LMAO, you're the only delusional one here.:fool2:I hope you're enjoying your delusional self-proclaimed victorys.
-Pp
LMAO, you're the only delusional one here.:fool2:I hope you're enjoying your delusional self-proclaimed victorys.
-Pp
Im not in here because I think PS powder is hurting my sales, it isnt. Im here because you are lying, just like you were at mind and muscle when you posted this same crap. Ive considered PS in the past and may consider it in the future but that has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Ive never said PS wasnt good, Ive actually posted the opposite. However your comments about the nonanabolic- nonandrogenic metabolites of DHEA being suppressive is false and the above studies show that whether you want to believe it or not.You’re just reposting the same unrelated research you posted before, which I’ve already replied to.
I’m giving you a polite invite to exit the thread. I suggest you take it, before you get chewed up any further. I doubt this thread is hurting your sells as much as you think it is. Relax and stop embarrassing yourself. (and your company)
Replace the 7OH and 5AT with PS and you will have a solid product. Nothing wrong with a reformulation.
-Pp
Yep, the same “crap” was posted on M&M and we came to the same conclusion – DHEA’s metabolites lower testosterone production.Im not in here because I think PS powder is hurting my sales, it isnt. Im here because you are lying, just like you were at mind and muscle when you posted this same crap. As I said I think PS is a good compound but at the moment there would be no reason for me to use it instead of something that is better. The only person getting embarrassed here is you.
They may not be direct anti-androgens, but they can have anti-androgenic effects. Here is one study that shows 7-oxo DHEA raising epitestosterone. (there are more studies on this)Care to prove that they are anti-androgenic?
Actually you were the only one who came to that conclusion.Yep, the same “crap” was posted on M&M and we came to the same conclusion – DHEA’s metabolites lower testosterone production.
Here it is for anyone who wants to see -
http://www.mindandmuscle.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=33280
-Pp
LMAO. You are still quoting the same transdermal study. Transdermal application of 7OXO is not relevant to oral use.They may not be direct anti-androgens, but they can have anti-androgenic effects. Here is one study that shows 7-oxo DHEA raising epitestosterone. (there are more studies on this)
Delayed effects of short-term transdermal application of 7-oxo-dehydroepiandrosterone on its metabolites, some hormonal steroids and relevant proteohormones in healthy male volunteers.
J Sulcova, R Hampl, M Hill, L Starka, and A Novacek
Clin Chem Lab Med, January 1, 2005; 43(2): 221-7.
Epitestosterone is generally considered an "anti-androgen" because it doesn’t poses significant androgenic/anabolic activity.
-Pp
Really?Actually you were the only one who came to that conclusion.
The transdermal studies are relevant because they give a very clear picture of what happens when these DHEA metabolites get into the system (an amplified result of what happens when administered orally).LMAO. You are still quoting the same transdermal study. Transdermal application of 7OXO is not relevant to oral use.
Phosphatidylserine has a clear benefit of being able to suppress cortisol release, while simultaneously increasing testosterone production. (This is at least a step in the right direction)
Yes, but PS’s ability to increase testosterone is secondary in action. For instance, if you’re under any kind of physical or mental stress, PS will mitigate the drop in testosterone associated with the rise in cortisol… or perhaps increase testosterone if you’re suppressed from chronically high cortisol levels.Whoa, whoa, whoa, so PS is a test booster now?
Studies please.
And if you are using "HORMONAL EFFECTS OF PHOSPHATIDYLSERINE DURING 2-WKS OF INTENSE WEIGHT TRAINING" please provide the full text, I can't even access the abstract.
Thanks
What I said was LX was not created as a PCT product although it can be used since it increases total testosterone, free testosterone, lowers estrogen, lowers cortisol, increases lean mass, decreases fat mass and helps to prevent futrure gains of fat. It doesnt suppress HPTA and you dont have a single study to show that it does. I dont sell hormones or products that suppress HPTA so I dont see the need in coming out with a product specifically to remedy that situation. However LX will work very well during PCT.Really?
I remember you saying you “dont recommend [7OH] for PCT”. Is this because you know it suppresses the HPTA?
