Is The Hi Tech Cyclosome Delivery System Legit?

[thescience]

So Hi Tech has been cranking out some interesting products lately and a number of these have what is described as a Cyclosome delivery system. Is it a cyclodextrin bound ingredient? is a phytosome? it isnt obvious from their description. A given ingredient is not specifically listed as being bound or altered on the label, but Phosphatidylcholine and Hydroxpropyl-beta-cyclodextrin (HPBCD are listed under "other ingredients." Here's the thing though, Hi-Tech sells a number of really expensive dhea derivative products at like $80/bottle. wouldnt there be serious outrage if this system wasnt delivering the goods? anyone have any information on this? can anyone testify as to how the Cyclosome has delivered for them? is there any speculation how this type of dual delivery could even be possible?

 

[teamguy312]

There is serious outrage as far as I know. They are still up to selling near useless PH’s named after actual roids to attract new guys. It’s sad really. I’m not saying there is zero science behind their delivery system but personally, I would never use them. They got some money from me before I knew any better and I look back like, such a waste. I don’t deny the fact that something like the 1 test or something could benefit you, but you’d probably have to take so much, just not worth it anyway I look at it. Mainly went on this rant cause I’m still mad about the money they got from me for their “superdrol” and ****. Haha

 

[thescience]

There is serious outrage as far as I know. They are still up to selling near useless PH’s named after actual roids to attract new guys. It’s sad really. I’m not saying there is zero science behind their delivery system but personally, I would never use them. They got some money from me before I knew any better and I look back like, such a waste. I don’t deny the fact that something like the 1 test or something could benefit you, but you’d probably have to take so much, just not worth it anyway I look at it. Mainly went on this rant cause I’m still mad about the money they got from me for their “superdrol” and ****. Haha

Thanks for the feedback. I ordered their fadogia. I never noticed anything from barlowes fadogia, and this is a more potent fadogia for sure so if it works then i may indicate the system works

 

[thescience]

Gotcha, if there is a natural supp or something you are after, hi tech has a few, so does huge nutrition. I agree, get the hi tech if it’s the most potent. I just wanted to make sure you weren’t getting steered into the direction of their “winstrol” or something, haha. Ever since the ban, basically the only way to get good PH’s is from ordering from the UK or on the supplement auction on this forum. Not sure if you’ve heard of predator nutrition, the stuff they carry is very good quality.

definitely looking for natural supplements, but if youve taken some of their dhea products with that delivery system then it is an indication that system may not be legit

 

[sns8778]

So Hi Tech has been cranking out some interesting products lately and a number of these have what is described as a Cyclosome delivery system. Is it a cyclodextrin bound ingredient? is a phytosome? it isnt obvious from their description. A given ingredient is not specifically listed as being bound or altered on the label, but Phosphatidylcholine and Hydroxpropyl-beta-cyclodextrin (HPBCD are listed under "other ingredients." Here's the thing though, Hi-Tech sells a number of really expensive dhea derivative products at like $80/bottle. wouldnt there be serious outrage if this system wasnt delivering the goods? anyone have any information on this? can anyone testify as to how the Cyclosome has delivered for them?

Thanks for the feedback. I ordered their fadogia. I never noticed anything from barlowes fadogia, and this is a more potent fadogia for sure so if it works then i may indicate the system works

Anytime this subject gets brought up here, the threads usually wind up being deleted because they delve into bashing and arguing, so that's why you can't find much in the way of 'outrage' that you mentioned.

As for the DHEA's that Hi-Tech has, they have the patents on certain ones and that's why you only see them under Hi-Tech or brands that Hi-Tech owns.

As for Fadogia, I wouldn't say that it would indicate anything about the system itself; there are many different grades of and standardizations of Fadogia available.

We use a very premium Fadogia in M-Test and in our Fadogia XT product, which we get really good feedback on.

 

[thescience]

Anytime this subject gets brought up here, the threads usually wind up being deleted because they delve into bashing and arguing, so that's why you can't find much in the way of 'outrage' that you mentioned.

As for the DHEA's that Hi-Tech has, they have the patents on certain ones and that's why you only see them under Hi-Tech or brands that Hi-Tech owns.

As for Fadogia, I wouldn't say that it would indicate anything about the system itself; there are many different grades of and standardizations of Fadogia available.

We use a very premium Fadogia in M-Test and in our Fadogia XT product, which we get really good feedback on.

yeah i mean if people want to bash the company for failing to deliver on a absorption enhancer, Id like to think those opinions have merit. The delivery system they claim to have was the deciding factor for me making that purchase, if feedback had been allowed to survive on that, and it was all bad, i would have gone with fadogia xt. Im not sure if label laws require an ingredient complexed with cyclodextrin need to be indicated as such or not, but it seems sketchy that it isnt and also the price point for ingredients complexed is usually higher

 

[thescience]

i wish someone would delete the double thread of this i created though, since it looks like that isnt something that can be done from my end

 

[sns8778]

i wish someone would delete the double thread of this i created though, since it looks like that isnt something that can be done from my end

Click the report button on your first post in the duplicate thread; and in the explanation section just put - sorry, double post.

 

[thescience]

interestingly, Huge Supplements is using the cyclosome delivery for Sapogenix, but hi tech isnt selling Huge supplements at their main site. Blackstone labs is also using the same mix found in "other ingredients," but makes no claim about a delivery system on their label. by all accounts, blackstone labs halo appears to be totally legit in the product efficacy dept in my experience so far, whether or not this is despite the added agents that may or may not be intended to help with absorption

 

[sns8778]

yeah i mean if people want to bash the company for failing to deliver on a absorption enhancer, Id like to think those opinions have merit. The delivery system they claim to have was the deciding factor for me making that purchase, if feedback had been allowed to survive on that, and it was all bad, i would have gone with fadogia xt. Im not sure if label laws require an ingredient complexed with cyclodextrin need to be indicated as such or not, but it seems sketchy that it isnt and also the price point for ingredients complexed is usually higher

What I meant is that there is a very negative sentiment here on AM towards Hi Tech for a variety of things including the way that they name old ph's and steroids, as well as the way they market that delivery system.

I don't personally have a problem with any of those things - because they are what they are, marketing. And they work, because as you said, it convinced you to buy theirs.

When in reality, there is no need for an advanced absorption anything for Fadogia because there are no absorption problems at all with Fadogia. The issue with Fadogia is moreso there being a wide variety of different raws materials and many brands going with the very inexpensive, more ineffective types for cost reasons.

I'm sorry, but by definition - if its in the 'other ingredients' then its an 'other ingredient'.

I working in the industry, see it as what it is - marketing and I understand why they do it; but I also see the customer side where people feel mislead and deceived by things like that.

 

[sns8778]

interestingly, Huge Supplements is using the cyclosome delivery for Sapogenix, but hi tech isnt selling Huge supplements at their main site. Blackstone labs is also using the same mix found in "other ingredients," but makes no claim about a delivery system on their label. by all accounts, blackstone labs halo appears to be totally legit in the product efficacy dept in my experience so far, whether or not this is despite the added agents that may or may not be intended to help with absorption

I think you're confusing marketing with supplement facts.

The other ingredients listed on Sapogenix according to their label are:

Microcrystalline Cellulose - flow agent
Phosphatidylcholine - says nothing about it being bonded to anything; so just a filler material in this case
Hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin - says nothing about it being bonded to anything or complexed with anything
Phytosterol
Stearic Acid
Magnesium Stearate
Starch
Titanium Dioxide
FD&C Red #40

^^^ There is nothing in there that mentions cyclosome, but their marketing may - and also there is nothing on their supplements facts to indicate or even imply that the the phosphatidylcholine or cyclodextrin is complexed or bonded with any of the active ingredients. If someone happens to assume that and it makes them buy the product, then for them, mission accomplished, that's likely the intended purpose.

Any brand could decide to use hydroxypropyl cyclodextrin or phosphatidylcholine as 'other ingredients', filler ingredients, flow materials, etc. It's no different including them under 'other ingredients' than it would be silica, rice flour, magnesium stearate, DiCalcium Phosphate, etc. (the normal ingredients used as flow materials).

Nothing about this is a knock against anyone nor is it specific to any certain company - its smart marketing, but it is marketing.

I hope that helps.

 

[teamguy312]

I think you're confusing marketing with supplement facts.

