I am a poor college student (redundant?), anyways, I was reading your article and you said something to the extent that 5AD is poor product yet Mesomorphosis sells 5AD, I thought that 5AD sounded very promising and was going to try it out, any other recommendations?
5-AD has plusses and minuses. it also depends on what you are looking for. If you are looking for maximal strength and muscle gain then it is inferior to androdiol. If you are looking for muscle gain with less androgenic side effects then it is a better bet then androdiol.
5-AD also has some other effects that you may want to take into consideration. First of all it is an immune system stimulant which is a positive and desirable property. Secondly it is significantly estrogenic which at high dosages means you are at great risk of gynecomastia and testicular atrophy.
Are there some androgenic effects on women using Androdiol? My wife’s experience was that of a tremendously increased sex drive and moderate size and strength gains. The dosage she used was 200 mg in the morning and 100 mg at night. No acne,no facial hair maybe a very slight clitoral growth (wishful thinking on my part). She is quite happy with the results. Perhaps an increase in dosage??
Thanks for your prompt reply
Androdiol is an androgenic compound yes. I am not surprised your wife is getting the effects she is getting. I would recommend most women avoid androdiol unless they are very careful not to use it for too long. I would keep a close eye on your wife as she is at risk for irreversible virilization problems. She may want to switch to norandrodiol which is a low androgenic high anabolic steroid prohormone.
I would like to know if the “androstenedione ” molecule is a “17-methylated” one (like “methandrostenolone”)? Has it got the same toxicity for the liver as “methandrostenolone”? Can I use it at a 150mg dose per day ,during six weeks without risks for the health?
No, androstenedione (or any of the natural steroid precursors) are not 17-methylated compounds. All 17-methylated compounds are synthetically derived as this chemical functional group does not occur in nature.
Here is a question that Bill Roberts answered:
Why is desmolase inhibition bad? I have read that cortisol is the enemy of our muscles, and we want to reduce it.
“Those articles are written by people trying to sell you alleged cortisol-reducing supplements. While abnormally high levels of cortisol are indeed muscle wasting, abnormally low levels of cortisol do not result in extra muscle growth, and cause joint problems.”
Since everyone speaks from a different frame of reference, I would like to hear your thoughts on why Substrate Solutions is pursuing this same substrate.
I stand by what Bill Roberts said. Excessive cortisol is the enemy, but cortisol levels that are too low are just as bad. Substrate Solutions was thinking of selling Phosphatidylserine but has since postponed that. PS is not a cortisol blocker but rather it diminshes the increase of cortisol resulting from stress (i.e. physical exercise). It will not lower your cortisol under normal circumstances. This makes it the ideal cortisol attenuating supplement as it only works when your cortisol is ready to go out of control due to stress.
I have some Sportsone 19-norandro and some Gen androdiol. Is there any benefit to using these products together, like the “deca and test” stack?
This is a good stack since they do convert to different prohormones and they also utilize seperate enzymatic pathways.
IS Substrate’s Norandrostenediol the same as Sports One Nordiol? I believe Sports One is 19Nor-5androstene-3, 17Diol. Given your opinion of 5androstenediol does this carry over to norandrostenediol?
There is no literature that I can find that substantiates any benefits for this 5 version of norandrodiol (and I looked high and low). If the manufacturers have any literature on it I think they owe it to reveal it to the public. Otherwise why should we think this compound has any activity at all?
One absolutely cannot extrapolate the data on nor4-4AD (the anabolic steroid bolandiol) to this nor-5AD. Delta 4 and delta-5 steroids often have drastically different pharmacological activities. One example is pregnenolone and progesterone. They (like the aforementioned nordiols) both share the same chemical structure except for the position of the double bond. Pregnenolone (a delta-5) has practically no progestational activity while progesterone (a delta-4) is the strongest endogenous progestagen.
Although I am biased I am sure you would agree with me that more data needs to be presented on the nor-5AD and until then the consumer would be best served to stick to the proven nor-4AD.