It’s funny you’re mentioning 7-oxo studies now. Earlier you refused to acknowledge the relationship between 7OH, 5AT and 7-oxo. I guess whatever’s convenient for you eh?
-Pp
nuff said.wow, am I the only one looking at this thinking it'a a bit immature? I think this sets in stone the fact that I will never buy a designer supplement product. I don;t even know what the hell you guys are talkign about, but even I can tell that you are going back and forth. Perhaps you BOTH have good supplements?
E L E
Exactly.Designer Supplements has been around for a long time now and has produced many great products. He is trying to debunk information which is being presented by PP for the good of the board. I would side with Designer any day of the week over a new company like PP. And no one is debating if the products are good or not, but rather the information the PP is selling products by and saying it is so much better than LX when there is no science to back it up.
There is also this:Quote:
Originally Posted by joebo
If you could choose just one fat loss product that you have used in the past, what would it be? I'm looking to drop about 7 lbs and looking for a little help in doing so.
Quote:
Originally Posted By Designer Supps
If youre going to be serious about your diet Ill send you a bottle of Adrenalean for free. Try it out and let me know how it worked towards the 7lbs of fatloss. PM me your addy if you are interested.
Heres where I found this...
http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplements/96363-if-you-could.html
Yeah I would back a company too if they were given me free product. Primordial may be a new company but I have received nothing but good info and results from them...these bros know their stuff
wow, am I the only one looking at this thinking it'a a bit immature? I think this sets in stone the fact that I will never buy a designer supplement product. I don;t even know what the hell you guys are talkign about, but even I can tell that you are going back and forth. Perhaps you BOTH have good supplements?
E L E
Good Call. Lots of good info....a must readneither are arguing which has better supps they have respect for each other in that aspect. they are just debating the science of compounds. just read and learn something instead of trying to turn this debate in to an argument.
Thanks
GJJ
PP is selling products by and saying it is so much better than LX when there is no science to back it up.
I obviously don't post negative if the product works, but I was trying to get across that I have recieved product for free to test which didn't live up to what it should have and in return I've posted my honest feedback which was negative for the product. It has nothing to do with DS or PP. I honestly could care less about either company, but moreso about the products they create. I have no loyalty to any company. if you make a good product I will purchase it. I do however believe DS to have a very deep background in the sciences and not knowing much about PP, I would tend to trust DS before PP. Who is ultimately right, I don't know.There is nothing wrong with free products. What makes all this interesting is after gibbob2 shows support for PP, joebo comes in to support DS. All perfectly fine. However, when it is shown that joebo has a biased opinion, he responds with
"I've received free product from a lot of companies and in return have provided negative feedback on these companies."
Which is obviously untrue, shown by his comment 35 minutes earlier.
But all this is in good fun, so who really cares?
very well said joebo. I'm with you Im not on any companies side. I do understand Ps is a great compound. I also understand Lean extreme is as well. Both lower cortisol and lean xtreme has some other compounds that increase fat burning and testosterone, like . From my understanding the studies show a eight percent decrease in test levels from TRANSDermal, not oral. Eight percent is basically nothing and the eight percent could be from anything. ie the guys may have not gotten enough sleep, or been exposed to lawn moving chemicals, etc many other factors. regardless eight percent did not come from the oral use and only the tub on use , is my understanding correct?I obviously don't post negative if the product works, but I was trying to get across that I have recieved product for free to test which didn't live up to what it should have and in return I've posted my honest feedback which was negative for the product. It has nothing to do with DS or PP. I honestly could care less about either company, but moreso about the products they create. I have no loyalty to any company. if you make a good product I will purchase it. I do however believe DS to have a very deep background in the sciences and not knowing much about PP, I would tend to trust DS before PP. Who is ultimately right, I don't know.
On a side note, if you believe I have a biased opinion towards any company because they will provide a free bottle of product to log, then you might as well disregard most members on this board as most have participated in sponsored logs, so in turn we have a board of biased members.
