Cy Wilson's view on M 1-T - AnabolicMinds.com

Cy Wilson's view on M 1-T

  1. New Member
    prolangtum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    453
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    361

    Cy Wilson's view on M 1-T


    Just buy Mag 10, right?

     

    Methyl 1-Test: The True Story

    <P class=email><SPAN class=header>Q:</SPAN> What is Methyl 1-test?&nbsp; Is it potent? Is it legally sold as a supplement or what? I'm so confused!

    <SPAN class=header>A:</SPAN> First, Methyl 1-Test isnít even proper nomenclature. As for it being potent, Counsell, et al., found that C-17 alkylation of 17B-hydroxy-5a-androst-1-en-3-one (also incorrectly referred to as 1-Testosterone) <I>decreased</I> anabolic and androgenic activity in bioassays. It had about o<I>ne-fourth </I>the anabolic potency of Testosterone propionate and about <I>half</I> the androgenic activity.

    The androgen found in MAG-10, 5a-androst-1-ene (1-Testosterone), was shown to be as androgenic as Testosterone propionate but had twice the anabolic activity. So, in reality, with this so-called methyl-1-Testosterone, you're getting the potential liver toxicity while getting much less benefit.

    I think people were excited when they first heard of it as they thought, "Oh, okay, well alkylating 1-Testosterone will solve the problem of oral bioavailability and thus we'll have one kick-ass compound." In reality, adding that methyl group creates not just a methylated version of the androgen, but an entirely different molecule, period!

    People need to understand that adding a methyl group or a double bond (or really any number of functional groups and atoms) creates an entirely different androgen. For instance, methandrostenolone (D-bol) only differs from Testosterone by a methyl group at the C-17 and an additional double bond between the C-1 and C-2. But can you honestly say D-bol and Testosterone impart the same effects? Even disregarding bioassays, which have demonstrated substantial differences between the two androgens, itís still obvious to anyone whoís used them.

    Alterations such as these and others in a steroid ring system can easily change the shape or the way in which the steroid molecule interacts with a given receptor, thus we get drastically different effects. Once and for all, will people please understand that a methyl group at the C-17 creates an entirely new androgen and is different from 17 beta-esterifcation as those esters are generally cleaved prior to systemic circulation, whereas the methyl group canít be cleaved via the esterase enzyme!

    As for its legality, I wouldnít think it would be legal. As far as Iíve always been told, C-17 alkylation isn't something our laws allow in terms of a legal steroid supplement. When I visited the various sites selling this product, it became clear that it likely isnít legal. Every disclaimer stated that the product was for "research purposes only" and intended for animals, <I>not</I> humans.

    They stated in no uncertain terms that if you buy and use the product they aren't liable as they're assuming youíre a licensed researcher using the compound on animals. Iím guessing people think that by claiming this "for research purposes only" theyíll evade the law. Well, unless the people who are buying this product have a DEA license to possess such materials, it's technically illegal. You can claim youíre a "researcher" all you want but without a DEA license, or a very close friend who has one, you donít have much of a case.

    I canít see this stuff being around for long. Even if it is legal, this is most certainly not something our government agencies would look too highly upon, and in general it makes everyone else in the industry look bad.

    The worst part is that itís actually less potent than the parent steroid molecule! So, letís see, you get all of these drawbacks and less benefit as compared to the parent molecule. Doesnít make much sense to me. Itís lowlifes who bring out products like this that give the entire supplement industry a bad name. (15)
    <P class=email>&nbsp;
    <P class=email>15) Counsell RE, et al. "Anabolic agents. Derivatives of 5a-Androst-1-ene." J Org Chem 1962;27:248-251

    <P class=header>


    &nbsp;

  2. Advanced Member
    Sir Foxx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Age
    44
    Posts
    892
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    591

    Well, I believe him because I see people on MAG-10 cycles gaining 10-20lbs in as little as 2 weeks, all lean, all of the time.

    {Sarcasm Mode OFF}

  3. Banned
    xendon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    17
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    0

    It's no surprise to see conflicting studies and opinions on a given supplement, but the real world results are more impressive to me than a given study. I for one have gotten real results off a 2 week cycle of M-1-T in comparison to a 4 week cycle of 1-Test at less than one-tenth the dose. So this study showing it as being one fourth the anabolic activity leads me to believe the study is either trumped or there were factors which lead to inaccurate results.

    •   
       

  4. Advanced Member
    NO MERCY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    745
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    612

    thanks for posting that prolangtum

  5. Brewing Anabolic Minds
    Chemo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,022
    Answers
    2
    Rep Power
    0

    riiiiiight....