The other ingredients listed on Sapogenix according to their label are:

Microcrystalline Cellulose - flow agent
Phosphatidylcholine - says nothing about it being bonded to anything; so just a filler material in this case
Hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin - says nothing about it being bonded to anything or complexed with anything
Phytosterol
Stearic Acid
Magnesium Stearate
Starch
Titanium Dioxide
FD&C Red #40

^^^ There is nothing in there that mentions cyclosome, but their marketing may - and also there is nothing on their supplements facts to indicate or even imply that the the phosphatidylcholine or cyclodextrin is complexed or bonded with any of the active ingredients. If someone happens to assume that and it makes them buy the product, then for them, mission accomplished, that's likely the intended purpose.

Any brand could decide to use hydroxypropyl cyclodextrin or phosphatidylcholine as 'other ingredients', filler ingredients, flow materials, etc. It's no different including them under 'other ingredients' than it would be silica, rice flour, magnesium stearate, DiCalcium Phosphate, etc. (the normal ingredients used as flow materials).

Nothing about this is a knock against anyone nor is it specific to any certain company - its smart marketing, but it is marketing.

I hope that helps.

Honestly I wouldn't have a problem with them in the least if they didn't market in the way they do, there is no doubt there have has been some advantage taken of from beginners, etc that don't know any better. There are companies out there that make good and legal stuff, no need to be deceitful in the naming of your stuff because you know there's a good chance that someone just getting into it has heard one of those names like winstrol and will pick it up without knowing better, sure, his own fault for not researching but it is incredibly deceiving especially when it's common knowledge that a lot of these prohormones were available at one point, so unless they stay up with the news too, I just see a lot of them buying hi tech stuff that doesn't do jack. This is not personal against you or anyone else, I just don't think I'm the only one that would respect hi tech more if they stopped the ridiculous named and aimed at creating compounds that could be useful, like high dose 4 dhea, 11 keto, etc, etc.

 

[sns8778]

Honestly I wouldn't have a problem with them in the least if they didn't market in the way they do, there is no doubt there have has been some advantage taken of from beginners, etc that don't know any better. There are companies out there that make good and legal stuff, no need to be deceitful in the naming of your stuff because you know there's a good chance that someone just getting into it has heard one of those names like winstrol and will pick it up without knowing better, sure, his own fault for not researching but it is incredibly deceiving especially when it's common knowledge that a lot of these prohormones were available at one point, so unless they stay up with the news too, I just see a lot of them buying hi tech stuff that doesn't do jack. This is not personal against you or anyone else, I just don't think I'm the only one that would respect hi tech more if they stopped the ridiculous named and aimed at creating compounds that could be useful, like high dose 4 dhea, 11 keto, etc, etc.

I think you may be misunderstanding my post if you think I was defending them on how they do it; I interact with the person that posted the thread quite a bit, and I was just answering his questions - like he asked what it meant when ingredients were listed in the 'other ingredients'.

I wasn't defending the brands doing it, I was answering him in detail as to if it was legally allowed and what it meant per label laws. Hence my comment about differentiating between marketing and supplement facts above and being careful to not confuse the two.

I often say that this industry is three different worlds:

1. Companies that don't do things the right way and don't care - as in companies that don't even try to be legitimate companies and follow GMP guidelines and don't do any quality or safety testing like microbial or heavy metals.
2. Companies that do follow GMP guidelines and do things by the book legally, but that I don't view so much as supplement companies as much as they are marketing companies that just happen to sell supplements. And in a lot of these cases, some of these brands my do things in a way that is legal but not necessarily ethical.
3. Supplement companies that do things the right way and care about the science and about people; but unfortunately, in most cases these are the companies that don't have the big financial backing and the marketing to really get their names out there.

I think that a lot of marketing from supplement companies in general is designed to target beginners &/or people that don't know any better.

^^^ I was saying that I understand from a business sense why they do it, but that doesn't mean I agree with it.

For example, I agree with your point about not naming things after old ph's or anabolics. Think about it like this, I own Competitive Edge Labs and we made some of the most popular old school ph's that there were. If I wanted to go the marketing route, I could likely make very good money off of naming new natural supplements after some of our old ph's like M-Drol, H-Drol, X-Tren, etc. I've been asked so many times by retailers to do that, and even had some retailers ask if I wasn't going to do it if they could license the names and do it - and my answer has always been no. Would it be legal? Yes. But would it be ethical? Not in my opinion. And I'm one of the people that does let my ethics cost me money quite frequently, but it is what it is.

 

[teamguy312]

I think you may be misunderstanding my post if you think I was defending them on how they do it; I interact with the person that posted the thread quite a bit, and I was just answering his questions - like he asked what it meant when ingredients were listed in the 'other ingredients'.

I wasn't defending the brands doing it, I was answering him in detail as to if it was legally allowed and what it meant per label laws. Hence my comment about differentiating between marketing and supplement facts above and being careful to not confuse the two.

I often say that this industry is three different worlds:

1. Companies that don't do things the right way and don't care - as in companies that don't even try to be legitimate companies and follow GMP guidelines and don't do any quality or safety testing like microbial or heavy metals.
2. Companies that do follow GMP guidelines and do things by the book legally, but that I don't view so much as supplement companies as much as they are marketing companies that just happen to sell supplements. And in a lot of these cases, some of these brands my do things in a way that is legal but not necessarily ethical.
3. Supplement companies that do things the right way and care about the science and about people; but unfortunately, in most cases these are the companies that don't have the big financial backing and the marketing to really get their names out there.

I think that a lot of marketing from supplement companies in general is designed to target beginners &/or people that don't know any better.

^^^ I was saying that I understand from a business sense why they do it, but that doesn't mean I agree with it.

For example, I agree with your point about not naming things after old ph's or anabolics. Think about it like this, I own Competitive Edge Labs and we made some of the most popular old school ph's that there were. If I wanted to go the marketing route, I could likely make very good money off of naming new natural supplements after some of our old ph's like M-Drol, H-Drol, X-Tren, etc. I've been asked so many times by retailers to do that, and even had some retailers ask if I wasn't going to do it if they could license the names and do it - and my answer has always been no. Would it be legal? Yes. But would it be ethical? Not in my opinion. And I'm one of the people that does let my ethics cost me money quite frequently, but it is what it is.

I didn't get the sense you were defending them, I was really just pointing it out from a consumers standpoint, from a marketing standpoint, I'm sure that tactic made them money and continues to do so. I didn't mean to direct the attention towards my answer, more so of a supporting answer from a consumer in regards to what you were saying and what others had said. Sorry if you took offense, I didn't mean to do so.

 

[sns8778]

I didn't get the sense you were defending them, I was really just pointing it out from a consumers standpoint, from a marketing standpoint, I'm sure that tactic made them money and continues to do so. I didn't mean to direct the attention towards my answer, more so of a supporting answer from a consumer in regards to what you were saying and what others had said. Sorry if you took offense, I didn't mean to do so.

No worries, I didn't take it offensively.

I just wanted to make sure that you or anyone else reading didn't mistakenly take me as defending them.

The case in this thread is a great example of how things like that work for big companies like that, and hurt smaller companies - the marketing worked in the sense that he bought their Fadogia bc of the wording about the delivery, even though there are no issues with the absorption of Fadogia to begin with. Yet here we are as a company offering a great Fadogia product but not willing to do the marketing angles like that to try to sell it.

(Not knocking him at all - he's actually pretty knowledgeable and that's part of my point - if the sales pitch works on him, it definitely works on a lot of people that don't know a lot about stuff like that).

 

[teamguy312]

No worries, I didn't take it offensively.

I just wanted to make sure that you or anyone else reading didn't mistakenly take me as defending them.

The case in this thread is a great example of how things like that work for big companies like that, and hurt smaller companies - the marketing worked in the sense that he bought their Fadogia bc of the wording about the delivery, even though there are no issues with the absorption of Fadogia to begin with. Yet here we are as a company offering a great Fadogia product but not willing to do the marketing angles like that to try to sell it.

(Not knocking him at all - he's actually pretty knowledgeable and that's part of my point - if the sales pitch works on him, it definitely works on a lot of people that don't know a lot about stuff like that).

Agreed, it’s business after all. If it means anything, SNS puts out good **** and I have a cycle coming up, (still waiting for some things to start) and either today or tomorrow I’m going to be your cardio support and kidney support. I’d take your products over these others any day, I’ve even recommended you to quite a few people, I forgot exactly what but I made a purchase at SNS before, I’m pretty sure it had CLA in it which I happen to respond to greatly and the doses on your product are actually sufficient, kudos for that.

 

[sns8778]

Agreed, it’s business after all. If it means anything, SNS puts out good **** and I have a cycle coming up, (still waiting for some things to start) and either today or tomorrow I’m going to be your cardio support and kidney support. I’d take your products over these others any day, I’ve even recommended you to quite a few people, I forgot exactly what but I made a purchase at SNS before, I’m pretty sure it had CLA in it which I happen to respond to greatly and the doses on your product are actually sufficient, kudos for that.