It was an 8% drop from oral use and a 12-15% drop from transdermal use.very well said joebo. I'm with you Im not on any companies side. I do understand Ps is a great compound. I also understand Lean extreme is as well. Both lower cortisol and lean xtreme has some other compounds that increase fat burning and testosterone, like . From my understanding the studies show a eight percent decrease in test levels from TRANSDermal, not oral. Eight percent is basically nothing and the eight percent could be from anything. ie the guys may have not gotten enough sleep, or been exposed to lawn moving chemicals, etc many other factors. regardless eight percent did not come from the oral use and only the tub on use , is my understanding correct?
wow, am I the only one looking at this thinking it'a a bit immature? I think this sets in stone the fact that I will never buy a designer supplement product. I don;t even know what the hell you guys are talkign about, but even I can tell that you are going back and forth. Perhaps you BOTH have good supplements?
E L E
I agree... but the debates about the science is what it is all about. I enjoy the heated discussions about product. Get Diesel comes to mind.I believe one should judge the effectiveness of products based on whether or not the matrix of compounds deliver the results the manufacturers claimed they would. From this perspective, the length of time a company has been around is secondary, not irrelevant; just secondary. Every (successful) company was once a start-up. Designer Supplements and Primordial Performance, to mention just the two involved in this thread, have excellent products in their line-up. I have stacked Activate Xtreme and Lean Xtreme several times and liked the results a lot. I have also used Endo-AMP, Toco-8, and Sustain Alpha, and was very pleased with the results. And will use them again in after Dermacrine. Furthermore, Lean Xtreme and Endo-AMP, even though their benefits intersect in some areas, are still completely different products and were meant to serve different purposes.
So, while this thread may be entertaining to some, the arguments lose intellectual power and the exchanges get more circular as the thread extends. No one really emerges as a winner in such hostile forum exchanges. On the contrary! So, let things be and just move on! :thumbsup: Or ignore my post!
You did when a persona asked if they should stop using LX to use PS instead. You did when you post lies about compounds you know nothing about.I never said PS was so much better than LX. To be fair, LX has a combination of ingredients which make it a totally different kind of product – it really is like comparing apples and oranges.
I posted research that shows DHEA metabolites suppress testosterone production (7oxo which is related to 7OH and 5AT). Any educated member can refute these claims, but science is science and this is what the research shows, whether Designer Supps likes it or not.
Designer Supps keeps crying BS, but posts no relevant research to support his stance. At this point I think we are beating a dead horse.
-Pp
Absolutely correct.very well said joebo. I'm with you Im not on any companies side. I do understand Ps is a great compound. I also understand Lean extreme is as well. Both lower cortisol and lean xtreme has some other compounds that increase fat burning and testosterone, like . From my understanding the studies show a eight percent decrease in test levels from TRANSDermal, not oral. Eight percent is basically nothing and the eight percent could be from anything. ie the guys may have not gotten enough sleep, or been exposed to lawn moving chemicals, etc many other factors. regardless eight percent did not come from the oral use and only the tub on use , is my understanding correct?
You did when a persona asked if they should stop using LX to use PS instead. You did when you post lies about compounds you know nothing about.
You posted research that shows TRANSDERMAL 7OXO can effect testosterone production. Transdermal delivery is not the same as oral. The studies you posted were refuted when I posted multiple studies showing that they cannot bind the AR, are not anabolic nor androgenic and do not convert into anything anabolic, androgenic.
5AT and 7OH are not 7OXO, regardless if they are related or not. Estrogen is related to Testosterone and neither act the same. Both are related to Cholesterol and none act the same.
I have posted tons of relevant research, of which you have no response.
Absolutely wrong and you’re absolutely full of it.Absolutely correct.
I couldn't have said it better. ;-0So, while this thread may be entertaining to some, the arguments lose intellectual power and the exchanges get more circular as the thread extends.
True dat. I'll just stack both.There are studies proving and disproving each companies arguments, these studies can be interpreted how ever you choose. What it boils down to is that both companies create quality products that live up to there claims. The products however work through different mechanisms and are truly different so this thread is going to go nowhere. Thank you both for the information in this thread and both of you for creating quality products but I suggest you agree to disagree on the topic because and internet fight never goes anywhere but in circles.
