X-Factor @ 1.5g (6 gels) for 65 days
- 01-13-2008, 02:59 PM
X-Factor @ 1.5g (6 gels) for 65 days
X-Factor @ 1.5g (6 gels) for 65 days
This is a repeat of my previous log however I decided to tweak it a bit: X-Reaper and X-Factor: no el sponsoro
I wound up buying 4 bottles of X-Factor so I decided to run it at 6 gels/ED which totals to 1.5g of Arachadonic Acid. Also too, despite the directions, I will not really limit my omega-3 fatty intake. I'm not going to go out of my way to take 'extra' but if I end up taking some fish oil gels or eating fish that day so be it. Bill Llewellyn touched upon this earlier, but I speculated awhile back that intaking omega-3 fatty acids would not impact the effect Arachadonic Acid would have.
I will however, NOT use any anti-inflammatories at all.
I originally was going to do a regular cycle of 2 bottles @ 4 gels, but honestly there isn't anything out on the market right now that is even worth buying, IMO so I just anted up and bought 2 more. I've also been following AA for awhile now and think that it is one of the more revolutionary supps to be discovered which has had me curious, (as opposed to the trillion different versions of creatine, nitric supps, etc).
Another speculation I have was that 4 gels (1g of Arachadonic Acid), is underdosed and that a higher amount would be needed to achieve better results. I decided upon 1.5g, and maybe after this whirl I'll make another judgement about it).
I am following the protocol on my previous thread from before. Regarding the pictures, my ex-gf broke her old camera and wanted the one I had back, as it was hers (ass.hole), so as of now I am stuck with nothing.
Also too, I am due for my annual physical that my employer provides for free which includes a blood test that will be conducted around early Feb, so it'll be a few weeks into the cycle.
I'll update this once in a great while, as it seems my workload has increased 100x since 2008 has started.
Couple of things that I am wondering about:
1. What is the actual uptake percent once the AA passes through digestion ? I'm not sure how much the oil protects the AA until it goes to the lymphatic system for uptake.
2. What is the conversion rate of the AA that has been uptaken into the system that eventually converts into protaglandins and all that other good stuff?
3. How much will it really help pumps/nitric oxide due to the various potential pathways of metabolism ?
(as far as I know) is:
1.Arachadonic Acid->Cyclooxygenase->Prostaglandins/Thromboxanes->cytokine IL-1 ?->NO (nitric oxide) ?
3.Arachadonic Acid->Cytochrome P450 monooxygenase->epoxyeicosatrienoic acid
.....anyways, I've been on this for 1 week already and starting up the 2nd week as to not delay.
-No DOMS so far
-Slight fat loss
-Pumps have been so-so
...........With X-Factor it will probably be a month or so before I can really comment on what is going on. I'll update again in 1-2 weeks.
- 01-14-2008, 03:38 PM
These questions are beyond my knowledge, but I'll try to get someone on this for you
Also, very impressive. You started sceptic to convinced, and now you're doing it the Jjohn way
- 01-14-2008, 06:04 PM
I think that the dosing needs to be higher, I am virtually sure of this. However, I think that the 50-60 day mark is spot on, b/c I think time thereafter the body is adjusting to the increase of AA. Not that it is not working, but the effectiveness goes down.
My guess is that the body adapts to the increase of AA rather quickly. Not that this means anything, but before I could only do 2-3 gels/ED without getting too bad of headaches. Actually right now with 6 gels/ED I don't have any headaches at all. This could possibly be due to already an adaption.
I would almost guess that a more effective way of dosing X-Factor would be:
3 days AA @ 1g, then 3 days AA @ 2g, then repeat.
It is interesting b/c I think it has a very similar effect to creatine.....works great at first and for awhile, but the gains/results diminish.
Another speculation that I have is that you can still make gains off of Arachadonic Acid, even if you are not 'sore' or DOMS. The only times I usually have increased soreness is when I change up my workouts to new exercises or have not trained for a significant amount of time.
The thing is, still I think the dosing needs to be upped. When you take fish oil, you don't just take 1g or so, usually you take between 2-4g if not higher when supplementing. Combined with the potential loss of the conversion within the body and absorption, this has lead me to speculate a higher dose needed to the 'results' to occur.