Thank you. I really appreciate that.

We have the Cyber Week Sale going this week, so make sure to use coupon code cyber25 if you order this week so you can save 25% off on everything.

Also, CLA Xtreme is on sale this week for 60% off at 7.99 each.

 

[teamguy312]

Thank you. I really appreciate that.

We have the Cyber Week Sale going this week, so make sure to use coupon code cyber25 if you order this week so you can save 25% off on everything.

Also, CLA Xtreme is on sale this week for 60% off at 7.99 each.

That sounds great, I’ll definitely take you up on that offer. Last things I need for this cycle are support supps so this will complete it

 

[sns8778]

That sounds great, I’ll definitely take you up on that offer. Last things I need for this cycle are support supps so this will complete it

We make a lot of great ones depending on what a person is looking for.

Ones I can think of right off hand, and I'll sort this by brand are:

SNS:

• Blood Pressure Support XT
• Cardiovascular Support XT
• Kidney Assist XT
• Liver Assist XT
• Inhibit-E
• Inhibit-P
• Stress & Anxiety Support
• L-Ornithine L-Aspartate (probably the least expensive and most underrated liver support ingredient)

Competitive Edge Labs:

• Cycle Assist (be back in stock within 2 weeks)
• Cloma-Plex
• PCT Assist (updated version in the next month or so)
• TUDCA

Of course there are a lot of other things that can be considered cycle support supplements, but those are just the ones that I can think of right off hand. I know you probably have a good idea of what you're looking for already, but the list is as much to help anyone following along or reading in the future.

 

[thescience]

I think you're confusing marketing with supplement facts.

The other ingredients listed on Sapogenix according to their label are:

Microcrystalline Cellulose - flow agent
Phosphatidylcholine - says nothing about it being bonded to anything; so just a filler material in this case
Hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin - says nothing about it being bonded to anything or complexed with anything
Phytosterol
Stearic Acid
Magnesium Stearate
Starch
Titanium Dioxide
FD&C Red #40

^^^ There is nothing in there that mentions cyclosome, but their marketing may - and also there is nothing on their supplements facts to indicate or even imply that the the phosphatidylcholine or cyclodextrin is complexed or bonded with any of the active ingredients. If someone happens to assume that and it makes them buy the product, then for them, mission accomplished, that's likely the intended purpose.

Any brand could decide to use hydroxypropyl cyclodextrin or phosphatidylcholine as 'other ingredients', filler ingredients, flow materials, etc. It's no different including them under 'other ingredients' than it would be silica, rice flour, magnesium stearate, DiCalcium Phosphate, etc. (the normal ingredients used as flow materials).

Nothing about this is a knock against anyone nor is it specific to any certain company - its smart marketing, but it is marketing.

I hope that helps.

With them, it’s on the front of the label:

 

[thescience]

What I meant is that there is a very negative sentiment here on AM towards Hi Tech for a variety of things including the way that they name old ph's and steroids, as well as the way they market that delivery system.

I don't personally have a problem with any of those things - because they are what they are, marketing. And they work, because as you said, it convinced you to buy theirs.

When in reality, there is no need for an advanced absorption anything for Fadogia because there are no absorption problems at all with Fadogia. The issue with Fadogia is moreso there being a wide variety of different raws materials and many brands going with the very inexpensive, more ineffective types for cost reasons.

I'm sorry, but by definition - if its in the 'other ingredients' then its an 'other ingredient'.

I working in the industry, see it as what it is - marketing and I understand why they do it; but I also see the customer side where people feel mislead and deceived by things like that.

this was exactly the kind of post i was looking for. after my experience missing the boat with -(-) Epicatechin until the phytosome and transdermals came out my eyes were opened to my inability to absorb certain ingredients. also because there have been so many things that i couldnt absorb, i will always give someone a shot making the claim to get around that. i have to keep an open mind, regardless of how well an ingredient is supposed to be absorbed. i will be putting their delivery system to the test with their fadogiapure. if it has an effect on me, next month im trying fadogia xt. i didnt realize people were dosing the 10x at 2g/day, so im optimistic that just taking in 1200mg of a 20x could get me there.

 

[thescience]

ok so i get that the brand is dislike due to misleading names, but i mean the back label never lies. i thought we all just accept the fact that there are pompous names out there, even though there is no way some caffeine supplement is "clen" -like.

i do think it's greasy if theyre pretending to have fashioned a delivery system that they havent, but i admit i set the bar pretty low on that score. i think there are people that absorb ingredients of all sizes and theyre happy and assume everyone is. i take hits all the time making the wrong purchase, just a part of this life, but year if i can see for myself cyclosome is bunk, i wont make that mistake twice.

 

[sns8778]

this was exactly the kind of post i was looking for. after my experience missing the boat with -(-) Epicatechin until the phytosome and transdermals came out my eyes were opened to my inability to absorb certain ingredients. also because there have been so many things that i couldnt absorb, i will always give someone a shot making the claim to get around that. i have to keep an open mind, regardless of how well an ingredient is supposed to be absorbed. i will be putting their delivery system to the test with their fadogiapure. if it has an effect on me, next month im trying fadogia xt

I'm a bit confused on part of your reply here about if their delivery system works for you, then next month you'll be trying Fadogia XT. I explained in the nicest way possible that its a marketing gimmick and there is no problem absorbing Fadogia to begin with, so using anything about their product as a gauge or comparison point for ours isn't exactly fair to us.

Our feedback has been great on Fadogia XT and the product stands for itself. If you want to try it, great - but whether any other brands product does or doesn't work has no reflection or bearing upon ours.

And I'm sorry, but there are no issues with absorbing real Epicatechin. The issue was that brands weren't dosing it properly and were using proprietary blends to save money and dose it too low to be effective. There has never been a brand to my knowledge that was able to prove that their supposed phytosomal Epicatechin's were actually encased in the phytosome and not just proprietary blended with phosphatidylcholine. See, the thing is - if you do a Epicatechin and Phosphatidylcholine blend and say its 600 mg., that means that you can just use 300 mg. of Epicatechin and 300 mg. of Phosphatidylcholine and guess what - its cuts your production cost in half.

So many companies act like its just so easy to make real phytosomal ingredients - it's not. Just because you can make something a phytosome in a few grams of test material doesn't mean you can do it at a commercial capacity and it also doesn't mean it will be stable and still be an encased phytosome by the time the customer gets it in the finished product.

If a brand has a real true phytosome, its really simple - prove it.

Here's an example - I've worked with a large branded ingredient company on having a real phytosomal ingredient made for the last 8 months. That's 8 months worth of trial and error with a large branded ingredient company that has state of the art production equipment - because we weren't just worried about making a few grams stable and the production runs not being; we've spent many thousands of dollars and very in depth stability testing to make sure that it stays in a real phytosomal format. And here's the best part - they're cGMP, the contract manufacturer is cGMP, we're cGMP, and when this ingredient is finally available to everyone in a finished product, it will come from 3 layers of cGMP testing and independent testing at an accredited lab to verify that it is a true real phytosomal.

Anyway, back to Epicatechin ......

If you doubt the absorption and effectiveness of real properly dosed Epicatechin, you an search for dozens of reviews on here for Epi-Plex and also see the feedback thread for the updated version that we just launched. We do use Bioperine to held enhance the absorption, but the main thing is we don't hide the dose in a prop blend and we dose it properly to begin with.

Here's a good review:

CEL Epi-Plex Mini Review - AnabolicMinds.com

Competitive Edge Labs Epi-Plex Mini-Review Background 42 Years old Lifted weights for 25 years Tracked my food and training since 1999 Natural Basics 2,5 bottle run (so far) 1 cap with meal 1 (pre workout) and 1 cap with meal 5 (pre bed) Calories in a slight deficit Experience This is a...

anabolicminds.com

Epi-Plex (New Version) Discussion Thread:

Epi-Plex - Just Got Even Better - The New Epi-Plex Available Now - AnabolicMinds.com

Natural Anabolic Muscle Builder Decimate Your Genetic Limitations Lean Muscle, Strength, Endurance, & More Natural Anabolic Muscle Builder + Cardiovascular & Endothelial Health Support 300 Mg. Epicatechin 150 Mg. VasoFlo+™ 10 Mg. Bioperine® Epi-Plex Highlights/Supports: Lean Muscle...

anabolicminds.com

If you prefer a topical Epicatechin, Xtreme Performance Gels makes the highest dose and best value topical Epicatechin available, XPG Epicatechin Gel. There are numerous reviews on here about it - but Epicatechin doesn't need to be in a topical, the topical is just available for if its a persons preference.

