1725 replies to this topic

[Wu Hang]

Thanks SG for the update. Hopefully we will be able to get this so-called "unobtainable" noo. I am a little scared, as I've seen too much American TV, that there maybe some kind of conspiracy from the US government (like FBI or NSI) to stop regular folks to obtain this substance. It is because they want us to be stupid so that we can be controlled.....easily........
Okay,....the above is just a joke. I don't want people to think that I should be on haldol or zyprexa before getting PRL. I do need a better memory before all else.
Please continue to keep us updated. Thanks

It could be true, given that there are no definite evidence to oppose the argument. Especially we know that DARPA has released several documents regarding to the positive effect of tDCS, yet the technology still remains unknown among the mass population. I mean nobody should take it seriously but it's true that the mass population is often unaware of the cutting edge technology (or not so cutting edge) even if they want to.

[Amorphous]

tDCS is a very effective nootropic, but we have to know the right spot to place the gel pad and the right intensity to stimulate the area of interest. I recently bought a cheap one with only 2 mA intensity. It is very effective for improving focus and motor skill, however, I found it hard to apply to other areas, such as F7 and T3. I am trying to use LLLT for that purpose, but the feeling is quite different from tDCS - I like tDCS a lot more. At any rate, hopefully we will be able to obtain prl so we can test this compound and it's effects on our memory.

[middpanther88]

Updates?

[Amorphous]

Any good news?

[xks201]

I'm hoping we get an update by the end of the month.

[sunshinefrost]

Q, scienceguy

Any updates ?k

[Reformed-Redan]

Meh

[Q did it!]

I have nothing to add at the moment. We will have to wait for SG to chime in. The compound should be nearly finished from what I understand. I am truly excited this is almost all nearly over after over a year of casing this compound :D sure hope it works as in the articles if not better.

[sunshinefrost]

I have nothing to add at the moment. We will have to wait for SG to chime in. The compound should be nearly finished from what I understand. I am truly excited this is almost all nearly over after over a year of casing this compound :D sure hope it works as in the articles if not better.

Will you venture in for prl-8-147 ? Lol !!

[Q did it!]

I have nothing to add at the moment. We will have to wait for SG to chime in. The compound should be nearly finished from what I understand. I am truly excited this is almost all nearly over after over a year of casing this compound :D sure hope it works as in the articles if not better.

Will you venture in for prl-8-147 ? Lol !!

Only if we get something useful out of PRL-8-53. 147 could be far superior. It may be that it was not the "lack of positive testing" that stopped its study but the same one that ended PRL-8-53's. Ether way we will have are answer soon on this compound

[xks201]

So SG is going to be the one shipping this compound out? Is this lab the Chinese lab? lol

[Q did it!]

So SG is going to be the one shipping this compound out? Is this lab the Chinese lab? lol

ScienceGuy will be packaging and mailing all samples and our trusted non China based lab was used. The same one used for NSI-1-89 and Coluracetam.

Edited by Q did it!, 23 October 2013 - 06:17 PM.

[xks201]

That is all music to my ears.

[Amorphous]

Thanks for the good news. Hope SG can confirm it. Really would like to start my experiment before Christmas or at least some time before next year.

[ScienceGuy]

UPDATE:

Hi Everyone,

Apologies for the delay in posting an update here... unfortunately due to work commitments I have had absolutely zero free time over the past week

I have checked with the lab regarding how the CUSTOM SYNTHESIS is progressing and here is their reply, which is self-explanatory:

PRL preparation is at full stop because my supplier is stalling delivery of sodium cyanide which is needed at next step of preparation.

I have now about 250g of pure:

And good practice called for ordering sodium cyanide in excess (500g) for which there is much trouble/paperwork/scanning of documents/etc.

I need this poison to make next intermediate - 3-(carbomethoxy)phenylacetonitrile:

And before you ask - there will be absolutely no cyanides after this reaction in the product.

So there would be some delay, I think this poisonous reagent should arrive next week at my lab and there are 3 more steps to finished product plus final purification.