I’ve read that taking antibiotics during a steriod cycle inhibits enymes that are needed to process steriods in the liver, thereby rendering them ineffective. Seeing that I am currently taking tetracycline, and would like to try the one of your stacked hormone precursor formulas, I was wondering if the same holds true concerning products like androdiol, norandrodiol, etc. I know these are processed via different enzymes, but I don’t know if they are effected also. Thanks for anything you can tell me.
The way certain oral antibiotics work to decrease the activity of steroid hormones is not quite as you explain it. What happens is that oral antibiotics kill alot of beneficial flora in the gut. Some of these microbes have a “regenerating” effect on metabolized steroids from the liver. What happens in the liver is that many steroids are deactivated by a process called “conjugation” which means that the steroid is linked to a sugar like molecule called glucuronic acid. Proceeding this process some of the steroid glucuronides formed find their way into the bile flow from the liver into the small intestine. Usually when the microbial environment in the small intestine is normal, much of the steroid glucuronides will be hydrolyzed back to the free active parent steroid by microbial glucuronidase. The free steroid is then reabsorbed and ready for action again.
When the mircobial environment is disturbed by antibiotics this regenerating effect is disrupted. Such is the case with women taking birth control pills. Since the dosage of birth control pills is small and carefully controlled there is a great risk for women that take concomitant doses of antibiotics, as the necessary circulating levels of hormones may be decreased below the active threshold. However since the dosages for steroid precursors are so large I do not think that their would be quite the risk of diminished potency as their is for birth control pills.
My name is Spencer David Kobren; I am the author of hair loss by using Proscar (5mg finasteride) I have been on it for 3.5 years with wonderful “hair raising” results and no apparent adverse side effects. However I am a bit concerned about the 15% increase in testosterone beginning to aromatise. I have not worked out heavy in about two years because of chronic injuries. I do however do a light workout a few days per week. I have been noticing some signs of gyno…I am not really sure if it’s gyno or the mere fact that I don’t train my chest like I used to and I put on some wait. My question is, since my 5a-reductase is being inhibited the extra testosterone may be aromatising. Is their any dietary or supplemental protocol I should follow to prevent gyno and increase muscle tone?. I have successfully stopped the progression of my
Thanks for your time.
Spencer David Kobren
I don’t believe the cause of estrogen related symptoms from finasteride is because some of the “extra 15%” of testosterone is aromatizing. Rather I believe that it is due to the elimination of the 5-alpha reduced androgens androstandione and dihydrotestosterone that have been shown to have potent paracrine (tissue localized) aromatase inhibitory and estrogen receptor antagonistic activity. This is the case of a hormone (DHT) having a good and a bad side.
I know of no bona fide natural anti-estrogenic compounds with the exception of Indole-3-carbinol. Certain flavonoids MAY also impart anti-estrogenic effects. I would try to eat a diet high in leafy green vegetables and perhaps supplement I3C and a flavonoid like quercitin.
I just got through reading your page on Andro-6 and thought I must share my thoughts on the subject, because your criticism of several components of Andro-6 cannot withstand any criticism! First of all, chrysin. At least, Bill Phillips based his decision to include this compound in Andro-6 based on solid scientific research (albeit IN-VITRO). Your criticism of it amounts to “Gee whiz, my grandma took a bucketful of chrysin and she still didn’t feel anything.” “Anecdotal reports”?? Are you shitting me??? ‘Cause if you’re not, I’ve got some great boron for you to buy! From what I hear, your testosterone goes through the roof. I can’t believe you even mentioned that! For all you know, that chrysin your “subjects” were taking was as pure as the waters of the sewage system. Was that a controlled environment? And were these people’s initial readings measured? (If you put Dorian You-know-who on a mild dose of Deca-Durabolin and nothing else, he’ll probably lose muscle mass. Does this mean it’s an ineffective compound?) You cannot possibly make conclusions concerning bioavalability based solely on empirical evidence. Any scientist worth his salt would NEVER rely on anecdotal evidence!