 

[sns8778]

ok so i get that the brand is dislike due to misleading names, but i mean the back label never lies. i thought we all just accept the fact that there are pompous names out there, even though there is no way some caffeine supplement is "clen" -like.

i do think it's greasy if theyre pretending to have fashioned a delivery system that they havent, but i admit i set the bar pretty low on that score. i think there are people that absorb ingredients of all sizes and theyre happy and assume everyone is. i take hits all the time making the wrong purchase, just a part of this life, but year if i can see for myself cyclosome is bunk, i wont make that mistake twice.

I think your question has been answered by me in the nicest possible way, and by others in a more blunt not as nice way haha.

Seriously though - it's irrelevant when it coms to Fadogia because there are no problems with absorption. If you don't respond well to Fadogia, its not because you didn't absorb it - its because you used a type that wasn't potent enough or you simply don't respond to it.

 

[sns8778]

Thank you for the info. I am interested in the CEL TUDCA, kidney assist and cardio support XT.

I trust you won’t tell me to buy things I don’t need, I can tell you care about the customers I’ll just go ahead and tell you my upcoming cycle, maybe I’m missing something vital and I’m very health conscious.

I am going to do a 6 week run with a 4 week PCT.

SNS kidney support (the astragalus seems to be the most important and doses very well.

SNS cardio XT

CEL TUDCA 250-500mg

life extension NAC 1200-1800mg.

2.5mg of cialis, also have 5mg’s I can bump it too. Thinking about the benefits of adding a baby aspirin as well.

I think that you have your bases covered pretty well.

You mentioned the Astragalus being the most important thing in Kidney Assist - I would say its important, but not the most important. The most important aspect of Kidney Assist XT is how the ingredients work together to target supporting multiple systems rather than kind of, and I'm using an analogy here, but rather than putting things off from one system to another. I hope that makes sense how I mean that - but it has things to support kidneys, urinary tract, prostate, liver, etc.

CEL TUDCA is great. TUDCA is one of the most common ingredients in this industry to not meet label claims and there are a lot of brands that claim to sell TUDCA that don't even come close to their labeled dosages. I hope he doesn't mind me tagging him, but I know @Hyde has posted about how much his blood work improved when switching from another brands to CEL's.

One thing I would do is swap out the NAC for Liver Assist XT because Liver Assist XT contains NAC, Milk Thistle, Artichoke, and Curcumin in it - so its far more comprehensive and still gives you the NAC.

Liver Assist XT | Serious Nutrition Solutions

Liver Assist XT is a top quality, comprehensive supplement for liver support and detoxification that contains Milk Thistle (Silymarin), NAC (N-Acetyl Cysteine), Curcumin, and Artichoke extract at fully transparent dosages and standardizations for maximum results.

seriousnutritionsolutions.com

One thing I would add if I were you, and I'm not saying that you need it, but I think its helpful for on cycle and in general for people that do cycle is that L-Ornithine L-Aspartate is a great ingredient for supporting liver health. Normally, our write ups go into a lot of detail about how things work, but in this case, to detail the way it works would probably overstep into what the FDA would consider making medical claims, so we have to be kind of intentionally vague to a degree - but google L-Ornithine L-Aspartate and liver support or liver health and you'll see a lot of information as to why it should be part of people's regimens that use AAS. If @Hyde posts in this thread, he may can expand on this subject a little more than I'm allowed to.

A big reason I'm such a fan of L-Ornithine L-Aspartate is because it works so well to be so inexpensive.

Here's links to ours, and we offer it in capsules and powder:

L-Ornithine L-Aspartate - 120 Veg Caps | Serious Nutrition Solutions

L-Ornithine L-Aspartate is commonly taken to support healthy liver function and may help with exercise endurance and muscle recovery.

seriousnutritionsolutions.com

L-Ornithine L-Aspartate - 100 grams | Serious Nutrition Solutions

L-Ornithine L-Aspartate contains a combination of amino acids that are used for and thought to be beneficial for a variety of purposes including enhanced body-composition, athletic performance, and liver support.

seriousnutritionsolutions.com

 

[sns8778]

Long story short brother, don’t bother with prohormones like these hi tech winstrol bottles and ****. I’d you are stuck on prohormones and want to run one, (I don’t blame you) then go on predator nutrition and pick up the PH of your choice, just not too harsh, you don’t want to end cycle early because of sides. It will take a week or two to get to the states from the UK but it will be good quality.

If I had to pick a PH for you to get from predator, I’d probably get 2 or 3 bottles of RPN havoc (epistane) and run it for a good 6-8 weeks and some sort of test base and a good PCT. Harsh roids like SD, Mtren, msten, etc sound amazing but after a week or two when you are so lethargic you don’t want to get up to workout, you can see how a milder PH like epistane or halo run for a long time is more efficacious than a harsh PH/roid you might now able to make it past 3 weeks of.

He doesn't want prohormones. He does understand that the Hi-Tech products that are named after them aren't them; he prefers natural supplements. I just wanted to point that out that he wasn't confusing them for ph's.

Also, I just wanted to tell you bc you may not know this, but there was an issue here a couple months ago with people spam posting about some things from Predator and the Admin deleted people doing it and Predator came really close to being a banned term on here it had gotten so bad for a couple weeks. I just wanted to let you know bc I know that's not what you're doing and I didn't want to see a case where you got banned or something for posting about Predator's ph's without knowing the situation that happened on here awhile back.

 

[thescience]

I'm a bit confused on part of your reply here about if their delivery system works for you, then next month you'll be trying Fadogia XT. I explained in the nicest way possible that its a marketing gimmick and there is no problem absorbing Fadogia to begin with, so using anything about their product as a gauge or comparison point for ours isn't exactly fair to us.

Our feedback has been great on Fadogia XT and the product stands for itself. If you want to try it, great - but whether any other brands product does or doesn't work has no reflection or bearing upon ours.

And I'm sorry, but there are no issues with absorbing real Epicatechin. The issue was that brands weren't dosing it properly and were using proprietary blends to save money and dose it too low to be effective. There has never been a brand to my knowledge that was able to prove that their supposed phytosomal Epicatechin's were actually encased in the phytosome and not just proprietary blended with phosphatidylcholine. See, the thing is - if you do a Epicatechin and Phosphatidylcholine blend and say its 600 mg., that means that you can just use 300 mg. of Epicatechin and 300 mg. of Phosphatidylcholine and guess what - its cuts your production cost in half.

So many companies act like its just so easy to make real phytosomal ingredients - it's not. Just because you can make something a phytosome in a few grams of test material doesn't mean you can do it at a commercial capacity and it also doesn't mean it will be stable and still be an encased phytosome by the time the customer gets it in the finished product.

If a brand has a real true phytosome, its really simple - prove it.

Here's an example - I've worked with a large branded ingredient company on having a real phytosomal ingredient made for the last 8 months. That's 8 months worth of trial and error with a large branded ingredient company that has state of the art production equipment - because we weren't just worried about making a few grams stable and the production runs not being; we've spent many thousands of dollars and very in depth stability testing to make sure that it stays in a real phytosomal format. And here's the best part - they're cGMP, the contract manufacturer is cGMP, we're cGMP, and when this ingredient is finally available to everyone in a finished product, it will come from 3 layers of cGMP testing and independent testing at an accredited lab to verify that it is a true real phytosomal.

Anyway, back to Epicatechin ......

If you doubt the absorption and effectiveness of real properly dosed Epicatechin, you an search for dozens of reviews on here for Epi-Plex and also see the feedback thread for the updated version that we just launched. We do use Bioperine to held enhance the absorption, but the main thing is we don't hide the dose in a prop blend and we dose it properly to begin with.

Here's a good review:

CEL Epi-Plex Mini Review - AnabolicMinds.com

Competitive Edge Labs Epi-Plex Mini-Review Background 42 Years old Lifted weights for 25 years Tracked my food and training since 1999 Natural Basics 2,5 bottle run (so far) 1 cap with meal 1 (pre workout) and 1 cap with meal 5 (pre bed) Calories in a slight deficit Experience This is a...

anabolicminds.com

Epi-Plex (New Version) Discussion Thread:

Epi-Plex - Just Got Even Better - The New Epi-Plex Available Now - AnabolicMinds.com

Natural Anabolic Muscle Builder Decimate Your Genetic Limitations Lean Muscle, Strength, Endurance, & More Natural Anabolic Muscle Builder + Cardiovascular & Endothelial Health Support 300 Mg. Epicatechin 150 Mg. VasoFlo+™ 10 Mg. Bioperine® Epi-Plex Highlights/Supports: Lean Muscle...

anabolicminds.com

If you prefer a topical Epicatechin, Xtreme Performance Gels makes the highest dose and best value topical Epicatechin available, XPG Epicatechin Gel. There are numerous reviews on here about it - but Epicatechin doesn't need to be in a topical, the topical is just available for if its a persons preference.