  6. New Member
    TheTorch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    138

    Yeah that was really disappointing to see Cy follow suit w/the rest of the Biotest clan and say Mag 10 was pretty much better than m1t....oops did i say m1t? Sorry, that might not be proper nomenclature....

    Seriously, I have read testosterone.net since 1999 and they were always a great site for info, etc, and back in the day their Androsol was a good product when the whole topical ph scene was starting out. This was the last time I will hold so much of their info as law, I mean c'mon who the **** is he kidding, calling m1t worthless???

    Ok...everyone using m1t even for a 2 week cycle is getting results that would never be achieved on Mag 10....and on their site, mag 10 is $120 a bottle?? u have to be kidding me, i mean hell u can get 2 bottles of m1t for that amount of dough and have enough for several cycles.

    Serioulsy, unless they started putting liquid dbol in their capsules of Mag10, I just don't see how he could make his outrageous claims like that.....

    T-mag is going the way of EAS and Muscletech, sad to say but it's true. A few weeks back in their reader mail section, people are saying how they want tmag to get back into their original shape and start putting out more articles about aas.......so what do they do? Well they listen to the readers and do it, and in the meantime they had to be thinking "Hell yeah this is a perfect time to push our PHs in place of solid advice".

    Sorry, as much as I appreciate them putting out a weekly e-mag for free, you can't argue about the real world effectiveness of m1t compared to ANY(not just mag10) PH on the market today.

  7. New Member
    intel55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    32
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    155

    Didn't PA post a link on the BB.com board that showed the molecular structure of M1T and PA labeled it "The Ugly" or something? I think PA believed it was very potent stuff and would never be legal for sale.

    NO Mercy I think you started that thread??? hmm

    Biotest liquid did nothing for me. I was surprised actually. I did the liquid at 2 caps/day for 10 days and nothing really. Then I switched on over to 1-AD.

    Have stocked up on m1t, but not used any yet

  8. Advanced Member
    NO MERCY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    745
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    612

    Originally posted by intel55
    Didn't PA post a link on the BB.com board that showed the molecular structure of M1T and PA labeled it &quot;The Ugly&quot; or something? I think PA believed it was very potent stuff and would never be legal for sale.

    NO Mercy I think you started that thread??? hmm

    Biotest liquid did nothing for me. I was surprised actually. I did the liquid at 2 caps/day for 10 days and nothing really. Then I switched on over to 1-AD.

    Have stocked up on m1t, but not used any yet
    Yes I started a thread over at bb.com asking Patrick's opinion on finigenx and m1t. If I remember correctly he was worried about liver toxicity and had some critisicm on the compound.

  9. New Member
    MrTrap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    68
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    179

  10. New Member
    intel55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    32
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    155

    Originally posted by MrTrap
    PA on m-1-t:

    http://www.mesomorphosis.com/article...evelopment.htm
    yup that was the link. thanks. "The Bad" he called it

  11. New Member
    buyb12's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    252
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    264

    well the only sides I've come across is the lethargy. everything else can be counter acted.....

  12. New Member
    cookmic5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Age
    33
    Posts
    265
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    272

    Originally posted by MrTrap
    PA on m-1-t:

    http://www.mesomorphosis.com/article...evelopment.htm
    I'm not that chemically inclined, but that was a pretty good read, thanks mrtrap.

    cm5

  13. New Member
    Ceaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    46
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    169

    this was Cy's rebuttal on the T-Mag forum:

    First, I wrote that column nearly a month ago. Secondly, if nothing else, it just goes to prove a point. People went in before using this compound thinking that it was whatever times more potent (some outrageous number) than testosterone and such. Well, the problem is that these bioassays performed on rats, which you'll see in collections like Vida's aren't meant to be interpreted literally. First, they are rats, not humans, which they use. Secondly, the anabolic portion isn't accurate as it's performed on a muscle which is not skeletal muscle when they performed these bioassays. Is it accurate to say if they found one androgen to produce 10x the effects seen with another, that the stronger androgen was indeed, just that...stronger, but not necessarily 10x stronger? Yes, in the majority of cases. Last, no, it's not really "funny" that the androgen in MAG-10 was chosen over the methylated version, no more funny than someone going by bioassays in Vida's book and thinking that the methylated version is more potent than the parent molecule. I have data which conflicts with that.....big deal. Again, if anything it goes to show that the data obtained from bioassays aren't 100% accurate in terms of extrapolating the effects from rats to humans. It may very well be a potent androgen in humans, I don't know. I don't really take the time to read other "message boards" as I have just a tiny bit of a hectic schedule. If you think it's great, keep using it, don't let me stop you. I really don't care. I won't argue with "real world" results. I will however argue if I see data being used to support their use and it isn't entirely accurate.

