People have to take into consideration nasal passage integrity. Would this route cause damage? How necessary is it?
If it's in the mucous membranes, why not just gum it? It's such a small dose too. They make testosterone troches too
Valid points. The troches (lozenges), do you know if these are cyclodextrin based? I tried googling a bit but couldnt determine such, but did find a patent for cyclotest lozenges. I assume they are ,as my understanding is thats the only effective way to make testosterone base absorb transmucosally.
I DIYd something similar, making sticky gummy bear candies loaded with cyclodextrin encapsulated testosterone base. They stick against my gums and slowly dissolve away over X minutes, The only downside was the limitation on dosage i could absorb, putting multiple in my mouth at once failed to give me the feelz that i was getting any more of a dosage than just one at a time. Research i read on the matter using blood testing also seemed to confirm a dose absorption limitation for the sublingual/buccal/gingival route, bigger doses did not equate to higher blood concentrations after a certain point, suggesting a limitation on absorption via that route at least per X amount of time.
With my intranasal experiments i never ran into nasal issues except it would leave my nostrils feeling sticky like sugar residue from the cyclodextrin. No discomfort in the nose itself but the throat felt pretty rough from the drip for unknown reasons. My composition was nothing but distilled water, hydroxy-propyl beta-cyclodextrin, and testosterone base.
That said, i personally would not repeat the experiments. Mainly because I had satisfied my curiosity. The nasal testosterone was the most “novel” of the experiments, by which i mean it produced an effect different than other ROAs.
Delivery of testosterone to the brain by intranasal administration: comparison to intravenous testosterone
William A Banks 1,
John E Morley,
Michael L Niehoff,
Claudia Mattern
Affiliations expand
Abstract
Intranasal (i.n.) administration has emerged as a strategy to deliver therapeutics to the brain. Here, we compared i.n. and intravenous (i.v.) administration for testosterone. About 75% of the i.n. administered testosterone entered the blood.
However, whole brain levels of testosterone were about twice as high after i.n. administration as after i.v. administration. About two-thirds of the testosterone entering the brain after i.n. administration did so by direct entry by nasal routes and the remainder indirectly by first entering the blood and then crossing the blood-brain barrier. All brain regions except the frontal cortex had higher levels of testosterone after i.n. administration than after i.v. administration, although the differences among brain regions varied much more for the i.n. route. The olfactory bulb, hypothalamus, striatum, and hippocampus had the highest levels after i.n. administration. The brain uptake pattern suggested a variety of distribution routes likely involving the cerebrospinal fluid, diffusion through brain tissue, and transport through nerve projections. Regional distribution patterns were similar after either i.n. or i.v. administration, suggesting that the dominant factor determining distribution/retention was the same for either route of administration. We conclude that the i.n. administration route delivers testosterone systemically and can target the brain, especially the olfactory bulb, hypothalamus, striatum, and hippocampus.