I went from using, supposedly 300mg epicarechin from olympus labs to their topical and then phytosomal and the difference was night and day. Yet i watched while others did benefit from their previous version and saw zero improvement from the more expensive phytosome version. Did they skimp out with their first version and falsify labelling only to come through when it csme to their phytosome? Maybe, but arguably not likely.

I also see other brands investing considerably more time and effort into improving absorption and there are some phenomenal products coming out. I dont think these companies are crazy, i think theyre cutting edge. Is hi tech scamming here? Yeah probably.

The fadogia; ok, what i mean is that i have to be skeptical of it’s supposed absorption, because barlowes did nothing for me, yet it rocked other peoples world. When i make a purchase, i mitigate risk, and unlike with plenty of other people the possiblility of not absorbing something is very real to me. People who absorb everything dont get it, but i go with the one with the claim of delivery first, because my odds of success are possibly higher. If that doesnt deliver, i figure nothing will. If it does, then yeah im definitely going to try a more respectful brand without claim to improved absorption. If that doesnt work, then i know the cyclosome is legit. Hi tech has, in my opinion, developed the only legit 5a hydroxy laxogenin out there; theyre going to get a fair shake here

 

[sns8778]

My apologies, I was under the impression they sold prohormones as well like blackstone does but not very useful to say the least? At least not anymore these uses to have some serious stuff.

I wasn’t aware we couldn’t talk about predator either, figured it was ok because it’s legal in the UK and some members that are allowed to buy them, but my bad all around.

I understand. I saw where you were coming from, but I knew he knew they weren't ph's and likes to stick to natural supplements.

Hi-Tech sells some of the pro-DHEA's and actually have the patents on them. That's why you only see them available from companies that Hi-Tech owns or manufactures for.

It's not that you can't talk about Predator, its that you'd mentioned them so many times in this thread that I was worried that someone at a glance may think you were covertly promoting them and report you bc of what happened a couple months ago. A few months back, there were several new accounts that went of a spree of promoting Predator and it turned into WWIII in one thread - I missed it bc I didn't post that weekend. But I know that the ones promoting it got banned and a couple other members kind of got caught up in it that had been innocently defending Predator but bc there was so much spam promoting of them it was hard to tell who was a legit poster and who was spam promoting them.

I actually like Predator, I've known the owner for over 15 years and have a great relationship with them. It's nothing against them, I just didn't want anyone to take you mentioning them wrong and think you were covertly trying to promote them or something - bc that thread was apparently the most heated blow up there's been on here in a long time from what I was told.

I hope I explained that in a way that made sense.

 

[sns8778]

I went from using, supposedly 300mg epicarechin from olympus labs to their topical and then phytosomal and the difference was night and day. Yet i watched while others did benefit from their previous version and saw zero improvement from the more expensive phytosome version. Did they skimp out with their first version and falsify labelling only to come through when it csme to their phytosome? Maybe, but arguably not likely.

I also see other brands investing considerably more time and effort into improving absorption and there are some phenomenal products coming out. I dont think these companies are crazy, i think theyre cutting edge. Is hi tech scamming here? Yeah probably.

The fadogia; ok, what i mean is that i have to be skeptical of it’s supposed absorption, because barlowes did nothing for me, yet it rocked other peoples world. When i make a purchase, i mitigate risk, and unlike with plenty of other people the possiblility of not absorbing something is very real to me. People who absorb everything dont get it, but i go with the one with the claim of delivery first, because my odds of success are possibly higher. If that doesnt deliver, i figure nothing will. If it does, then yeah im definitely going to try a more respectful brand without claim to improved absorption. If that doesnt work, then i know the cyclosome is legit. Hi tech has, in my opinion, developed the only legit 5a hydroxy laxogenin out there; theyre going to get a fair shake here

I don't dislike Hi-Tech at all. Matter of fact, for years I was one of the only people here that defended them.

I'm not saying anything negative about their Fadogia at all - but I'm telling you factually that Fadogia does not need anything with it to help with absorption. That part of it is a sales pitch - but that doesn't mean the product doesn't work.

I was genuinely trying to answer your questions. I'm not going to debate you. I wasn't trying to disagree with you, I thought you were asking a question and wanted to know an honest answer. I've worked in this industry on the supply chain side for 19 years and I know the answer to the question and that's what I was providing you with.

I've talked about and posted about absorption for years. I was involved in some of the first companies to offer td's in the sports nutrition market, have a great relationship with Sabinsa who are the patent holders on Bioperine which is the most researched absorption enhancer on the market, and actually friends with the President of Nuliv who owns AstraGin which is the second most researched absorption enhancer on the market. I was also one of the first people to ever talk about the absorption enhancement properties of Naringin all the way back in 2004.

On the absorption subject, we may still be, but I know at one time we used AstraGin (absorption enhancer) in more sku's than any other brand - so don't take anything I say as decreasing the significance of absorption enhancement - its just that some things have issues with absorption and some things do not. And for things that do, there are different methods of enhancing absorption for different things. And if you want to get technical, if you did want to try to do anything to enhance the absorption of Fadogia, Bioperine would be better than a phytosome/liposome in its particular case.

I know the in's and out's of complexing cyclodextrins, liposomes, and phytosomes and I know what technology and production capacity is required to do it. There are some great companies that are making great advancements in this field, but there are some companies that are absolutely full of crap and try to take advantage of customers by making them think that they are true liposomes, phytosomes, or complexed with cyclodextrins when they aren't.

We were one of the first companies to offer Fadogia and I can tell you for a fact that raw material quality varies dramatically and the prices correspond to the quality - they can range from 12.00 per kg. to over 200.00 per kg. I never mentioned Barlowe's, I just simply said that the problem with Fadogia in general is not the absorption, its that many brands choose to use lower grade versions of it to keep costs down. I'm not giving you my opinion, I'm stating facts.

I enjoy my and your conversations because many of the are more on the science side and I enjoy that; but I'm going to bow out of this one because it seems like you're upset at my answers and I'm just giving honest factual answers and thought I was giving answers and discussing something that you wanted to learn more about.

 

[BJT]

@sns8778 Would be grateful for links to any studies you might have regarding the absorption of Fadogia when you have a moment. Your products work for me - just for interest. Agreed on Epi - the studies are clear there!

 

[Stacks1]

I used Hi Tech products for years. All the crazy names and stuff never bothered me. Although recently I had a problem with one of their products and customer service was terrible. I was actually quite shocked how poorly it was handled. I think it was the only time I've ever reached out to a company to complain about a bad experience with a supplement. Just based on that poor experience I would never buy their products again. There are too many other competitors to give my money to rather than to do business with a company who treats their customers that way.

 

[Resolve10]

Oh man spicy thread.

Not totally on topic, but I don't worry as much anymore about what brands name stuff. When we have companies with owners who don't even know how to label stuff or don't understand how vitamins/minerals and extracts seem to work I am more worried what is actually in the products than the names people are using.

FWIW on the quality side of things Fadogia is one where it was a bit hit or miss when it first dropped from what I remember. Some people had issues with certain brands, I remember enjoying Omega's and one of the Bioforge versions I believe?

The first time I remember it being an issue between quality was with Agmatine personally. I used that stuff a ton and loved MAN Blue Print. Then other brands started to offer bulk and honestly most of the products with Agmatine for awhile just didn't hit the same as SNS Agmatine for me.

 

[sns8778]

@sns8778 Would be grateful for links to any studies you might have regarding the absorption of Fadogia when you have a moment. Your products work for me - just for interest. Agreed on Epi - the studies are clear there!

Thanks. It amazes me that there is still the debate on Epicatechin absorption when there are dozens, if not hundreds of studies based on oral use of it. I think that sometimes people miss the fact that rarely does anything absorb 100%, even basic vitamins - and that oral dosing is based off of using x total dose to get y active dose that a person needs.

We have such great feedback off of Epi-Plex because it is a properly dosed oral Epicatechin and we do use Bioperine to help with absorption; but then on the other hand under XPG there's Epicatechin Gel for those that prefer topicals - I just always explain that with Epicatechin, its a preference, not a must.

