Future of Formex

[LakeMountD]

AnabolicMinds Members and IBE Customers,

There has been a lot of controversy regarding Formex recently and where the MCPE group is located on the molecule. The original nomenclature was correct and since both formestane and 4-OH test differ only in the 17 position being an alcohol or ketone, putting the group here makes it structurally similar to both of these compounds. With that being said IBE has decided to discontinue Formex just in case the laws on derivatives are swayed one way as opposed to another. It is all up to interpretation and the last thing we want is one product causing an issue for the rest. This is not a recall, we just feel that with the recent tension in the PH market and the length of time Formex has already been available that it is best we move on to bigger and better things. The compound has also been increasingly difficult to find and we do not want to add to backorders. We are looking to move to a transdermal formestane considering it is already mass produced.

This is one of the problems with innovation in the supplement market. Not only does innovation cost more money and make things harder to find but it makes it difficult to defend based on the current structure of the DSHEA. I hope you understand and we appreciate your continued business.

-IBE

[crowbar46]

OK, could you spell that out for those of us with less chemistry background? Is this stuff bioavailable, or not? Is it Formestane, or not?

Thanks,

Crowbar

[Iron Lungz]

Thanks for letting us know.

[LakeMountD]

Takes ~5x as much to get similar plasma concentrations, hence the fact we went with the oral formex route. But it doesn't matter what "we" want, it is about what customers want and we have had a massive influx of people saying they want transdermal.

There is a reason that there are HUNDREDS of drugs on the market and not 1 drug for each condition. It doesn't matter if one is better than the other, it is about who is used to prescribing what, patients demanding drugs they saw on commercials, and drug reps offering samples. My point is we supply what people are asking for and this is one of them.

[fightercowboy]

OK, could you spell that out for those of us with less chemistry background? Is this stuff bioavailable, or not? Is it Formestane, or not?

Thanks,

Crowbar

I hope they clarify this for us a little more.

[DAdams91982]

Is it true about the MCPE being the 4th position D? So from what I have read, the current batch is either A) Illegal, or B)Unbioavailable. Which is it?

[crowbar46]

It seems that LakeMountD is now saying that the original nomenclature WAS CORRECT=MCPE at the 17th position, and thus--at least potentially--illegal; however, this was right after IBE was quoted in the "Formex Lab Test" thread as saying that the original nomenclature was WRONG and the employee how created the original write-up got "reamed" for this mistake! Also, that their toxicologist "chuckled" when he heard about this mistake and assured them that he would have told them if the MCPE was at the 17th position, as this would have been "trouble" for them!

Well, which story is it?!!!

Crowbar

[Iron Lungz]

Anyone want some Sushi?

[crowbar46]

I think he is refering to Expertox, the company that does their testing. It seems to be a very legit company ran by a serious scientist--for what that's worth.

Crowbar

[crowbar46]

I don't understand why LakemountD won't clear up which story is the correct one?


Crowbar

[Iron Lungz]

Interesting.

[crowbar46]

Yes, I do find it strange that COAs for Epistane have been around, but I can't get LakemountD to provide one for Formex nor clear up which of ther conflicting stories concerning this product is correct--the MCPE was or was not ever at the 4th position? The original nomenclature was or was not correct?

Crowbar

[LakeMountD]

Is it true about the MCPE being the 4th position D? So from what I have read, the current batch is either A) Illegal, or B)Unbioavailable. Which is it?

The MCPE is at the 17th position. The way it was written originally is completely correct and always has been. The owners freaked out really early in the morning (or late at night if you prefer) and thought it was wrong when they read a PM from someone. This was before they spoke with me. The tests confirm our originals and the nomenclature. The problem with formex is that since there is only a difference between formestane and 4-OHT at the 17 position, adding an ether technically makes it a derivative of both, leaving it up to interpretation.

EDIT (to answer post above): It is because I never get on the forums anymore and half the time I do not know this stuff is going on. I have a lot of work to do and there are a lot of forums. I am addressing it now. I know my chemistry and the structure was written correctly. Confirm it with NattyD he is a chemist as well.

[Iron Lungz]

Maybe it's for the best.

[LakeMountD]

If you guys have any questions feel free to PM.

[benj851]

okay so are we hearing that this is being disco'ed for the scare, and it is truly form...?
or that this isn't form?

I'm kinda confused... Thanks.

[crowbar46]

Well it looks like it's being discontinued as it could be construed as an illegal derivative of 4-OHT. THey claim it is indeed modified Formestane.

Crowbar

[sumbum801]

So what it comes down to is: is it safe to take, does it do what is advertised, is it actually formestane?

[crowbar46]

All I can tell you is, I've had good results with it.

Crowbar

[LakeMountD]

Yes, it is safe to take. In fact having using an ether as opposed to a methyl decreases toxicity and is just as effective as 17a-methyls at protecting from degradation. Since it is derivatives of both, however, it is just better that we move on now instead of later. Again, this is why innovation is hard, we come out with a better formestane that gets rid of the need for a transdermal, we make it less toxic than a 17a methyl compound, and make it better absorbed and end up being forced to stop selling it to be safe.