new thread
I posted a message on saturday that was a bit out of line for some added stuff I just dropped in and for that I apologize. I will post the message bellow with corrections. Changes will be in caps and I hope I get an answer now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I was browsing the FDA website, and after looking around for 45 minutes, I couldn't find the report. Maybe all the hair growth the supplements give me is making my mind a bit distracted. However, I thought, why wouldn't the HAIR EXPERT enlighten us with the full info on this. Honestly, I don't know how much TRUTH THERE IS ABOUT THE REPORT.
If this report "was once brand new and prominently featured" as you say on post no. 41421, then it ought to be there. Not only that, maybe most of us would like to read other reports and related info. If you have it, please post the URL for the report, I'd find myself AMUSED at it, or any similar documents, because obviously they're wrong on this if they say what you say they say and they mean what you say they mean.
Dude, don't be so petty. If you search the FDA website, the article is obviously no longer on there. If you paste a line or 2 of the article into a google search, there also appears only on this board, and no-where else. Your point is?
Do you think Rokker just made up the whole article? You cannot prove that such products actually increase hair growth, and i feel that i can trust that Rokker's explanation of the origin of the article is truthful.
The whole point, though, is that there is no need to attack Rokker over this. Even though i agree with much of what he said, i think Rokker's posts on the subject were slightly arrogant, but at the same time sincere. He has made the effort to end the argument, by just ignoring your attempts to keep it going. Really, by pursuing the argument, you're just trying to cause trouble. You think one thing, and Rokker clearly thinks another. Just accept that you have differences of opinion on the matter, and let it rest.
Perhaps if someone brings up the issue of growth-improving products again, you can both just make your thoughts clear indiepdentantly of each other's posts? No-one wants to read pointless arguments, so why not just avoid confrontation on the matter? Your above post is surely going to achieve nothing.
Despite what it looks like, its not an argument. There are articles there that appear as old as 1997. So it should be there. If Rokker made it up or not, that is for him to answer. Why would it be so hard to post the URL and shut me up?
This goes beyond the supplement argument, its more important than that and if Rokker hasn't answered, I bet its the lack of a URL, not an intent to stop the confrontation. If he replies to this with no answer, he'll be proven wrong. Why is it me to prove my statement is correct. Many folks in here have reported improvement. However Rokker and company have only attacked that with an article allegedly issued by the FDA. What's to do here?
even if the alleged report isn't true, whats the big deal?? No one suffers one way or the other. *extends olive branch*
Really !!
It sounds like it's " you have a right to express your opinion up until the time I think it's wrong" syndrom.
Ever hear of shooting a dead horse?????
That's "beat a dead horse". ; )
On that note, does anyone remember the somewhat obscure band in the late 80's that put out a song called "Beat a dead horse"?
There won't be a URL. The FDA site has its own google search function, and it doesn't find the article. You know that the article isn't on their site, so why say that? If you really don't think that the article was published by the FDA, or you want to know why it's no longer on their site, why don't you email them? The FDA is an american government department isn't it? It's their obligation to answer your questions probably, so they should be able to tell you something about that article, and the issue.
You know about how thinking you're taking something that will help you, does actually help? They've even proven that this is true for Alcohol: People who think they're really drunk, show more symptons of drunkness than others who have actually drank the same amount, and know how much that is. No-one has posted proof of anything, except Rokker's article which outlines a scientific experiment on the matter.
Why can't you just let the issue drop? I really don't care if you or anyone else wants to buy these expensive products... But i just think that Rokker is right for making his opinion clear on the matter, because people have the right to know the truth; even if that truth has to be decided upon by the individual.
As the report stated on the bottom....
"If you have questions about a product or company, get answers before you make a purchase. For information, contact the Better Business Bureau, the nearest Food and Drug Administration office, your local consumer office or state attorney general's office, or your doctor."
I'd suggest that you contact any one of the above mentioned references. Any and all of them should have the info your looking for.
Note also that this study led directly to the FDA shutting down the makers of ProPlus because of the claims they made on the product. I don't know if that article is still on the FDA site or not, but it showed what the FDA does to companies that mislead customers.
In the meantime, dude....let it go! You are to rational, thought-out posts as Liberace was to pumping iron.