01-14-2008, 06:26 PM
I very much agree with ur conclusion to this as well. And reading the packet inside the Xfactor bottle really made sense to me ( duh right? lol) but we all have AA in our bodies, so when we do a new exercise that hits a new part of the muscle it releases AA which is why we get sore, so having more AA in the body will increase that because more is being released after we workout, which makes sense as to why the body would get used to the new AA.
Now my theory on this would be to start at about 1g for the first 3 or 4 weeks and then keep increasing. Especially if you are new to AA. Like maybe 750mgs for the first 2 weeks, then 1g for 2 weeks, then 1.25 for another week the finally at the end 1.5 or if you got more then 50-60 days then adjust accordingly.
E-Pharm Rep... PM me with any questions or concerns
01-14-2008, 08:03 PM
I disagree with the muscular soreness being directly due to the release of the AA.
The arachadonic acid is release during muscular activity. The thing is why is it when I workout using the same exercises, week after week and I don't really get sore ? Does that mean that since I'm not sore I'm not releasing AA ? WRONG !
But..........when I do the same exercises with a mega amount of reps, (like 75 reps) or an insane amount of sets (like 10 sets) and high amount of exercises then I will get sore.
If I did my biceps like:
Dumbbell curls: 75 reps, 10 sets
Barbell curls: 75 reps, 10 sets
Preacher curls: 75 reps,10 sets.
....besides the fact that I think something like this is impossible to physically do, even if I were using the same exercises for several weeks prior, my muscles would get sore as a result of this.
Reaper's opinion: Muscular soreness is inflammation that is achieved because:
-The muscle fibers you are using are being stimulated past a 'normal' threshold thus creating a new re-calibrated response and the result is muscular trauma and localized inflammation. This situation is achieved anytime the normal muscular contractions are increased beyond the normal capacity that they are accustomed to.
This would hold true in doing new exercises (stimulation of NEW muscle fibers) and mega amounts of sets, reps, whatever (overload of muscular contraction threshold currently established).
01-14-2008, 08:27 PM
01-14-2008, 09:26 PM
Using Bill Llewellyn's terms, AA is a hypertrophic catalyst.
While inflammation is an aspect of AA, I don't believe it to be its sole purpose only in the 'aiding' of muscle building. I don't know everything about AA. Not to 'smackdown' Bill either, but I think there is still a lot that needs to be discovered about AA in order to truely harness its potential.
01-14-2008, 10:06 PM
I like the way you think, will follow for results.
01-14-2008, 10:13 PM
01-14-2008, 10:50 PM
This is just for clarification:
-Diet: 40/40/20: c/p/f
-Training: 4 exercises per muscle group, 12 reps range, each muscle group gets hit once a week
-Supps: Multi-vitamin, ZMA, Fish Oil, caffeine, that's it. Nothing else.
-Taking X-Factor always with food. I think this is imperative for optimal absorption.
-I'm pretty much using bare minimum on supps, and dropped creatine/no supps.
-Instead of cutting like I wanted to, I'm running a maintenance diet, so my composition will be in terms of muscle gain, in conjunction with my current physique.
-I got one of those scales for Christmas that measures bodyfat, water, weight, etc, etc and took intial measurements and will again at the end.
My sole purpose is to see how much AA really exaggerates my muscle gains, off of not changing anything else. IRO, if you stack a trillion supps, and eat to bulk, etc, etc, you never really know if a product is working.......which is ok for some people, however, this is not the case for myself.
01-14-2008, 11:08 PM
One last thing:
From the data I have looked over, AA's release ISN'T dose dependent upon strength (i.e. lifting heavy weights), but from muscular contraction alone. This is the reason why I chose high volume over strength.
The idea is to get optimal release as well. Which should, theoretically, result in optimal gains.
ok that's it.
........over and out.
01-14-2008, 11:17 PM
01-15-2008, 02:43 AM
I'll be watching, Reaper. I remain somewhat skeptical of AA's effectiveness. (I think JJohn's gains may be attributable to the many months he spent in the gym, and diet. AA may have been just "along for the ride.") That said, I do have 5 bottles of a competitor's AA that I got for $10 each on the clearance table at a local supp store. So if you discover a truly effective way of using this stuff, I'm all ears. (In the meantime, I'm all Superdrol, lol.)
01-15-2008, 12:55 PM
01-15-2008, 03:24 PM
I'm guessing it is that Syntrax Arachadonic Acid Ethyl Ester that got released awhile back. I think Molecular Nutrition sued Syntrax over it, lol.
