finfighter said:Because I was advised by a friend (who is a PHD/MD biochemist) not to give specific details.
finfighter said:beaner said:finfighter said:Because I was advised by a friend (who is a PHD/MD biochemist) not to give specific details.
I don't get it. The whole point of this was for us to find out the true percentage in Tricomin. I cannot imagine a reason why we can't have specific details. That makes no sense. I'm not sticking up for Bryan, but unless you release the details, he hasn't been proven wrong just because you said so.
The tester is concerned he could be sued, if you don't understand that then hire someone to do your own test, otherwise keep drinking the corporate blue kool aid.
finfighter said:No beaner I never had it tested I decided not to, someone else did it instead when they saw this debate and posted the results on another forum, but they asked to be kept confidential.
finfighter said:Well that's the thing the person who did the test and shared this information, is not known is he? So procyte wont care it's just an internet rumor to them. Like I said I had originally thought I might have it tested but I did not, someone else did it themselves once they heard about it, and that person is not associated or connected with me in anyway.
monty1978 said:Initial result has come back at 0.2% +/- 0.05%
Therefor between 0.15% and 0.25%
Hence the reason for the blue dye!
And no I'm not confirming anything or ellaborating on anything or giving any details about the tester or where or how or whatever and I don't care if I have no evidence of this, but I am not lying and I think most will realise this apart from those who don't realise that if you put blue dye in a substance that should already be blue then you must not have much of that substance to begin with, if any!! :whistle:
Jacob said:Can't you ppl READ? :dunno:
monty1978 said:Initial result has come back at 0.2% +/- 0.05%
Therefor between 0.15% and 0.25%
Hence the reason for the blue dye!
And no I'm not confirming anything or ellaborating on anything or giving any details about the tester or where or how or whatever and I don't care if I have no evidence of this, but I am not lying and I think most will realise this apart from those who don't realise that if you put blue dye in a substance that should already be blue then you must not have much of that substance to begin with, if any!! :whistle:
Bryan said:Who was more accurate: the guy who did this test, or the guy at Procyte who gave us a completely different figure?
rick31 said:Personally I belive that the guy who did the test of tricomin sounded credible, Im not a chemist but the way he described the test sounded resonable and like he knew what he was doing...
Bryan said:rick31 said:Personally I belive that the guy who did the test of tricomin sounded credible, Im not a chemist but the way he described the test sounded resonable and like he knew what he was doing...
Where did he "describe" the test?
finfighter said:Good one Jacob! Lol, where's the research for Dr. Proctor's products Bryan????
Bryan said:finfighter said:Good one Jacob! Lol, where's the research for Dr. Proctor's products Bryan????
It's in his YEARS of experience with those products.
In a comprehensive 3 year clinical study
Jacob said:Bryan said:It's in his YEARS of experience with those products.
That's not what he claimed....I mean LIED about:In a comprehensive 3 year clinical study
EXACTLY what snake-oilr's say/do.