So good news and bad news everyone... The good news is that the CUSTOM SYNTHESIS is well underway... The bad news is it is going to take a bit longer than originally estimated to complete for the above reason

I will be sure to post further UPDATES here as and when

EDIT: I should add that it is quite common for TOXIC CHEMICALS, such as SODIUM CYANIDE, to be used as REAGENTS within the CUSTOM SYNTHESIS PROCESS; wherein, what is important it that the lab used is sufficiently skilled and reputable such that no traces of said TOXIC CHEMICALS remain in the FINAL PRODUCT (which can always be confirmed via independent third party analysis)

Edited by ScienceGuy, 25 October 2013 - 08:55 AM.

[brand2]

thanks for the update scienceguy. you are doing a great job. if anyone has extra or would be willing to see a portion of theirs - i'd be interested.

[MangekyōPeter]

Yes, I'd also like to chip in if there is way. If not - Oh well.

[dare2winit]

I hope the final product is better than their english.

[Amorphous]

Thanks for the update. It is great that the synthesis is on-going and they are actually working on it (instead of moving furniture around in the new company or decorating the new office)
Hopefully the delay won't be too long

[Jeremy Paul Stiles]

Oooh I am starting to get pretty excited!

[xks201]

Glad to hear we are using a reputable lab for this. Would hate for one of us to start foaming at the mouth. That would kind of negate the nootropic effect.

[Reformed-Redan]

Glad to hear we are using a reputable lab for this. Would hate for one of us to start foaming at the mouth. That would kind of negate the nootropic effect.

Lol, if you're so paranoid you should do your own lab testing. Sorry 'bout that.

[xks201]

That was a joke. If you knew the stuff I did you'd cringe. Lol

[catalase]

You should all have several concerns about PLR 8-53:

1) There has only been ONE peer-reviewed study that included human trials ever published on this pharmacological agent. (https://www.ncbi.nlm...v/pubmed/418433)There is not nearly enough research on this compound to consider it safe for consumption. No one has studied the long-term effects of the use of this drug in any capacity.

1a) Of the 19 studies referenced in "PRL-8-53 Enhanced Learning and Subsequent Retention in Humans as a Result of Low Oral Doses of New Psychotropic Agent", Hansl cites himself 4 times. In other words, 21% of his references are to himself. This is generally considered a poor practice.

1b) The study is from BEFORE 1975 -- <<38 YEARS OLD>>. Technology and our understanding of neuroscience, pharmacology, and molecular physiology has changed markedly since then.

1c) The note at the end of the study that reads: "Following completion of this study it was found that the particular lot of PRL-8-53 that had been used contained a small amount of the desmethyl compound as admixture, which may also have contributed to the observed effects." This is further cause for concern because it is a testament to the low quality and poor consistency of the product that had been used in the study.

1d) No further studies were ever conducted despite the "positive" results of the above reference. Why not? Did the researchers run out of funding because of flaws in the product? Were there negative effects reported months or years after the study had been published? Additionally, no followup studies were conducted with the subjects that participated in the 1978 study.

1e) The study only administered a single FIXED dose (5 mg) for all subjects, regardless of mass, and did NOT consider the effects of higher doses.

1f) The study did NOT consider contraindications with other medications. Drug-drug interactions can severely impact the physiological effects of medication.

2) The researchers [Nikolaus R. Hansel (Ph.D.) and Beverley T. Mead, (M.D.)] who synthesized this compound and studied it's effects are both DECEASED. They cannot be contacted for further insight or research developments on this drug.

3) Dr. Beverley T. Mead voluntarily surrendered her medical license in 2002, approximately 7 years before her death IN LIEU OF DISCIPLINARY ACTION. (http://www.nebraska....tails&lid=72576) This reflects poorly on her credibility as a researcher and health care practitioner.

4) What are the credentials of the individuals synthesizing this compound for the group-buy? What level of standards is their laboratory held to? Who monitors the laboratory and holds them accountable for violations of regulations? Are they a reputable source that acquires their reagents from other reputable sources?

