Guest guest Posted September 26, 2006 Report Share Posted September 26, 2006 > > Has any body responded regarding this on J. Crow's website? > > Linn would you mind posting the link for that? I just looked on thier site but couldn't find it....too much stuff on that site! Thanks Lynn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2006 Report Share Posted September 26, 2006 Sure, www.jcrows.com, scroll down past Jarvis' picture, click on About Lugol's Solution of Iodine and its Antiviral Properties, scroll down a page and click on DEA Proposed Change in Lugol's Solution of Iodine Regulations under the Action Alert. There's a lot of summary info so it was too long to post the whole thing, but here's an excerpt:There is a proposed DEA change in the regulation of products containing iodine and the corresponding thresholds that would be exempt and not exempt if the proposed Listing changes are put into effect.It is necessary to comment professionally and scientifically to the DEA and have them refrain from implementing the proposal as outlined.There is a comment window open until Oct 10 2006. This may be done online.dea.diversion.policy@...orhttp://www.regulations.govFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Sannerud, Ph.D., Chief,Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Office of Diversion Control, DrugEnforcement Administration, Washington, DC 20537 at (202) 307-7183.Comment while there is still time to do so. The DEA wants to hear from people on this issue!Contact your representatives!The DEA's own statistics, in the proposal below, show a decrease in seizures of iodine for illegal purposes.The existing law, cited in the proposal below, seems responsible and thorough as stated. I would like to see the industry and individuals defend the existing thresholds or suggest a slight modification to regulate only those thresholds above the original formulation for Lugol's Solution i.e.5% Iodine and 10% Potassium Iodide. The original Lugol's Solution of Iodine formula should remain available as the law now allows. It has been used for many worthwhile purposes for over 120 years.On Sep 26, 2006, at 3:13 PM, Lynn wrote:>> Has any body responded regarding this on J. Crow's website?> >Linn would you mind posting the link for that? I just looked on thiersite but couldn't find it....too much stuff on that site!ThanksLynn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2006 Report Share Posted September 26, 2006 Here is the URL, which is easier than navigating to locate it. Alobar On 9/26/06, Linn <linnmiller@...> wrote: > > Sure, www.jcrows.com, scroll down past Jarvis' picture, click on About Lugol's Solution of Iodine and its Antiviral Properties, scroll down a page and click on DEA Proposed Change in Lugol's Solution of Iodine Regulations under the Action Alert. There's a lot of summary info so it was too long to post the whole thing, but here's an excerpt: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2006 Report Share Posted September 26, 2006 > > Sure, www.jcrows.com, scroll down past Jarvis' picture, click on > About Lugol's Solution of Iodine and its Antiviral Properties, scroll > down a page and click on DEA Proposed Change in Lugol's Solution of > Iodine Regulations under the Action Alert. There's a lot of summary > info so it was too long to post the whole thing, but here's an excerpt: > > There is a proposed DEA change in the regulation of products > containing iodine and the corresponding thresholds that would be > exempt and not exempt if the proposed Listing changes are put into > effect. > > It is necessary to comment professionally and scientifically to the > DEA and have them refrain from implementing the proposal as outlined. > > There is a comment window open until Oct 10 2006. This may be done > online. > dea.diversion.policy@... > or > http://www.regulations.gov > > FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Sannerud, Ph.D., Chief, > Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Office of Diversion Control, Drug > Enforcement Administration, Washington, DC 20537 at (202) 307-7183. > > Comment while there is still time to do so. The DEA wants to hear > from people on this issue! > Contact your representatives! > > The DEA's own statistics, in the proposal below, show a decrease in > seizures of iodine for illegal purposes. Seems all the more reason for them to leave it alone! Strange logic they use over there at the DEA. - www.zenpawn.com/vegblog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2006 Report Share Posted September 28, 2006 > > > > There is a proposed DEA change in the regulation of products > > containing iodine and the corresponding thresholds that would be > > exempt and not exempt if the proposed Listing changes are put > into > > effect. What will this do? Will it put it in the same class of drugs as cold medicine which you have to sign for? Which of course, would make it virtually impossible to buy online, and it's not carried locally. Skipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2006 Report Share