienone from this vendor might be different from another vendor, but how much different can the quality be? One cheap supplier from China might supply 90% pure dienone (really bad by most standards), while a top-notch lab in Germany might supply 99.9% pure dienone (pharmaceutical standards). This is only a difference of 10%. I think the sprays coming out of my bottles vary by way more than 10%, so I don't know if we can attribute too much to "bad synthesis."

Maybe different synthesis methods produce different stereo-isomers of molecules. These can have different effects in the body and maybe as pheromones, too. Do steroids like the ones we use even have different stereo isomers?

Another explanation is some kind of contaminant. Like maybe 99% Androstenone with 1% Estrogen is going to behave differently than 99% Androstenone and 1% Testosterone, because sometimes residual compounds from the synthesis can be left over. They're impossible to get rid of completely.

As for banned steroids, what is this list of banned steroids? Who banned the steroids? FDA? DEA? Is there a full list I can browse from the year in question?