5) Who will test this compound to ensure that it is >99% purity?

There are too many unknowns here for consumption of "PRL-8-53" to be even remotely safe. No one can guarantee that you will even be consuming that compound if issues 4) and 5) are not addressed properly. It is greatly concerning that this a questionable study to begin with, and that there is virtually ZERO additional research to support the results of the aforementioned study.

Reference: http://www.mediafire...opic_Agent.pdf.

Edited by catalase, 31 October 2013 - 03:31 AM.

[igorpanarin]

IS THIS GROUP STILL OPEN. I WOULD LIKE TO BUY PLR 8-147 WITH THE GROUP. IF NOT PLEASE TELL ME IF IT WORKS OR NOT

[Q did it!]

You should all have several concerns about PLR 8-53:

1) There has only been ONE peer-reviewed study that included human trials ever published on this pharmacological agent. (https://www.ncbi.nlm...v/pubmed/418433)There is not nearly enough research on this compound to consider it safe for consumption. No one has studied the long-term effects of the use of this drug in any capacity.

1a) Of the 19 studies referenced in "PRL-8-53 Enhanced Learning and Subsequent Retention in Humans as a Result of Low Oral Doses of New Psychotropic Agent", Hansl cites himself 4 times. In other words, 21% of his references are to himself. This is generally considered a poor practice.

1b) The study is from BEFORE 1975 -- <<38 YEARS OLD>>. Technology and our understanding of neuroscience, pharmacology, and molecular physiology has changed markedly since then.

1c) The note at the end of the study that reads: "Following completion of this study it was found that the particular lot of PRL-8-53 that had been used contained a small amount of the desmethyl compound as admixture, which may also have contributed to the observed effects." This is further cause for concern because it is a testament to the low quality and poor consistency of the product that had been used in the study.

1d) No further studies were ever conducted despite the "positive" results of the above reference. Why not? Did the researchers run out of funding because of flaws in the product? Were there negative effects reported months or years after the study had been published? Additionally, no followup studies were conducted with the subjects that participated in the 1978 study.

1e) The study only administered a single FIXED dose (5 mg) for all subjects, regardless of mass, and did NOT consider the effects of higher doses.

1f) The study did NOT consider contraindications with other medications. Drug-drug interactions can severely impact the physiological effects of medication.

2) The researchers [Nikolaus R. Hansel (Ph.D.) and Beverley T. Mead, (M.D.)] who synthesized this compound and studied it's effects are both DECEASED. They cannot be contacted for further insight or research developments on this drug.

3) Dr. Beverley T. Mead voluntarily surrendered her medical license in 2002, approximately 7 years before her death IN LIEU OF DISCIPLINARY ACTION. (http://www.nebraska....tails&lid=72576) This reflects poorly on her credibility as a researcher and health care practitioner.

4) What are the credentials of the individuals synthesizing this compound for the group-buy? What level of standards is their laboratory held to? Who monitors the laboratory and holds them accountable for violations of regulations? Are they a reputable source that acquires their reagents from other reputable sources?

5) Who will test this compound to ensure that it is >99% purity?

There are too many unknowns here for consumption of "PRL-8-53" to be even remotely safe. No one can guarantee that you will even be consuming that compound if issues 4) and 5) are not addressed properly. It is greatly concerning that this a questionable study to begin with, and that there is virtually ZERO additional research to support the results of the aforementioned study.

Reference: http://www.mediafire...opic_Agent.pdf.

These things we know and are why we getting this compound synthesized. We want the answers and there's only one way to get them.

As far as the lab goes I can personally vouch for it and ScienceGuy may be getting a sample tested for purity as he seeming always does

[Nattzor]

You should all have several concerns about PLR 8-53:

1) There has only been ONE peer-reviewed study that included human trials ever published on this pharmacological agent. (https://www.ncbi.nlm...v/pubmed/418433)There is not nearly enough research on this compound to consider it safe for consumption. No one has studied the long-term effects of the use of this drug in any capacity.