01-15-2008, 03:26 PM
01-15-2008, 03:34 PM
Well, the thing is there are several different pathways that AA can take. The problem with this is that the pathways are arbitrary and hypothetical. This is something that I touched upon my first question in regards to the conversion rate. Hence the 'compensation' for the increase in the AA. The AA is supposed to essentially exaggerate gains.
If I had the resources I would like to be able to do this in a much more controlled fashion, however, it is limiting at this time. The good thing is that the machine I am using takes into account bodyfat %, water weight, actual weight, etc, etc so individual markers can be examined, vs. just looking at the mirror and saying 'I got jacked', combined with a 'Oh yeah, I gained 10 lbs off of it.'
Keep in mind though, this is unsponsored by the way, so 4 bottles equates to nearly $200.00. For this amount, I am realistic in terms of natural gains, but I'd really like to see between a 10-12lb gain if not more.
01-15-2008, 04:02 PM
Honestly, I still don't know. The fact that there are still 3 potential pathways of the Arachidonic Acid still makes me wonder......
-One thing would be to use 5-Lipoxygenase and thromboxane A2 inhibitors. Lipooxygenases catalyse the conversion of arachidonic acid to leukotrienes. From what I read was that inhibitors of lipooxygenase prevent pancreatic cancer cells proliferating in vivo.......of course for whatever that is worth.
-Furthermore, inhibition of the cytochrome P450 monooxygenase pathway, although who knows how much this affects it since all I've been seeing are the LOX/COX metabolism pathways in studies and that's it.
......so that's great Reaper, what the fizz-uck does that mean ?
-If you can somehow inhibit the LOX pathway and maybe even the CYP450, then you'll wind up with the COX pathway being the sole method of metabolism, resulting in the prostaglandin, etc, etc....which is what we really want anyway.
-I'm still slightly skeptical. I question how much is being lost in the 'other 2 pathways'. This is like playing 1:3 odds of winning. Not really a good thing.
01-15-2008, 09:20 PM
I'm not exactly sure where all the costs come in with respect to the actual product and its extraction/processing.
Nothing is going to come close to Super, or any PH/PS/etc. in terms of cost:gains.
I mean let's think about this for a sec: The results have been very mixed with the current X-Factor set up as it is right now, 2 bottles-4 gels/ED.
Some people have good results, some don't, it is actually tremendously mixed in terms of feedback. I highly doubt that lowering the dose is the answer, so if the feedback has been so-so, logically, the only other way to get better results is to increase the dosing and timing intake. Of course more product=more cost to the consumer.
What I am doing is just trying to put things in terms of actual numbers and feedback and people can decide if it is something they want or not.
LG Sciences' Liquid Masterdrol has gotten me very interested and curious. I am very tempted to do a similar analysis with it for shlts n' giggles once I complete X-Factor.
01-15-2008, 10:44 PM
01-15-2008, 11:04 PM
At the same time, I'd also have to think about how I'd run it:
1. Take advantage of it and use it on a cut (DHT)
2. Keep my current physique (again), and run maintaince, and determine actual muscle gain.
When I get more time, I'll look into it and see if I will.
-Pumps were very good tonight. The high volume really is effective at creating edema within the muscles giving that pump feeling. I was training biceps and doing curls with 15lb dumbbells.
-I have been having random sporadic headaches, then again my water intake has been low so yeah.
-Haven't gotten on the scale at all. Probably will in a few weeks.
-Actually have not been having DOMS, considering the increase in volume lately. This is surprising.
......that's about it for now.
01-15-2008, 11:13 PM
Reaper, It seems you know your stuff well..more specifically you're well versed on Body Pathways. If it's the 5-lipoxygenase pathway which leads to joint inflammation and destruction, what is your take on supplementing with 5-LOX (boswellia serrata extract) in order to prevent further damage to joints. That doesn't guarantee that the AA won't still follow that Body Pathway, but it's been something that I have wondered in the past....just looking for more insight.
01-15-2008, 11:30 PM
Assuming that joint inflammation is a direct result of the 5-LOX pathway, then supplementing with bosweillia serrata extract would theoretically stop the metabolism of the arachidonic acid via 5-LOX. I'm not actually familiar with the bosweilla serrata extract, but from what I understand the 5-lipoxygenase inhibition is by acetyl-11-keto-b-boswellic acid within that extract. (I think the extract needs to be 60% or greater for an effect ?)