I hate when people use words and they don't know what they mean. Diurnal: Relating to or occurring in a 24-hour period; daily. Therefore, when you talk about reducing cortisol diurnally, you are talking about reducing it though a 24 hour period, not just the daytimeAs long as you don’t have cushings syndrome you could likely benefit from a lower diurnal cortisol level.
Cortisol released during the night is perfectly ok. But having a high cortisol level throughout the day is highly undesirable. High diurnal cortisol is sign of nutritional deficiency, perhaps a PS deficiency. (seriously)
-Pp
The reason is that measuring cortisol levels is very difficult. the act of measuring itself often increases stress levels and cortisol release so it is not very reliable which is why, if the doctor thinks you may have a problem, does an ACTH stimulation test or some other kind of tests to see how your adrenals are doing instead of just measuring cortisol.There are studies proving and disproving each companies arguments, these studies can be interpreted how ever you choose. What it boils down to is that both companies create quality products that live up to there claims. The products however work through different mechanisms and are truly different so this thread is going to go nowhere. Thank you both for the information in this thread and both of you for creating quality products but I suggest you agree to disagree on the topic because an internet fight never goes anywhere but in circles.
Excellent google lesson.... http://www.thedoctorsdoctor.com/labtests/testosterone.htmPlease post a study that shows Total Test is responsible for the actions of testosterone in the body, independant of free test.
There are dozens of studies showing free testosterone is the bioactive form of testosterone, it is not something which has been overated by the supplement industry.
"Only about 2 percent of the total testosterone in the plasma of men is free or nonprotein bound; about 1 percent in women. In most men and women, more than 50 percent of total circulating testosterone is bound to sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), and most of the rest is bound to albumin. It is only the free or nonprotein bound testosterone which is the hormonally active form, able to interact with cellular hormone receptors. SHBG-bound testosterone is not readily available for intracellular complex formation because of SHBG's high binding affinity for testosterone."
"Testosterone-bound SHBG is considered biologically inactive. SHBG levels are sensitive to changes in estrogen and testosterone. Thus conditions which affect SHBG will directly affect the serum levels and biological activity."
Agreed. Total test means nothing.Excellent google lesson.... http://www.thedoctorsdoctor.com/labtests/testosterone.htm
:hammer::hammer:
Fudge he beat me to it....Desperately searching google, and pulling quotes from top ranked sites about basic endocrinologic function is only detracting from the main point of this thread...
Nothing at all....I suppose if you dont mind diabetes?Agreed. Total test means nothing.
Free test is active, bound test is not -- that pretty much sums it up. Take any masters level endocrinology course or read the willkiams text and you will understand.Nothing at all....I suppose if you dont mind diabetes?
No, I have used this name as a pseudonym for the past 10 years or so.OT: Are you the "set point" Seth Roberts???? Or just a fan?
Yes, this is very well understood even by those with undergrad level endo knowledge. But its sounds as if your saying males with low total test are perfectly healthy with normal free test ranges? I'm putting words in your mouth but its seems like that is where you are taking this...Free test is active, bound test is not -- that pretty much sums it up. Take any masters level endocrinology course or read the willkiams text and you will understand.
Since the range for total test is so braod, it is almost pointless to even look at it. It is very unlikely that you would have total test below the cutoff for the normal range and still have free test be normal unless you were doing something to manipulate SHBG levels.Yes, this is very well understood even by those with undergrad level endo knowledge. But its sounds as if your saying males with low total test are perfectly healthy with normal free test ranges? I'm putting words in your mouth but its seems like that is where you are taking this...
We are way OT, btw...
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Any good new cortisol blockers/"hormone regulars" out? | Supplements | 26 | ||
Cortisol blockers | Anabolics | 8 | ||
Cortisol blockers and supplements | Supplements | 24 | ||
Peptides or cortisol blockers while on CKD | Weight Loss | 2 | ||
A2-Receptor Blocker or Cortisol Blocker? | Supplements | 3 |