1a) Of the 19 studies referenced in "PRL-8-53 Enhanced Learning and Subsequent Retention in Humans as a Result of Low Oral Doses of New Psychotropic Agent", Hansl cites himself 4 times. In other words, 21% of his references are to himself. This is generally considered a poor practice.

1b) The study is from BEFORE 1975 -- <<38 YEARS OLD>>. Technology and our understanding of neuroscience, pharmacology, and molecular physiology has changed markedly since then.

1c) The note at the end of the study that reads: "Following completion of this study it was found that the particular lot of PRL-8-53 that had been used contained a small amount of the desmethyl compound as admixture, which may also have contributed to the observed effects." This is further cause for concern because it is a testament to the low quality and poor consistency of the product that had been used in the study.

1d) No further studies were ever conducted despite the "positive" results of the above reference. Why not? Did the researchers run out of funding because of flaws in the product? Were there negative effects reported months or years after the study had been published? Additionally, no followup studies were conducted with the subjects that participated in the 1978 study.

1e) The study only administered a single FIXED dose (5 mg) for all subjects, regardless of mass, and did NOT consider the effects of higher doses.

1f) The study did NOT consider contraindications with other medications. Drug-drug interactions can severely impact the physiological effects of medication.

2) The researchers [Nikolaus R. Hansel (Ph.D.) and Beverley T. Mead, (M.D.)] who synthesized this compound and studied it's effects are both DECEASED. They cannot be contacted for further insight or research developments on this drug.

3) Dr. Beverley T. Mead voluntarily surrendered her medical license in 2002, approximately 7 years before her death IN LIEU OF DISCIPLINARY ACTION. (http://www.nebraska....tails&lid=72576) This reflects poorly on her credibility as a researcher and health care practitioner.

4) What are the credentials of the individuals synthesizing this compound for the group-buy? What level of standards is their laboratory held to? Who monitors the laboratory and holds them accountable for violations of regulations? Are they a reputable source that acquires their reagents from other reputable sources?

5) Who will test this compound to ensure that it is >99% purity?

There are too many unknowns here for consumption of "PRL-8-53" to be even remotely safe. No one can guarantee that you will even be consuming that compound if issues 4) and 5) are not addressed properly. It is greatly concerning that this a questionable study to begin with, and that there is virtually ZERO additional research to support the results of the aforementioned study.

Reference: http://www.mediafire...opic_Agent.pdf.

http://www.reddit.co.../1d40a5/prl853/ - I've written about it a bit. They've atleast done some un-official safety studies on it according to the patent. Checking how off-springs are effected, the effects on the brain, liver, etc.

Bu idd, it's really experimental.

[catalase]

These things we know and are why we getting this compound synthesized. We want the answers and there's only one way to get them.

As far as the lab goes I can personally vouch for it and ScienceGuy may be getting a sample tested for purity as he seeming always does

1) "We want the answers and there's only one way to get them." Wrong. Most of the people that participated in the group-buy are consumers--not producers, i.e. those who are not knowledgeable about conducting scientific investigations and not trained to use proper protocols. They don't know how to evaluate primary literature or even do basic literature searches. You won't get legitimate answers from amateur pharmacologists on this forum who only contribute their anecdotal evidence. Additionally, the sample size is too small to draw any conclusions about short- or long-term effects.

2) What is the name of the laboratory that is synthesizing this compound? Provide their contact information so I can research their qualifications and credentials. Every group-buy should be entirely transparent, especially with the nature of the product being sold.

3) Have you ever met "ScienceGuy" in real life before? What kind of credentials does he have? Does he work for a reputable institution? How do you know that these group-buys are not motivated by money and self-interest? You don't. It's entirely possible that he was quoted 500 dollars total for the entire synthesis, and he is making an extravagant profit off of each and every one of you for his own personal gain.

The people in this community should be asking questions like these and raising concerns. The process should be entirely transparent.

[mait]

These things we know and are why we getting this compound synthesized. We want the answers and there's only one way to get them.

