Good ole "Ageless Male!"
"Re-settin" is far from new (original study published on this combo in 2008 -
http://www.jissn.com/content/5/1/12) but also under a different trademark (this is merely a knock off; products suggested as "first to market" include: Muscle Tech Cryotest -
http://www.nutraplanet.com/product/muscletech/cryotest-168-capsules.html (although significantly underdosed compared to the study) or Axis Labs' Myodrol -
http://www.nutraplanet.com/product/axis-labs/myodrol-120-caps.html (which was the first study-dose formula; but at the same time sacrificed some of the "add-ons" seen in the Muscle Tech formula) for which Axis Labs is finally putting the effort into studying their version; in other words...these agents have been sourced differently and you really need to evaluate your own sourcing; which IMO means you simply CANNOT make claims in this industry based on another prep). But, let's take a closer look at the original study because
I smelled a rat as Saw Palmetto actually DECREASES androgeny (by way of 5AR Type 2) on the order of 61% (
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20623347) - funny how the EXACT same 61% comes up in this story (does that mean the astaxanthin contributes nothing to the equation? Why add it at all outside of the fact that you could market a combo of astaxanthin + saw palmetto as opposed to either alone) - not exactly "usual" per se for the research world to say all 61% not converted to DHT winds up as T (there's aromatic conversion you have to take into account and subsequent reprocessing down amplification cascades into the very DHT that's being inhibited). What the hell then; how could this be - everyone's coming up with 61%?
Let's look at the original JISSN study a bit closer...
http://www.jissn.com/content/5/1/12/figure/F1
http://www.jissn.com/content/5/1/12/figure/F2
http://www.jissn.com/content/5/1/12/figure/F3
I find this (figure 3) a condeming figure because it throws out a dose-dependency effect (again, keep in mind levels of aromatization); which again is a relative atypia based on saw palmetto monotherapy trials before it. If you take figure 3 in conjunction with figures 1 + 2; there is a serum disconnect (due to increasing T; decreasing DHT; modestly increased E but not statistically significant NOR equivocal to T and DHT numbers).
Also - conspicuous by it's absence are BASELINE numbers. How would a study not show baseline numbers and claim significance - I can't even verify it?
But even still, if you take their "Day 3" numbers...the men in this trial were hypogonadal. I would question applicability to those with normal serum test.
And, to make matters worse...I have NO "Free T" (just total) which means I cannot tell a thing about viability here and what kind of reproducibility you would get if not published. Well...if SHBG increased by a profound mark, would I care at all about this "61%" increase?
So - ultimately...I remain skeptical and whole-heartedly unconvinced! When calling the Ageless Male representatives; I got some "drone response" reciting the same nonsense over and over against my questions despite my asking some things of sincere significance (continually citing the JISSN study)...but I probably shouldn't have expected much more.
D_