For Fadogia, the reason that I can't post any studies for you showing that it doesn't need anything to enhance absorption is that there are no studies that show that it does. I've never seen it even be questioned in any studies, as the oral bioavailability has always been shown to be fine on it. I can't find a single study stating or implying that there are any issues with oral bioavailability at all with Fadogia.

There are many, many ingredients that can benefit from absorption enhancement, but in this case it seems to be just a sales pitch; which from a business side, I get it - it works or no one would be discussing it.

I've talked about and posted about absorption enhancement and different systems for it for almost 20 years now and one of the things I've always emphasize is that different ingredients need different things to help increase absorption. There's no one size fits all approach for it and not everything is a suitable candidate for phytosomal, liposomal, or td application. And even with oral absorption enhancers, they work differently and one may be better for one thing whereas another would be better for another.

 

[sns8778]

FWIW on the quality side of things Fadogia is one where it was a bit hit or miss when it first dropped from what I remember. Some people had issues with certain brands, I remember enjoying Omega's and one of the Bioforge versions I believe?

That was one of the points I was trying to make - that every since Fadogia was introduced, there's always been people that responded differently to it. It works great for most people, but some people don't respond as well to it, even to the best quality of raw materials. It isn't an absorption issues, its an individual response issue.

But then the issue did get compounded as it became more widespread and cheaper raw materials were used by a lot of brands because of course the lesser potent (and cheaper) raw materials didn't work as well as the original more potent ones.

I'm surprised to see anything heated about the subject of Fadogia and absorption when virtually everyone agreed it wasn't an issue back then - myself, PA, Cooper, Synapsin, Omega, etc. Like literally no one back then with high levels of knowledge on the subject ever thought there was any issue with absorption on Fadogia at all.

Which the fact that its even being discussed and questioned now shows what I was saying in this thread all along - in today's supplement market, the power of marketing 99% of the time wins over the power of science.

 

[Emmanuel06]

Im UK based and have access to predator nutrition website, thats were i got the Androstat from fusion supplements.

Another good supplement site in the UK is ( cross the limits ) thay have a lot of stuff, trying to understand it all lol

 

[Resolve10]

That was one of the points I was trying to make - that every since Fadogia was introduced, there's always been people that responded differently to it. It works great for most people, but some people don't respond as well to it, even to the best quality of raw materials. It isn't an absorption issues, its an individual response issue.

But then the issue did get compounded as it became more widespread and cheaper raw materials were used by a lot of brands because of course the lesser potent (and cheaper) raw materials didn't work as well as the original more potent ones.

I'm surprised to see anything heated about the subject of Fadogia and absorption when virtually everyone agreed it wasn't an issue back then - myself, PA, Cooper, Synapsin, Omega, etc. Like literally no one back then with high levels of knowledge on the subject ever thought there was any issue with absorption on Fadogia at all.

Which the fact that its even being discussed and questioned now shows what I was saying in this thread all along - in today's supplement market, the power of marketing 99% of the time wins over the power of science.

Also haven't had any issues with Epicat from reliable brands.

Funny brands that want to say it needs to use a bunch of fancy absorption factors also seem to be the same ones that like to hide behind prop blends. If your absorption agents help so much then it shouldn't matter if your dose is a little less, unless its like really a lot less.

 

[Emmanuel06]

I don’t want to seem like I’m promoting predator because I believe it’s against forum rules and I’m not affiliated with them, but I will say if you have access to predator, there are a plethora of PH’s you’d see results from that they carry, here in the US, the good PH’s are banned and that’s why stuff like vicious labs, RPN, etc aren’t available here, just the blackstone and hi tech type stuff that isn’t the same.

Have you considered dropping the hi tech winstrol and getting a mild but more effective PH? Maybe Triumphalis, Halodrol or Epistane? Haven’t ran it yet, but my next run is trendione and it’s non methylated, if you can tolerate the sides maybe that would be a good option instead also. It’s usually called trenavar.

Yes predator seems really good just like cross the limit !
I still want to try the winstrol and see for myself , its only 50 pounds here (around 60 usd )
Already feeling good with just the androtest from fusion supplement , might go for more than 3 a day and order another bottle from Predator nutrition.
Going soft to see how my body reacts to all that , than ill see for the step up

 

[sns8778]

I'm not trying to tell anyone what to do, I'm just trying to be helpful - but if the ph discussion continues and the Admin sees it, he's going to delete the thread and may start banning people because he's very adamant about ph talk not being in the supplement section.

The reason he tries to keep it separate is that as has been mentioned in this thread, names tend to cross over now days, and he doesn't want people that are seeking genuine natural supplements to wind up buying a ph thinking its a supplement and then taking a ph that they didn't mean to take &/or don't know how to prepare for.

I'm not going to mention this again, as it doesn't affect me other than me trying to be helpful. There's been some good information in this thread, and I just don't want to see it get deleted or anyone banned, and this is one of the rules that are the most strictly enforced on this forum.

 

[sns8778]

Also haven't had any issues with Epicat from reliable brands.

Funny brands that want to say it needs to use a bunch of fancy absorption factors also seem to be the same ones that like to hide behind prop blends. If your absorption agents help so much then it shouldn't matter if your dose is a little less, unless its like really a lot less.

Yeah, like for Epi-Plex, we do use Bioperine and we don't hide the dosages in a proprietary blend, the dosage of every ingredient is clearly stated on the label. The new version of Epi-Plex contains 300 mg. Epicatechin, 150 mg. VasoFlo+, and 10 mg. of Bioperine per capsule.

For anyone not familiar with what Bioperine is, Bioperine is the most clinically researched absorption enhancer that there is. It is a patented ingredient from Sabinsa, a major company with major technology and backing and some of the most sophisticated production capabilities in the industry. Bioperine has close to, if not over 100 clinical studies on it.

And we don't just select Bioperine for the heck of it or as a sales pitch, we use Bioperine in this particular case because it addresses the pathways through which absorption can be efficiently enhanced for Epicatechin.

It is selected based on science, not marketing. It may seem a little boring compared to some of the sales pitches that some claim for their other things, but the reality is that the decision is based upon science and providing people with the best product possible, not providing them with a good sales pitch.

Think about it like this, each capsule is 300 mg. of Epicatechin, 150 mg. of VasoFlo+, and 10 mg. of Bioperine. The addition to Bioperine increases the cost on our end. We could easily reduce the cost of the product by going the prop blend route, we could as much as cut it in half by doing that and offering less actual Epicatechin, but instead we use the scientific approach of using a clinically researched absorption enhancer in addition to a high dose of Epicatechin per capsule.

Then, for people that do prefer a topical, XPG Epicatechin Gel is a great choice and tackles absorption through a different way.

 

[thescience]

I don't dislike Hi-Tech at all. Matter of fact, for years I was one of the only people here that defended them.

I'm not saying anything negative about their Fadogia at all - but I'm telling you factually that Fadogia does not need anything with it to help with absorption. That part of it is a sales pitch - but that doesn't mean the product doesn't work.

I was genuinely trying to answer your questions. I'm not going to debate you. I wasn't trying to disagree with you, I thought you were asking a question and wanted to know an honest answer. I've worked in this industry on the supply chain side for 19 years and I know the answer to the question and that's what I was providing you with.

I've talked about and posted about absorption for years. I was involved in some of the first companies to offer td's in the sports nutrition market, have a great relationship with Sabinsa who are the patent holders on Bioperine which is the most researched absorption enhancer on the market, and actually friends with the President of Nuliv who owns AstraGin which is the second most researched absorption enhancer on the market. I was also one of the first people to ever talk about the absorption enhancement properties of Naringin all the way back in 2004.

On the absorption subject, we may still be, but I know at one time we used AstraGin (absorption enhancer) in more sku's than any other brand - so don't take anything I say as decreasing the significance of absorption enhancement - its just that some things have issues with absorption and some things do not. And for things that do, there are different methods of enhancing absorption for different things. And if you want to get technical, if you did want to try to do anything to enhance the absorption of Fadogia, Bioperine would be better than a phytosome/liposome in its particular case.

I know the in's and out's of complexing cyclodextrins, liposomes, and phytosomes and I know what technology and production capacity is required to do it. There are some great companies that are making great advancements in this field, but there are some companies that are absolutely full of crap and try to take advantage of customers by making them think that they are true liposomes, phytosomes, or complexed with cyclodextrins when they aren't.

We were one of the first companies to offer Fadogia and I can tell you for a fact that raw material quality varies dramatically and the prices correspond to the quality - they can range from 12.00 per kg. to over 200.00 per kg. I never mentioned Barlowe's, I just simply said that the problem with Fadogia in general is not the absorption, its that many brands choose to use lower grade versions of it to keep costs down. I'm not giving you my opinion, I'm stating facts.