However, so it is like just shutting down one road. So if you stop the 5-LOX pathway (assuming the extract is that selective), then you have metabolism via COX,12-LOX, 15-LOX, and CYP450. Still means that there is pro-inflammatory pathways still available. I'm not 100% sure if joint inflammation is solely caused by 5-LOX alone. If not then you still have potentially a higher conversion rate now via COX. Also I don't know exactly how selective bosweilla serrata extract is to 5-LOX.
I really can't tell you b/c I don't know what feedback mechanisms the body naturally has, or even what the conversion rates are of these various pathways.
01-15-2008, 11:33 PM
Note: Also too, this just got me thinking, assuming that my body is intaking a higher amount of AA, there is nothing that might not suggest other wise that there are negative feedback mechanisms that are in place causing a metabolism into something else.
Just b/c I am taking a higher amount of AA, dosen't mean that there will be a great amount of AA release or prostaglandin synthesis.
01-16-2008, 04:00 AM
Reaper -- it's cool that you've researched AA so thoroughly before trying it. And as for cost/gains, while AA seems very high compared to Superdrol, when you take into account PCT (not needed with AA), and all the ancilliary supps needed for a Superdrol cycle, I'd say AA is actually cheaper (but not as effective).
And you're right -- the AA I got is the stuff that MN sued off the market. I'm sure that's why it was so cheap (although I knew nothing of the lawsuit when I purchased it).
01-16-2008, 04:00 AM
PS: I love your theory about the negative feedback -- I would have never considered that.
01-16-2008, 04:38 PM
The real pro-hormones required an enzymatic reaction to occur that was within the body. Yeah maybe you'd get a 30-40% ish conversion rate, but due to the conversion, there was a finite capacity.
The designer stuff out right now is very active within it self.
I'm willing to try pro-hormones or whatever that is not methylated. Furzadrol and Liquid Masterdrol have kinda gotten my eye, b/c they are mild and non-methylated. I'd rather have something be weak and mild, but safe than vice versa.
anyways.....yeah negative feedback. It occurs with the hormonal balance within our bodies and it is possible that there is something that occurs within the arachidonic acid metabolism. Not trying to stirr anything up, but the handout that is included in every X-Factor bottle does have a good write up however, it does omit the LOX route for AA as well.
My muscle gain is typically .5-1lb each month off of the basic supplements and whole foods. I don't know if this is good or bad gains, but that's what I've came to the conclusion that my 'development rate' is.
So 65 days normally would yield: 1-1.5 lb gain and 1 year is roughly 10-11 lbs gain.
01-16-2008, 05:14 PM
Well I'll be following your log for sure. Great information so far. Good luck with the gains.
01-17-2008, 11:34 AM
Or is it just me, lol?
01-17-2008, 04:16 PM
Personally, I am very concerned about 17a substances and I think the issue is taken very lightly when it should not be. There have been several instances for example with Superdrol that caused an induced liver choleostasis with people after several weeks.
I have not came across any reports where a healthy male gets utterly trashed for week on alcohol beverages and has had choleostasis. I know of (my friend) who was throwing up blood (probably stomach) from repeated days of excess alcohol consumption, but not liver failure.
People always like to compare 17a with alcohol consumption when trying to give a reasoning behind liver damage.
The pathways that alcohol affects the liver is different than how 17a affects the liver. Dr. Dana Hauser covered this, so such a comparison is invalid.
I looked more into the Liquid Masterdrol and I'm not really convinced on the science behind it so I'm going to have to pass on it and probably try Furzadrol instead.
01-18-2008, 10:21 PM
-No DOMS at all
-Pumps good so far
-Everything is the usual
-No headaches at all
*I used to get very frequent headaches when I took X-Factor for the first time a long time ago with a much smaller dose. I'm not sure how my body is specifically reacting to a higher amount. Hm. Interesante.
----Wrapping up week 2----
The suspense is killing me so I'm gonna check in @ 4 weeks (1 month) and report feedback.
01-19-2008, 06:17 PM
01-19-2008, 06:48 PM
I'm in for this. I want to run this exact layout if I get selected to log it.
NSCA-CSCS and CPT
Currently Pursuing a Doctor of Physical Therapy Degree
01-20-2008, 11:13 AM
I'm curious as to how high your EFA intake is? You mentioned that you'll supplement with EFAs and at the very least not go out of your way to avoid Fish Oils/EFAs...