As far as the lab goes I can personally vouch for it and ScienceGuy may be getting a sample tested for purity as he seeming always does

1) "We want the answers and there's only one way to get them." Wrong. Most of the people that participated in the group-buy are consumers--not producers, i.e. those who are not knowledgeable about conducting scientific investigations and not trained to use proper protocols. They don't know how to evaluate primary literature or even do basic literature searches. You won't get legitimate answers from amateur pharmacologists on this forum who only contribute their anecdotal evidence. Additionally, the sample size is too small to draw any conclusions about short- or long-term effects.

2) What is the name of the laboratory that is synthesizing this compound? Provide their contact information so I can research their qualifications and credentials. Every group-buy should be entirely transparent, especially with the nature of the product being sold.

3) Have you ever met "ScienceGuy" in real life before? What kind of credentials does he have? Does he work for a reputable institution? How do you know that these group-buys are not motivated by money and self-interest? You don't. It's entirely possible that he was quoted 500 dollars total for the entire synthesis, and he is making an extravagant profit off of each and every one of you for his own personal gain.

The people in this community should be asking questions like these and raising concerns. The process should be entirely transparent.

Hi, catalase. Your posts are appreciated here but as a new member of this thread, You may have missed some points to take into consideration. The part of Your post, where You question SG is a bit iffy. He and the lab he has been using has quit good record of accomplishment in organizing two group buys / group giveaways that resulted in high quality products for end users: coluracetam and NSI-189. Further, the SG was asked to help in PRL-53-8 group buy after the first collective tries to obtain this compound failed. Plus the delaying of PRL-53-8 synthesis suggest me that the aim of SG is to get quality product: typical scammer would have sent You some fake stuff in very short notice to get the money ASAP. Plus the synthesis seems to be complicated because the first lab selected to make PRL-53-8 for this group buy failed to complete this multi-step synthesis – so obtaining this compound cant be super cheap a la 500 USD.

Secondly all of the participants of current group buy are well aware of the experimental nature of the compound being tested. That’s why the use of some quantitive measure of brain performance has been discussed and encouraged (a la Dual-n-Back). Otherwise the points brought up by catalase are valid but they are discussed in this thread before and the risks and unknowns have been made explicitly clear for participants – so no wrong marketing here.

[ScienceGuy]

These things we know and are why we getting this compound synthesized. We want the answers and there's only one way to get them.

As far as the lab goes I can personally vouch for it and ScienceGuy may be getting a sample tested for purity as he seeming always does

1) "We want the answers and there's only one way to get them." Wrong. Most of the people that participated in the group-buy are consumers--not producers, i.e. those who are not knowledgeable about conducting scientific investigations and not trained to use proper protocols. They don't know how to evaluate primary literature or even do basic literature searches. You won't get legitimate answers from amateur pharmacologists on this forum who only contribute their anecdotal evidence. Additionally, the sample size is too small to draw any conclusions about short- or long-term effects.

2) What is the name of the laboratory that is synthesizing this compound? Provide their contact information so I can research their qualifications and credentials. Every group-buy should be entirely transparent, especially with the nature of the product being sold.

3) Have you ever met "ScienceGuy" in real life before? What kind of credentials does he have? Does he work for a reputable institution? How do you know that these group-buys are not motivated by money and self-interest? You don't. It's entirely possible that he was quoted 500 dollars total for the entire synthesis, and he is making an extravagant profit off of each and every one of you for his own personal gain.

The people in this community should be asking questions like these and raising concerns. The process should be entirely transparent.

Firstly, welcome to LONGECITY

Secondly, it is abundantly clear that your information level is woefully insufficient to be making such posts. I suggest you might like to read through threads properly and ensure that both your information level is complete and all of your facts are correct and accurate before making such bold sweeping statements, and especially insinuations that someone might be acting immorally; wherein, if you read through this thread you will see that pretty much all of your concerns have in fact been discussed previously in this thread, and my actions to date with respect to this forum, which includes posting a copy of the invoice for the respective custom synthesis on the respective thread, and in fact the manner in which I became involved in this particular Group Buy, demonstrates that your insinuations are misguided to the absolute degree