Comment · Sat, May 8, 2021 · ND Owner
Supply chain breakdown risks for Nootropics Depot?
Original post in this thread
blabmight · 42 points
This might be best answered by /u/misteryouaresodumb but I thought I'd post the question because it might be useful for others who are curious.
Is it true that $150k worth of supplies have been lost and rejected? And there's $500k currently in limbo? And certain supplies like bottles could end up arriving in a year from purchase?
I'm wondering what sort of risk this poses for Nootropics Depot?
Are there any details regarding what has caused customs to clamp down so tightly? Is there a foreseen date of when things will loosen up or is this probably going to persist under the current administration?
I'm just curious about the details around this\\these issues.
What they were answering
AIPVIP · 1 points
This seems like semantics. A baby isn't considered diseased because it's able to repair the damage caused by normal metabolism effectively. Over time this damage repair system _itself_ gets damaged, so damage begins to accumulate. This leads to all the symptoms of old age (wrinkled skin, frailty, dementia, heart disease, osteoporosis and increased risk of cancer). So even if the process "aging" itself is not a disease, all of its resultant deleterious effects can be considered disease.
Of course none of this means that nootropics should be illegal. Supplements can help treat diseases too, if you've got scurvy then a vitamin C "supplement" will cure your "disease".
u/MisterYouAreSoDumb · ND Owner
Supplements can't help diseases, per the FDA. That's like their main sticking point. Supplements cannot diagnose, treat, prevent, or cure a disease. If you are trying to do that, it's a drug. Yes, even vitamin C is a drug if you are using it to treat a disease. This means that if you define aging as a disease, you can't market vitamin C for it anymore. It must be prescribed by a doctor. Also, scurvy is a disease. A supplement company can't sell you vitamin C to prevent or treat scurvy. That would be a violation of the FFDCA.
Back to your original point, then when does a baby grow enough to not be diseased by aging? Who defines that age?