New Vendor Launch! Thrivous.com

Well I looked back at your primary COA for Rhodiola Rosea, and sure enough, it says "Rhodiola Crenulata." So right off the bat things are not looking good. That's a mislabeled product. Rhodiola Crenulata is the most commonly mislabeled extract used in place of the more expensive Rhodiola Rosea. Not good at all. Mislabeling is bad, and it brings into question the entire legitimacy of the testing and COAs you provided. So I figured I would look closer at all your info, and I'm going to be honest, it's looking really bad.

Your Panax Ginseng primary COA is listed as stem and leaf material. However, your secondary COA says it is root. Well root and stem/leaf are very different, and will show on a proper analysis. Furthermore, the leaves usually have a different ginsenoside % than that. It really makes me question the whole Panax Ginseng ingredient, to be perfectly frank. I would expect a 10% UV-VIS (which is like 3% HPLC by the way), to be a root extract. The leaves have a lot more. Why would CTLA certify this as correct, when the material used is totally different, and would show when doing an analysis of the plant material? Either way, your label says root material, but your manufacturer COA says stem and leaf. So again, not good.

So we get back to CLTA. I know you don't want the info out, but I did a lot of digging through the Utah corporation commission, and I am really questioning whether this is a legitimate lab. CTLA is in there, but its NAICS code is "5413-Architectural, Engineering, and Related." That is not what a legitimate lab would have. The owner of that LLC owns a few other companies; one of which is a supplement ingredient supplier. I would venture to guess that is who supplied your raw materials. The issue now is that the supplier is the one who created a brand new lab to certify these ingredients like it was a third party. Furthermore, the address listed on the COAs shows up as a waste treatment facility in Orem Utah. Weird, right? Google could be the one messing up, but it is very suspicious.

You've made some claims about purity testing that I think deserve some explanation and proof, given the facts presented. CTLA does not seem like a legitimate lab, and is connected to other companies that supply supplement ingredients. I am not sure if you are aware, but the supplement industry is having a big issue right now with suppliers making fake analytical labs to certify their own ingredients as legitimate and pure. Now I am not claiming that is what is happening here. However, the further I dig, the worse it looks. Purogenics/CTLA/IDH Labs/Analytical Resource Labs all being owned by the same person raises about a million red flags with me. I apologize in advance if this is just a big misunderstanding, and I have read into things too much. However, I think some proof is warranted for your potential customers, and the readers of /r/Nootropics.

The mislabeling needs to be fixed ASAP regardless. If you are using Rhodiola Crenulata, instead of Rhodiola Rosea, then your label needs to say that. They are different species. If you are using Panax Ginseng stem and leaf, your label needs to say that instead of root. The Ginkgo Biloba being produced in 2014 is kind of old, but testing would need to be done to ensure it is still in spec. Based on the CTLA questions, I would probably use a different lab for that. The actual product and price would be good, if you can fix the issues, and if you can actually verify legitimate identity and purity testing has been completed on the ingredients.