Posted September 28, 2006 I talked to the owner at JCrows today. Basically the proposal is to water Lugol's down to half its present strength. The purpose is to make it harder to use for illicit drug production. You will still be able to buy it but you'll use twice as much. The problem will come when you read dated info and don't realize that the modern product will be half-strength. Daddybob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2006 Report Share Posted September 28, 2006 Call me ignorant, but what illicit drug production uses iodine?? They will have to label the new product version with the strength tho won't they? Kirsty > > I talked to the owner at JCrows today. Basically the proposal is to water > Lugol's down to half its present strength. The purpose is to make it harder > to use for illicit drug production. You will still be able to buy it but > you'll use twice as much. The problem will come when you read dated info and > don't realize that the modern product will be half-strength. > > Daddybob > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2006 Report Share Posted September 28, 2006 emugirls wrote: > Call me ignorant, but what illicit drug production uses iodine?? They > will have to label the new product version with the strength tho won't > they? > Kirsty > Meth. It's a big problem: easy to make in your basement, but nasty to clean up. Pseudafed is the other big ingredient: you can't buy the big bulk sizes of that anymore either, and it's behind the counter. I'm not sure how I feel about the problem: I sympathize with both sides. Meth is nasty stuff, and very addictive. And Pseudafed is kinda addicting too: I had WAY too much of it when I was battling sinusitis (which iodine cured, BTW). There are some things that are just easy to misuse, and if people misuse them, it's hard to know what to do. Around here they seem to use the " community " approach. I can buy, say, nitrates fairly easily, which I COULD use to make gunpowder ... but they label the batch and they know who I am, so if I blow something up they'll know who did it. Works for me. (I don't use nitrate fertilizers, BTW, I use fish fertilizer, which has the iodine, so this is just an example ... ) Anyway, watering down Lugol's sounds like a decent solution, pardon the pun. -- Heidi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2006 Report Share Posted September 28, 2006 >From: Heidi <heidis@...> >Meth. It's a big problem: easy to make in your basement, but nasty to >clean up. >Pseudafed is the other big ingredient: you can't buy the big bulk >sizes of that anymore either, and it's behind the counter. > >I'm not sure how I feel about the problem: I sympathize with both >sides. Meth is nasty stuff, and very addictive. Yep, if you outlaw the stuff you need to make it, then it moves the production factories for it to Mexico, something our government is good at, and thanks to our tight border security we don't have to worry about ever seeing another meth addict in this country. I came up from Mexico once. At the border, they set the dogs on my brother-in-law's van. Had I kown him better, I would have been worried. That was border security 25 years ago, and they were smart enough to be profiling back then. Looking back at those pictures, I could tell why they stopped us. >There are some things >that are just easy to misuse, and if people misuse them, it's hard >to know what to do. I was stabbed by a fork once, ever since then I've wondered why they don't outlaw them. I was almost killed by Cipro, wondered why that was a legal drug. And why my doctor didn't give me one with fewer side effects. Augmentin caused my son emotional trauma, a " rare " side effect. I've wondered why that's legal. Lugol's Solution, Armour Thyroid, Hydrocortisone, Vitamin C are the 4 best medicines I've ever had with the fewest (none) side effects. They ought to be legal and freely available. (Vitamin C is only at risk if Codex is put in force over here, which isn't that far fetched.) >Anyway, watering down Lugol's sounds like a decent solution, >pardon the pun. If the chemical properties are the same so all you have to do to get the same effect is to take double, triple, or quadruple the dose in a consistent manner, and it's still the approximate cost than it's only a mild inconvenience. Skipper _________________________________________________________________ Find a local pizza place, music store, museum and more…then map the best route! http://local.live.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2006 Report Share Posted September 28, 2006 I strongly suspect that there will be no price drop for the half-strength Lugol's which means it will cost us twice as much per dose. Alobar On 9/28/06, Skipper Beers <lsb149@...> wrote: > If the chemical properties are the same so all you have to do to get the > same effect is to take double, triple, or quadruple the dose in a consistent > manner, and it's still the approximate cost than it's only a mild > inconvenience. > > Skipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.