Aifm Rash Poll

[itlnstln]

Jesus, come on people! A skin rash? This is a steroid bodybuilding board, and every AAS has side effects. Every drug has side effects. Every supplement has side effects. To those steroids that accelerate hair loss, gyno, acne/backne, elevated liver enzymes, etc....to the people that are sensitive & genetically dispositioned to them, DOES this necessitate that we should ban talk of all these products from being discussed or used on Elite Fitness???? Thinks about it....we might as well close shop here. I'm sure all those people on HRT or with HIV/AIDS would be happy about that?BMJ

Here's the thing - we all know the side from AAS - and we "expect" them

But a product that (at most) states that it may cause irritation or a rash - when in many cases it cause BLISTERS and a few good bro's to go to the emergency room - something needs to be re-evaluated.

Please don't "cheapen" this board by belittling these cases or patronizing AAS users with your comaprisons.

And as far as how new I am - it didn't take long for me to bring to the attention that 40% of customers have developed a rash. - fact

When you see a warning on a generic skin creame with the same warning as these guys - they are literally dealing with a 1-3% bad reaction to their product - so to compare AIFM to everything else is just smoke-and-mirrors

Thanks B.J.

 

[kbrkbr]

This thread saddens me.

 

[macrophage69alpha]

And as far as how new I am - it didn't take long for me to bring to the attention that 40% of customers have developed a rash. - fact

take a step back and think about this: try to be objective.

you have four or five people posting that they had an allergic reaction, one of which was anon (a single post, just registered), you have 21 votes.

Does that seem like perhaps maybe there are people voting that have not even tried AIFM?

you dont have to accept that, but just consider it.

Since you mention a 1-3% allergy range, whether you beleive it or not based on the data collected by AF, it falls in that range. With people that are unable to use it at 1%, with that 2-3% that have to rotate and do things like apply aloe.

You dont have to believe that. But at least consider it as well.

Just basic economics if 40% of people got a rash, AF would lose money trying to sell it, even if less than half of those asked for a refund.

 

[jumpshot]

Wow I had a great night last night! went to a blockparty with 2 Irish bars and came home to rail my little girlie for a couple hours!

ANybody else do something besides sit on their ass trolling this fucking thread?

 

[kbrkbr]

I think the bottom line is this: Anyone who thinks that Ulter or Macro would knowingly promote a dangerous product is either,

1. ignoring the long history of contributions and knowledge they've made to this board, or

2. has a separate, more nefarious, agenda, or

3. is utterly deluded.

If the AF store -- of which I am not a customer because I tend to make my own supplements -- had a history of pushing bunk products, then I think all this bogus outrage would be justified. But as far as I know, this is the very first time one of their gems hasn't been met with wild acclaim.

For chrissakes, they're offering complete refunds. What more do you crybabies want?

 

[itlnstln]

Wow I had a great night last night! went to a blockparty with 2 Irish bars and came home to rail my little girlie for a couple hours!

ANybody else do something besides sit on their ass trolling this fucking thread?

yeah - I grew up - how bout' you - seriously - how old are you???

No flame - 18,19?

 

[itlnstln]

For chrissakes, they're offering complete refunds. What more do you crybabies want?

i can't speak for anyojne else - but I am NO crybaby.

Back off and work your way into the thread you mad-scientist

 

[neverenuf]

i can't speak for anyojne else - but I am NO crybaby.

Back off and wrok your way into the thread you mad-scientist

get em stallion...

 

[itlnstln]

take a step back and think about this: try to be objective.

you have four or five people posting that they had an allergic reaction, one of which was anon (a single post, just registered), you have 21 votes.

Does that seem like perhaps maybe there are people voting that have not even tried AIFM?

you dont have to accept that, but just consider it.

Since you mention a 1-3% allergy range, whether you beleive it or not based on the data collected by AF, it falls in that range. With people that are unable to use it at 1%, with that 2-3% that have to rotate and do things like apply aloe.

You dont have to believe that. But at least consider it as well.

Just basic economics if 40% of people got a rash, AF would lose money trying to sell it, even if less than half of those asked for a refund.

1-3 is what "I" said - you said 1% and the poll doesn't lie.
Sure , there may be people voting who have never tried it, but they are voting both ways.

y guess would be that AT LEAST 10% of you customers have had a serious - blister-like reation to it...............almost everyone has gotten SOME sort of rash.

I ordered some a while back - but never used it - I sent it off to a family member at MA General to have it tested and see if it should even be "allowed" to be sold for public use.

 

[jumpshot]

yeah - I grew up - how bout' you - seriously - how old are you???

No flame - 18,19?

33. You never cease to insult. You don't have to be 18 to go to a party and fuck. I'm sick of your petty insults. Stay off my posts.

No flame? How else should that be taken? You are the secondary cause of all the drama on this board lately, and we're all worse off for it.