Was this different from your last log with X Factor?
01-20-2008, 11:31 AM
In that case, I would ask you not to judge ArA, and by extension our product, based on your experience with that product. I know everyone loves to "ethyl esterize" everything, but in this case it is not a good thing. If anyone is REALLY interested, I can dig up some posts by Phosphate Bone (or possibly ask him to chime in) that showed that the ethyl ester version of ArA actually had a lower oral bioavailibility than the regular version.
01-20-2008, 01:14 PM
01-20-2008, 01:18 PM
I know that originally the intial was to avoid omega-3s. however, assuming this were true that the anti-inflammatory effects would negate the X-Factor would probably not have too much of an impact.
I had a headache awhile back a long time ago and took several fish oil gels as an alternative to ibuprofen to see if it would stop my headache. This was awhile back, but it really did not ease my headache at all, so the anti-inflammatory effects were not as significant as I would have expected.
I typically do not use any anti-inflammatories in general or OTC/perscription medication if I can help it. I'm not very keen on the idea of taking chemicals, if I can avoid it.
I don't think that the anti-inflammatory effects of omega-3/EFA would be very significant, unless you were to mega-dose on them, which is why I decided to not strictly stop my intake.
My last log with X-Factor, I took 2 gels/ED and only ran one bottle. My omega-3/EFA intake was the same though. Fish here and there, plus fish oil gels/ED
01-20-2008, 05:27 PM
You're also correct about the changing expectation of EFAs while on cycle. It's becoming much more lenient and as long as you don't take EFAs to the extreme, your cycle should go about quite smoothly with no negative impact.
Glad to see you're up to speed (as expected from reading your other posts).
As a side note, Mag, CoQ10, and Water seem to have helped my headaches a lot on a daily basis... this may be something to consider if your headaches come about.
01-20-2008, 05:58 PM
Do you supplement frequently with Omega-3s or just use Omega-3s from time to time ? In my previous post, when I said I took some fish oil gels when I had a headache, I took 3 gels at one time. Later on down the line after the cycle is over, if I get a really bad headache I'll try taking 6 gels at once and see if it has any impact.
I should start supplementing with CoQ10, it has been something I've been meaning to do. I take multi 2x day, and ZMA. It is hard for me to specifically pinpoint the reason why I get headaches. I think the top 2 reasons are because my caffeine intake is somewhat high, and if I drastically stop or lower my intake, I immediately get headaches. Also too, poor sleep the night before also creates headaches with me.
01-21-2008, 01:08 PM
I use Omega 3s from time to time. While I'm at school I'll supplement with them since the food on campus sucks and I can't afford good food, but when I'm home I like to try and get all the healthy fats from food (I'm a huge fan of fish).
I have come to the conclusion that even with my high intake of fish, I must still not be getting enough EFA/Omega-3s since I get more frequent headaches while at home than at school, which is weird since while I'm home it's always for vacation and most of my headaches are tension and stress related.
CoQ10 is by far one of the most underrated supplements today. The FDA once banned CoQ10 and then later highly taxed it due to the fact that it’s sold as a prescription drug in Japan and the fact that it was an ‘unproven’ therapy. CoQ10 has shown many benefits to the after American and has no found side effects. The FDA banned CoQ10 simply because they were afraid larger drug corporations would lose money due to the health benefits of CoQ10.... at least that's my conspiracy theory for ya
As for the caffeine intake and headaches, I've had great results with Palo Alto's Reset A.D. in the past when I was coming off of Caffeine and it's relatively cheap. You could potentially look into making it a staple and just continuing with your caffeine regiment as is. The other interesting supp. for headaches if Picamilon. It's been used for alcohol withdrawal with some great results.
Similar Forum Threads
- By ReaperX in forum Supplement LogsReplies: 0Last Post: 01-14-2008, 08:08 PM
- By warbird01 in forum SupplementsReplies: 13Last Post: 07-11-2007, 08:56 PM
- By raylewis in forum AnabolicsReplies: 3Last Post: 11-02-2004, 04:30 PM
- By ps24eva in forum AnabolicsReplies: 1Last Post: 04-19-2004, 04:35 PM
- By babygetoboy in forum AnabolicsReplies: 5Last Post: 08-04-2003, 06:12 PM