Would transdermal Epi Andro be easier on lipids than oral?
I would think so, but @delsolrob would know better.Would transdermal Epi Andro be easier on lipids than oral?
But epi Andro is a DHT prohormone. So it shouldn't be too hard on lipids or liver anyways.Nope, it's going to have the same effect if you took it orally or any other method. Transdermal administration just bypasses first pass metabolism on the liver.
Go with Ultra Hard! Has epi andro and Androsterone, which compliments the epi andro. It is Transdermal, and excellent. I currently have a log up. It is not harsh on lipids (not like a methylated compound) or liver.Would transdermal Epi Andro be easier on lipids than oral?
plus i saw where androsterone improves lipids.Go with Ultra Hard! Has epi andro and Androsterone, which compliments the epi andro. It is Transdermal, and excellent. I currently have a log up. It is not harsh on lipids (not like a methylated compound) or liver.
i was already a big fan of androsterone, but that study is icing on the cake!!!For this purpose there is no difference based on administration - but T is correct there is data suggesting Androsterone can actually help cholesterol
Androsterone Lowers Cholesterol and Mimics Thyroid Hormone
Research shows that the sex hormone Androsterone has the capabilities to lower bad cholesterol (LDL), and increase oxygen consumption similar to active thyroid hormone (T3). These findings indicate that Androsterone may have the ability to keep your heart healthy while stimulating a better...iconicformulations.com
Why would you say it would make no difference in administration? Wouldn’t the fact that it doesn’t have to pass through the liver like orals and also that the transdermal absorbs better so less milligrams need to be dosed make a difference to reduce lipid impact?For this purpose there is no difference based on administration -
Don’t forget he’s running DMmothafukingZThanks guys for the info! Yes, I plan on going with Ultra Hard too after seeing Valiant’s great results!
Ya that is definitely the heavy hitter in his cycle!Don’t forget he’s running DMmothafukingZ
I do think you're over complicating the logic on this. All substances must pass through the liver - transdermal application bypasses the first pass through the liver. So, we can use lower quantities of actives in order to achieve similar results...there are additional benefits for using transdermal applications too, like extended release by buffering in the dermis, greater conversion via enzymes in the skin, etc. But, the impact on things like lipids and HPTA suppression are not dictated by delivery, but by the active that reaches the bloodstream. Since epiandrosterone and androsterone are not generally considered to have considerable hepatoxicity, regardless of method of administration, I don't believe they should cause lipid issues stemming from compromised liver function. The impact would stem from other more complicated pathways that aren't dependent on the delivery, but the effect of the serum level of steroidsWhy would you say it would make no difference in administration? Wouldn’t the fact that it doesn’t have to pass through the liver like orals and also that the transdermal absorbs better so less milligrams need to be dosed make a difference to reduce lipid impact?
That’s not true necessarily, it’s not as simple as that. Ex. HDL will 100% not get hit as hard by utilizing a transdermal. Same things go with transdermal SARMs vs oral. Bioavailability is better with the oral, but you skirt the very negative hdl loweringNope, it's going to have the same effect if you took it orally or any other method. Transdermal administration just bypasses first pass metabolism on the liver.
can you expand on this with an explanation on why?That’s not true necessarily, it’s not as simple as that. Ex. HDL will 100% not get hit as hard by utilizing a transdermal. Same things go with transdermal SARMs vs oral. Bioavailability is better with the oral, but you skirt the very negative hdl lowering
There is going to be little to no evidence to back that up........just a hunch lol.can you expand on this with an explanation on why?
I assumed he meant to say bioavailability was better transdermal than oral?There is going to be little to no evidence to back that up........just a hunch lol.
Yes but in regards to sarms I am not sure we have that evidence. SARMS were designed to be taken orally so I believe by and large their oral absorption is decent.I assumed he meant to say bioavailability was better transdermal than oral?
oh I don’t disagree that the oral absorption is normally decent but as long as the Dalton size is appropriate then I’m not sure why TD would be worse? Not going through the first pass is only likely to improve absorption or at least equal not (ie not make it worse).Yes but in regards to sarms I am not sure we have that evidence. SARMS were designed to be taken orally so I believe by and large their oral absorption is decent.
If anyone has any lit. ref. on TD sarms please post it would be interesting.
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Transdermal Epiandro vs Oral | Supplements | 50 | ||
Transdermal 3-AD to rival epiandro? | Anabolics | 110 | ||
High dose 500mg+ transdermal epiandro | Anabolics | 12 | ||
Iconogenin and XPG Epiandro Transdermals for Sale | General Chat | 2 | ||
Transdermal epiandrosterone dosage | Anabolics | 3 |