Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below ANABOLICK1
New member
Why is fina not considered a controlled substance?
fina ?
- Thread starter ANABOLICK1
- Start date
Fina and the Controlled Substance Act
Here's the nutshell overview (adapted from LEGAL MUSCLE): The U.S. Code defines anabolic steroids in 21 U.S.C. § 802(41). Subparagraph (B) provides an exemption for veterinary implants, because the mode of administration was thought to limit potential human abuse. The law excludes “an anabolic steroid which is expressly intended for administration through implants to cattle or other nonhuman species and which has been approved by the Secretary of Health and Human Services for such administration.” Here’s the catch, however. The subparagraph goes on to say:
(ii) If any person prescribes, dispenses, or distributes such
steroid for human use, such person shall be considered to have
prescribed, dispensed, or distributed an anabolic steroid within
the meaning of subparagraph (A).
[Note that the DEA’s own website misinforms the public – despite my bringing it to their attention – by ignoring the exclusion and claiming instead that Finaplix-S is just an “other name” for the Schedule III anabolic steroid, trenbolone (see www.dea.gov/pubs/scheduling.html,).]
So, cattle implants are not controlled substances -- as long as they’re prescribed, dispensed or distributed for animals. While neither the U.S. Code nor the federal regulations use the term “divert,” the word appears in the Federal Register [Federal Register, Vol. 62, No. 192, Rules and Regulations, Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, 21 C.F.R. Part 1308, Schedules of Controlled Substances: Excluded Veterinary Anabolic Steroid Implant Products, 62 F.R. 51774 (October 3, 1997)]. The rule states:
“The veterinary anabolic steroid implant products which are
described in 21 CFR 1308.26 are excluded from application of the CSA in
relation to their production, distribution, and use in animals only. If
any person distributes, dispenses or otherwise diverts these products
to use in humans, he/she shall be deemed to have distributed a Schedule
III controlled substance and may be prosecuted for CSA violations.”
[Note that state laws may vary. For example, the cattle implant exclusion in New York doesn’t protect anyone “who knowingly and willfully administers [cattle implants] to himself or another person” (Public Health Law § 3306(i).]
Here's the nutshell overview (adapted from LEGAL MUSCLE): The U.S. Code defines anabolic steroids in 21 U.S.C. § 802(41). Subparagraph (B) provides an exemption for veterinary implants, because the mode of administration was thought to limit potential human abuse. The law excludes “an anabolic steroid which is expressly intended for administration through implants to cattle or other nonhuman species and which has been approved by the Secretary of Health and Human Services for such administration.” Here’s the catch, however. The subparagraph goes on to say:
(ii) If any person prescribes, dispenses, or distributes such
steroid for human use, such person shall be considered to have
prescribed, dispensed, or distributed an anabolic steroid within
the meaning of subparagraph (A).
[Note that the DEA’s own website misinforms the public – despite my bringing it to their attention – by ignoring the exclusion and claiming instead that Finaplix-S is just an “other name” for the Schedule III anabolic steroid, trenbolone (see www.dea.gov/pubs/scheduling.html,).]
So, cattle implants are not controlled substances -- as long as they’re prescribed, dispensed or distributed for animals. While neither the U.S. Code nor the federal regulations use the term “divert,” the word appears in the Federal Register [Federal Register, Vol. 62, No. 192, Rules and Regulations, Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, 21 C.F.R. Part 1308, Schedules of Controlled Substances: Excluded Veterinary Anabolic Steroid Implant Products, 62 F.R. 51774 (October 3, 1997)]. The rule states:
“The veterinary anabolic steroid implant products which are
described in 21 CFR 1308.26 are excluded from application of the CSA in
relation to their production, distribution, and use in animals only. If
any person distributes, dispenses or otherwise diverts these products
to use in humans, he/she shall be deemed to have distributed a Schedule
III controlled substance and may be prosecuted for CSA violations.”
[Note that state laws may vary. For example, the cattle implant exclusion in New York doesn’t protect anyone “who knowingly and willfully administers [cattle implants] to himself or another person” (Public Health Law § 3306(i).]
ANABOLICK1
New member
Thanks
Similar threads
