|
2002/11/08, 02:33 PM
As a public service to the FT community:
I’ve been receiving many questions recently regarding the newest wave of wonder supplements called pro-steroids, so I decided to do a little research:
From what I can find, it seems to be that most of these are based on 4-androstenediol (4-AD) and 1-androstenediol (1-AD), in an attempt to convert to the Class-I androgen 17-hydroxyandrost-1-ene-3-one or Androst-1-ene, also erroneously known as "1-Testosterone." But, Androst-1-ene is not a form of Testosterone at all, even though certain companies have been loosely referring to it as 1-Testosterone.
Though initial research shows some promise with 1-AD and 4-AD IN THEORY, (though I am really sick of companies comparing any products to Deca, Dianabol, etc.), there is a major problem with absorption and conversion. So, what some companies have decided to do is to encase the molecules to improve usage by the body. They elected to use an ester, which is a product of an organic acid and an alcohol, in this case, an ethylcarbonate ester. By encapsulating the AD molecule in the ester, they advertise that this will improve the absorption, and therefore, the conversion, of the AD molecule into Testosterone. Sounds good.
However, the biggest problem (not the only, mind you) that I have with this is the issue of scientific method. With VERY little time and concerted effort, these companies are stating with absolute certainty that these products are better than steroids. Before any cause and effect connection can be established with any experiment, repeated and extended sampling on multiple control groups is necessary. From a new safety device in a car to a new diabetic drug, many years of research and millions of dollars are spent before any one will claim any thing, and even this is not a promise that the new product will work.
My point is this: with no peer-review evidence or demonstration of long term effectiveness available yet (maybe never), it is not ethical to make such incredible claims so early on in the products’ lives, and, therefore, consumers should be quite leery.
----------------------------
Michael
"Trample the weak; hurdle the dead!"
|
|
|
|
2002/11/08, 02:37 PM
great post!
--------------
There are those the lift, and those that do not. Which are you?
|
|
2002/11/08, 04:08 PM
Thanks for the info.
Ester is also used in coating some vit c brands.
--------------
To change it, or to create it, simply train it!
|
|
2002/11/08, 06:18 PM
Yeah Rev...right on. From someone who tried 1-AD(yeah, I fell for the hype), about a year ago, by a company called sportpharma or pharma something, red label. These were touted as the end all of andro! Which by the way, never worked either. But, luckily I do okay financially, so I tried them. 3 bottles, and nothing. And I am a person who gives everything its fair time and chance to work. So, great post!! I am so for saving people money on these outrageous claims. That was exactly the type of "hype" my rant post was about in this section about a month ago.
|
|
2002/11/13, 04:16 PM
Watch out for IDS as well. They've been marketing products that tout 'steroid-like gains!' They even name their products simliarly to types of steroids and have a picture of a syringe on their ad for added effect!
Well, if the old ball coach from Nebraska has his way, though, all of this stuff is going to be off the market.
|
|
2002/11/22, 04:06 PM
i've recently received several more questions re: this topic, so i thought i'd give it a bump...
--------------
Michael
"Trample the weak; hurdle the dead!"
|