You also write: “[DHT]… may be vital to the strength and aggressiveness effects of testosterone.” Excuse me, but aggressiveness is an UN-desirable side effect of testosterone! If saw palmetto could reduce that aggressiveness, I think that would be considered a beneficial property, no? Plus, “may be vital”… Unless you have some research to back it up, it’s pure speculation no better than Phillips’ about chrysin. In any case, the fact that cases of prostate problems and male pattern baldness are so incredibly wide-spread (and actually growing) would totally justify supplementing your diet with saw palmetto even if you are not taking Andro-6 or other anabolic agents. The benefits of inhibiting the conversion of testosterone into DHT by far outweigh the hypothetical side effects for athletes.
I also found it quite strange that you criticize the use of Tribulus Terrestris! That is one supplement that is back up by both research and “anecdotal reports”. Just because the research was performed in Bulgaria, doesn’t make it any less valid. (In fact, it’s probably more valid as Soviet-era research was conducted by the state agencies who did not have a hidden agenda of selling a supplement if its effectiveness was demonstrated.)
The only thing I tend to agree with is the DHEA argument, although more research in this area would certainly be justified. Thank you for you attention,
Andrey V. Medvedev
P.S. I would take that article off the Net if I were you.
P.P.S. No, I don’t work for MM or EAS and I don’t know anyone there.
If I based supplements on IN-VITRO research only I could probably come out with over 100 new products right now. I remember an executive at a top pharmaceutical companies R&D told me that of about every 10,000 compounds that work in the test tube perhaps about 1 are found to be active in humans with low toxicity.
Your statements reveal that you are naive about drug development and issues such as bioavailablity and pharmacokinetics. Let me tell you something, I am the person that introduced chrysin to the sports supplement industry and I have done more research on it than anyone else in this arena. I worked for EAS and it was during that time I introduced Bill Phillips to chrysin. Everything Bill knows, or forgot, or was utterly confused about concerning chrysin he got from me. I don’t suppose you remember an article by Bill in a Q&A of his a couple of years back where he stated that he would like to see the people that come out with “flavone X” to do studies to show its efficacy in humans as well as prove its safety? Did Bill PHillips ever do such studies before HE came out with chrysin?”
Most of what I have read about chrysin indicates that it should have very low bioavailability. Its poor solubility and its metabolically labile nature both make this a poor candidate for an oral medication. Feedback I have gotten is from people that have taken several grams and found no amelioration of gynecomastic symptoms while these same folks respond very well to low dosages of prescription anti-estrogens.
To use or not to use chrysin is your choice. To sell it is my choice and I chose not to because I don’t sell things with insufficient data backing them up.
As far as aggressiveness being an undesirable trait I wholly disagree. Agressiveness and heightened mental function is, according to the East Germans, one of the greatest benefits of androgenic steroids on athletic perfomance. That is why they gave their atheltes more androgenic compounds like testosterone and mestanolone (methyl DHT). The East Germans coined this mental androgenic effect “psychomotor stimulation”. Since DHT is the active androgen in the CNS and is the strongest androgen in the body I believe wholeheartedly that by diminishing 5-alpha reductase you would diminish some of the ergogenic activity of the testosterone circulating in your body.
The tribulus terrestris study was done in Bulgaria and sponsored by the company that sells the stuff. I am not debating the validity of this study, rather I am just emphasizing the urgency of a second or third study to validate this one. Why doesn’t someone like your friend Bill Phillips, who claims to be so science oriented, perform such a cheap simple study to prove the stuff once and for all? Could it be because the wrong results may hurt sales?
What is you feeling on Pro-hGh?
David Shores D.C.
My feelings on Pro-HGH is that it the inventors are scamming the public. They claim in the MM interview that they have a natural growth hormone releasing peptide “NGHRP” as the main active ingredient. The other ingredients are there to support the actions of the main ingredient “NGHRP”
The fact is the natural ligand for the GHRP receptor has never been identified. The inventors are out and out lying. My guess is either this product is a total scam consisting of insuffiently effective ingredients (the support ingredients) or these guys “spiked” their formula with a synthetic GHRP.
If the latter is true than it probably would not matter to most people as long as they know its working!