I can not find evidence that NR, an admitted synthetic knock off of a botanical molecule, has been approved as an NDI by the FDA. If not the ingredient and all products which contain it may be in violation of FDA's recent admonition which states that a synthetic version of an existing botanical is not a botanical, and must get NDI approval. If the company is selling this product without a valid NDI it would appear to be illegal and could subject the company to massive liabilities and penalties. Was this stated in any SEC filing as a potential liability? If not, this is almost certainly another violation. A stock holder who relies upon the company's SEC filings to inform him or her may have status for a lawsuit against the company and its major owners and management.
If you are a lawyer with FDA experience and training I would be interested in hearing your take on this. If you are a high school drop out with a trailer trash tongue, and you know who I am referring to, no one is interested in your nonsense.
I have to say, sharron is using a better strategy by casting doubt on the classification of this stuff. Unfortunately her argument falls apart when she relis on organizations lik the FDA and the SEC to do the heavy lifting.
Once again she proves that spending 2 years at a community college is no match for a lifetime of investing accumen.
Every day, people are making hundreds of dollars - thousands per month off this stock. But she remains steadfast, screaming at the walls.
Please read the business summary. I find it highly unlikely that they would market any ingredients that have not been approved. After all, that's part of their business they do for other companies. The patents for 'NR' were acquired from several noted Universities. I guess you didn't look hard enough.
What you find unlikely is irrelevant. Also, the company's core business is selling reference samples, not raw materials. There is no requirement for approval of samples since they are not meant for human consumption. Thirdly, I have spoken to an expert in FDA rules since I posted my comment. The stipulation by the FDA that one must file NDI submissions on so-called bio equivalent materials, such as NR, and PteroPure for that matter, has existed for several years, but only recently, due to some egregious abuses, is it being strenuously enforced. Finally, patents have nothing to do with this requirement. Given today's patent office policies one can almost patent a ham sandwich. Patents and the FDA rules are totally separate issues. I guess you did not look at all.
keep... your the one who may get desperate! Before you continue your bashing you might want to have a conversation with your attorney about the legality of selling drugs illegally. Shareholders need to investigate this so they also dont become liable. Trouble ahead, trouble behind......problem