I enjoy my and your conversations because many of the are more on the science side and I enjoy that; but I'm going to bow out of this one because it seems like you're upset at my answers and I'm just giving honest factual answers and thought I was giving answers and discussing something that you wanted to learn more about.

no way definitely not upset. dont bow out. youre making a case, im making a case. i dont really have any solid convictions here. this is how we get information from these forums. obviously, you know alot more than most people on here about how the business works, certainly more than me. One of the reasons so many of us love SNS is because your such a purest. of course i can see there is definite shady behavior evident from HI tech, but ive manuvered these waters long enough to know a even a dead clock is right twice a day and the company has some accomplishments. believe me, im not defending them either, just stating why im giving them a chance on a $20 supplement of theirs. you are totally correct that it could work for reasons totally unrelated to their "cyclosome," and i will be investigating that. this is how i crawl along, one supplement at a time. I always felt like fadogia would be an awesome test booster, as it doesnt appear to function via estrogen reduction, which is something im really sensitive to, so im pretty excited to hear that fadogiapure may work where other forms havent.

 

[thescience]

That was one of the points I was trying to make - that every since Fadogia was introduced, there's always been people that responded differently to it. It works great for most people, but some people don't respond as well to it, even to the best quality of raw materials. It isn't an absorption issues, its an individual response issue.

But then the issue did get compounded as it became more widespread and cheaper raw materials were used by a lot of brands because of course the lesser potent (and cheaper) raw materials didn't work as well as the original more potent ones.

I'm surprised to see anything heated about the subject of Fadogia and absorption when virtually everyone agreed it wasn't an issue back then - myself, PA, Cooper, Synapsin, Omega, etc. Like literally no one back then with high levels of knowledge on the subject ever thought there was any issue with absorption on Fadogia at all.


Which the fact that its even being discussed and questioned now shows what I was saying in this thread all along - in today's supplement market, the power of marketing 99% of the time wins over the power of science.

all valid points. of course there are other reasons why a supplement may not work. it's true that as a consumer i lean toward a company that caters to a guy who has demonstrated poor absorption. anyone who had taken epi from OL to no effect before having a super response to a phytosome of it from the same company i think would agree that yeah there are instances where you have an ingredient that some absorb and others dont unless steps are taken. i put money down for that, and sometimes i get burned. it's like the necessity to trust people in order to have normal relationships, even though it exposes you. sometimes i disregard what everyone and everything is saying and try something anyway and it's rewarding. yeah, it sucks that some companies steal business from others with false claims, but their running the risk of getting dropped by the consumer.

Im definitely not trying to posit that fadogia is poorly absorbed. ive had so many supplements that didnt work, some of which should have had improved absorption, that i question everything and will always try something for myself.

 

[thescience]

Also haven't had any issues with Epicat from reliable brands.

Funny brands that want to say it needs to use a bunch of fancy absorption factors also seem to be the same ones that like to hide behind prop blends. If your absorption agents help so much then it shouldn't matter if your dose is a little less, unless its like really a lot less.

yeah but there are people that can absorb epicat without anything added. anyway, i definitely sounds like the general consensus is that Cyclosome is bunk, but there are legit absorption enhancers. ive tried an epicat with bioperine and a few other ingredients that may or may not have been necessary to absorb it and it worked great. im also a fan of livon labs liposomal delivery, but their products are really expensive. swanson and sciencebio also have some great phytosome products that worked for me where larger quantities of the active without the phytosome didnt.

 

[thescience]

For Fadogia, the reason that I can't post any studies for you showing that it doesn't need anything to enhance absorption is that there are no studies that show that it does. I've never seen it even be questioned in any studies, as the oral bioavailability has always been shown to be fine on it. I can't find a single study stating or implying that there are any issues with oral bioavailability at all with Fadogia.

.

ive seen rat studies where they definitely absorbed it. havent seen much along the way of human studies so i mean i cant really have an opinion on it, i can just try stuff.

 

[thescience]

Yeah, like for Epi-Plex, we do use Bioperine and we don't hide the dosages in a proprietary blend, the dosage of every ingredient is clearly stated on the label. The new version of Epi-Plex contains 300 mg. Epicatechin, 150 mg. VasoFlo+, and 10 mg. of Bioperine per capsule.

For anyone not familiar with what Bioperine is, Bioperine is the most clinically researched absorption enhancer that there is. It is a patented ingredient from Sabinsa, a major company with major technology and backing and some of the most sophisticated production capabilities in the industry. Bioperine has close to, if not over 100 clinical studies on it.

And we don't just select Bioperine for the heck of it or as a sales pitch, we use Bioperine in this particular case because it addresses the pathways through which absorption can be efficiently enhanced for Epicatechin.

It is selected based on science, not marketing. It may seem a little boring compared to some of the sales pitches that some claim for their other things, but the reality is that the decision is based upon science and providing people with the best product possible, not providing them with a good sales pitch.

Think about it like this, each capsule is 300 mg. of Epicatechin, 150 mg. of VasoFlo+, and 10 mg. of Bioperine. The addition to Bioperine increases the cost on our end. We could easily reduce the cost of the product by going the prop blend route, we could as much as cut it in half by doing that and offering less actual Epicatechin, but instead we use the scientific approach of using a clinically researched absorption enhancer in addition to a high dose of Epicatechin per capsule.

Then, for people that do prefer a topical, XPG Epicatechin Gel is a great choice and tackles absorption through a different way.

ive certainly never had an experience where something failed to work with bioperine that had worked with something else

 

[sns8778]

all valid points. of course there are other reasons why a supplement may not work. it's true that as a consumer i lean toward a company that caters to a guy who has demonstrated poor absorption. anyone who had taken epi from OL to no effect before having a super response to a phytosome of it from the same company i think would agree that yeah there are instances where you have an ingredient that some absorb and others dont unless steps are taken. i put money down for that, and sometimes i get burned. it's like the necessity to trust people in order to have normal relationships, even though it exposes you. sometimes i disregard what everyone and everything is saying and try something anyway and it's rewarding. yeah, it sucks that some companies steal business from others with false claims, but their running the risk of getting dropped by the consumer.

Im definitely not trying to posit that fadogia is poorly absorbed. ive had so many supplements that didnt work, some of which should have had improved absorption, that i question everything and will always try something for myself.

Edit: Nevermind. I had typed out a long reply and deleted it bc there's just no point.

I give up on trying to be helpful and actually explain things in great detail on here anymore.

 

[teamguy312]

Edit: Nevermind. I had typed out a long reply and deleted it bc there's just no point.

I give up on trying to be helpful and actually explain things in great detail on here anymore.

Hey man, if it helps any, I just made an order on your site for 4 different support products, you make good **** and people will continue to give you business. Some people on these forums just refuse to listen because they want to do what they want to do regardless of what anyone says.

Go watch a funny movie, I recommend “it’s a mad mad mad mad world” (1963). You’ll piss yourself watching it. Forget explaining things to brick walls. Hahaha

 

[sns8778]

Hey brother, don’t feel so bad, I learned things from you and it’s greatly appreciated. I don’t argue with a single thing you said, but I am of the opinion that this guy needs to stop messing around with all these natural options and just run a real test cycle or else he’s going to be disappointed, guaranteed.

Im sorry if I caused you trouble tonight.

Hey man, if it helps any, I just made an order on your site for 4 different support products, you make good **** and people will continue to give you business. Some people on these forums just refuse to listen because they want to do what they want to do regardless of what anyone says.

Go watch a funny movie, I recommend “it’s a mad mad mad mad world” (1963). You’ll piss yourself watching it. Forget explaining things to brick walls. Hahaha

No worries and no trouble. And I appreciate the order, I hope that you'll enjoy the products.

I had typed out a long reply and just edited and deleted it bc there's no use even continuing the conversation on the subject.

I love helping people and I love discussing the science of things and helping teach people how to safeguard themselves and make informed decisions. I love the the ingredients and the ingredient science, and I love helping people and that's what the companies are about to me - providing top quality products to help people reach their health and fitness goals.

But I hate drama, I hate arguing, and I'm not going to defend myself or be came at like I don't know what I'm talking about when it's literally my job and I've worked in the supply chain side of this industry with some of the largest suppliers and branded ingredient companies in the industry for 19+ years.

I try to be active on threads, be helpful, and keep this place active and alive. I've spoken on absorption enhancement for 19 years and its something I'm very familiar with. I came into the thread thinking I was being helpful by answering questions, because I've had positive interactions with the person that posted it in a lot of threads. I had no idea it was going to veer into what it has or I wouldn't have bothered to post.

I have never seen that movie. I don't have time to hardly think straight this week, which is another reason I need to just avoid bothering with stuff like this once it goes sideways; but I may check out that movie this weekend. My daughter loves old movies so I'll tell her about it and may be something we can check out.

 

[thescience]

But I hate drama, I hate arguing, and I'm not going to defend myself or be came at like I don't know what I'm talking about when it's literally my job and I've worked in the supply chain side of this industry with some of the largest suppliers and branded ingredient companies in the industry for 19+ years.

steve, i certainly dont want you to think that im trying to make you sound like you dont know what youre talking about. im expressing a strong opinion that when olympus labs improved their epi absorption, it made a huge difference for me. i think you kindof agree it may benefit from alittle help with absorption because you make a transdermal of it and a version with bioperine. im thrilled that so many companies are doing things to improve absorption now, instead of acting like everything is fine for everyone because something works as-is for alot of people. on the topic of fadogia, 1) there arent a whole lot of studies on it, 2) a study would be relevant to me if they were, for example, testing with people who had a history of failing to absorb commonly enjoyed supplements. that doesnt mean i think it doesnt absorb; i dont have an opinion, just a general and at times unfair sterotype that absorption could be a problem for me for anything stemming from my track history. I think i did a good job expressing here that i am 100% wide open to the possibility, if not likelyhood, that fadogiapure without any absorption enhancers is going to work better than previous fadogias ive tried so it really isnt like we're miles apart on anything

 

[teamguy312]

steve, i certainly dont want you to think that im trying to make you sound like you dont know what youre talking about. im expressing a strong opinion that when olympus labs improved their epi absorption, it made a huge difference for me. i think you kindof agree it may benefit from alittle help with absorption because you make a transdermal of it and a version with bioperine. im thrilled that so many companies are doing things to improve absorption now, instead of acting like everything is fine for everyone because something works as-is for alot of people. on the topic of fadogia, 1) there arent a whole lot of studies on it, 2) a study would be relevant to me if they were, for example, testing with people who had a history of failing to absorb commonly enjoyed supplements. that doesnt mean i think it doesnt absorb; i dont have an opinion, just a general and at times unfair sterotype that absorption could be a problem for me for anything stemming from my track history. I think i did a good job expressing here that i am 100% wide open to the possibility, if not likelyhood, that fadogiapure without any absorption enhancers is going to work better than previous fadogias ive tried so it really isnt like we're miles apart on anything

Then try it bro, I’m sure it will work for you and you can stop worrying about this, lmao. You won’t know it will absorb well until you try, it’s just that simple. I am surprised you are so sensitive to different carriers/absorption methods but if anyone has it right it’s Steve with SNS or iconic formulations. I’d go with SNS. That’s the last of the answers I have for you about this, you really just have to buy it and try, especially because everyone is an individual and obviously your body is more or less sensitive to these carriers and the compounds in them.

 

[sns8778]

steve, i certainly dont want you to think that im trying to make you sound like you dont know what youre talking about. im expressing a strong opinion that when olympus labs improved their epi absorption, it made a huge difference for me. i think you kindof agree it may benefit from alittle help with absorption because you make a transdermal of it and a version with bioperine. im thrilled that so many companies are doing things to improve absorption now, instead of acting like everything is fine for everyone because something works as-is for alot of people. on the topic of fadogia, 1) there arent a whole lot of studies on it, 2) a study would be relevant to me if they were, for example, testing with people who had a history of failing to absorb commonly enjoyed supplements. that doesnt mean i think it doesnt absorb; i dont have an opinion, just a general and at times unfair sterotype that absorption could be a problem for me for anything stemming from my track history. I think i did a good job expressing here that i am 100% wide open to the possibility, if not likelyhood, that fadogiapure without any absorption enhancers is going to work better than previous fadogias ive tried so it really isnt like we're miles apart on anything

This is going to be my last reply - bc honestly I'm on the verge of stopping posting here I'm so upset over the way this thread has gone at this point.

I have researched, spoken on, and consulted on absorption enhancement for 19 years. I've been talking about it and stressing the importance of it before most of the stuff you've mentioned ever existed in the supplement industry. You asked questions about absorption and I've answered them - not with my opinion, but with facts.

You said this regarding Epicatechin:
I think you kind of agree it may benefit from a little help with absorption because you make a transdermal of it and a version with Bioperine.

^^^^ I have answered this nicely now multiple times, and it honestly is coming off like you're baiting me trying to get me to say something about the company you keep bringing up. I try to be polite to everyone and not say anything negative about other companies, so if you, or anyone brings up a company or product to me and I ignore it over and over, there's probably a reason.

Let me turn that around on you, and don't answer me, just think about it logically - I could cut the cost per bottle of what it costs me to make Epi-Plex by close to half if I went that route, so don't you think if I thought it would be as effective that I would want to make more money off Epi-Plex? But see, that's not the way I do business - instead, we state exactly how much Epicatechin there is per capsule, use Bioperine, which is the scientifically valid way to increase absorption of Epicatechin, and recently added another really cool ingredient to it (all of these things increase my cost, not lower them).

Again, don't answer me - because it is coming off as baiting bc I've ignored it now multiple times.

There are two scientifically valid ways to enhance absorption of Epicatechin. You mentioned that we use two different ways, and you're correct, we do use two different ones because there are two scientifically valid ones - adding Bioperine to an oral form or going with an effective topical carrier.

Which is why I've said now multiple times that whether to go with Epi-Plex or Epicatechin Gel is simply a matter of preference.

You stated - I'm thrilled that so many companies are doing things to improve absorption now, instead of acting like everything is fine for everyone because something works as-is for a lot of people.

I've tried to educate people on the subject of absorption enhancement since 2004. Matter of fact, I was the first person that I ever knew of to write anything about Naringin and absorption enhancement in relation to supplements.

The two leading absorption enhancers in the world are Bioperine from Sabinsa and AstraGin from Nuliv. I already mentioned in this thread that I have great relationships with both companies and use both ingredients. As a matter of fact, we were one of the first supplement companies to use AstraGin in a non-amino acid related supplement back when we introduced Anabolic Effect that contained AstraGin. We now use AstraGin in a lot of supplements, and at one time were, and may still be the company that uses it in more supplements than any other company in terms of in the number of different products.

The thing about absorption is that there are clinically researched absorption enhancers available that are patented ingredients and have undergone numerous clinical studies. These are scientifically valid absorption enhancers.

Then there is the marketing side of things where some companies mix together a few things and claim that it improves absorption without having any real data to back that. That isn't science, its marketing.

Then there are things like cyclodextrins, liposomals, and phytosomals - BUT they are only scientifically valid if they are complexed with or encase the ingredient(s) that are intending to be delivered.

Mixing something with phosphatidylcholine doesn't make something a real encased phytosomal. Having it done professionally by a company that has the correct equipment to do so and then doing the proper stability testing to ensure that it stays that way does. I had typed out a very long detailed post about this subject, but it was part of what I deleted.

You stated - on the topic of fadogia, 1) there arent a whole lot of studies on it, 2) a study would be relevant to me if they were, for example, testing with people who had a history of failing to absorb commonly enjoyed supplements.

^^^ the thing is there is zero reason for anyone to ever do a study on Fadogia focused on absorption enhancement when no other studies have shown any issues with absorption. That's like trying to create a problem that isn't a problem - which some companies do for marketing purposes, but there is just no research driven reason to.

There are, always have been, and always will be people that respond differently to Fadogia because herbs in general tend to work different for different people and because of what I've stated now over and over - there are simply different grades of material and different standardizations.

The issue is not absorption - the issue is individual response and raw materials.

And if, even if you wanted to go with absorption enhancement and theorize what would be best with Fadogia, it would be Bioperine because of the way that it works.

You stated - just a general and at times unfair sterotype that absorption could be a problem for me for anything stemming from my track history.

^^^ there's nothing wrong at all with going towards brands or products that legitimately help with absorption. My point there is that people need to not be mislead by marketing based around the subject and go for legitimate clinically researched absorption enhancers.

As I said, we use AstraGin in more products than any company I'm aware of and use Bioperine in many as well. But we use them where is a scientifically valid reason to use them. See, the way this conversation is going is why some companies just throw unneeded stuff over in supplements, so that they can avoid stuff like this. I've just never been one to use an ingredient in something that I felt like it didn't need to be in.

Now, if you would like to discuss further, you're welcome to pm me.