  14. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    585

    I wonder if cy knows that "in real world results" he is " back tracking" and looks like an "*******"

  15. New Member
    spoofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    32
    Posts
    190
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    239

    Quote Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla
    I wonder if cy knows that "in real world results" he is " back tracking" and looks like an "*******"

    I would dislike. I think he makes some vary valid points and I've yet to see someone provide a good arugment againt anything he says.

    Persoanlly I think people are all to eager to accept things they read on message boards (sponsered by the people who sell a given product).

  16. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    585

    The post before cy's pointed out that the claims he made about m-1-t weren't true in the ref. he posted at the end of the article.
    A person pointed out that"Small problem with his article in that Vida, lists M-1T as being 4 times more anabolic as Test Prop, and he fails to address the fact that since it is methylated it is much more bio available that test prop or normal 1-test." I believe cy said it was four times less anabolic.
    Persoanlly I think people are all to eager to accept things they read on message boards (sponsered by the people who sell a given product).
    You mean like biotest pimping mag-10 on thier message boards. M-1-t is much more effective than mag-10. I tried mag -10 it didn't work at all. M-1-T is a threat to biotest. You can get it at dps for 43.00. Mag-10 is double the amount and only last a week. Spend 43.00 for a 40 day supply or 300.00 for a product that is less effective. What is he going to say go out and buy m-1-t over mag-10. Biotest also cencors it's message boards AM does not. I tried to post the point above on t-mags board and I was banned. Anyone from t-mag has zero credibility.

  17. Elite Member
    Matthew D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,014
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    0

    Spoofy, just what valid points does he bring up in his article.. because I didn't really see any
    Also, AM does sell 1-m-t and this board is not censer as someone said..

  18. Elite Member
    bioman's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    42
    Posts
    7,697
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    513131

    I guess I didn't gain those 7 pounds in 7 days on M1T. Silly me. lol..or maybe I'm part rat?!

  19. Elite Member
    Matthew D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,014
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    0

    that it Bioman, you just imagined you got those 7 lbs.. its the Matrix all over again.. lol

  20. New Member
    FunkMasterFlex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    85
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    161

    The main active in mag-10 is 4-ad-ec and then 1-AE i believe. In 4 weeks i gained 12 lbs lean, 4 lbs fat, and i got shut down pretty hard ( i doubled dosed, and did 2 a day splits on lifting). I never used m1t but Mag-10 treated me right. Just as m1t treats some right and some badly, Mag-10 was the same. Ive worked in retail and sold atleast 50 bottles a month and even more like 200 of hot-rox after ephdra was banned. Mag-10 had a 70% success rate IMO, prob only beat by Vpx's orals that people used to stack. And i dont really care what anyone thinks because i handled returns and i saw these people come back for the 6-oxo or tribex 500 or whatever they used and they def gained some weight, and exaggerated but i could tell if it worked atleast. One guy gained 34 lbs in 8 weeks with mag-10...which is retarded, didnt even know who he was at first.I only bring this because my store was very high volume. Agreed sometimes t-mag over hypes and is biased but they have good products. I personally liked there 4-ad-ec, as mag-10 made me lethargic and shut down hard (PCT was a bitch, but didnt know about nolva then)....i wish i would have gotten my bloodwork done but it was about 2 years ago and a year ago that i used it and did not quite care why it worked or how. Soon i will be playing with a methyl or two and look forward in comparing my logs i made back then and the ones i will keep. So my opinion will be formed after that, for definite. But i can truly say that for 50 bucks m1t and pct are taken care of ...mag-10 was more like 200-300 bucks at that time for a 4 week 2x dose run. But being mag-10 is no longer i guess it really doesnt matter lol.

  21. USA HOCKEY
    CEDeoudes59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,928
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    3201

    an old thread here,
    wow how times sure do change - we hate this stuff now
    My Little Site about Hair Loss & Anabolics-
    hair loss from steroids dot com

  22. Elite Member
    ryansm's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  305 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,125
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    22017

    Mag-10 can't hold m1t's snot rag, you are comparing apples and oranges. It sold well because biotest does well to advertise. Once ppl realized the true efficacy of m1t all it needed was word of mouth.


  23. Advanced Member
    -2z-'s Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  190 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Age
    43
    Posts
    736
    Answers
    0
    Rep Power
    499

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Foxx
    Well, I believe him because I see people on MAG-10 cycles gaining 10-20lbs in as little as 2 weeks, all lean, all of the time.

    {Sarcasm Mode OFF}
    Whew! For a second I thought an alien had taken control over your mind or something....lol.

    I've did mag-10 once long ago. There's no reason for anyone to put themselves through that.

  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-04-2008, 06:38 PM
  2. Dave Polumbo's view on IGF-1
    By Dwight Schrute in forum IGF-1/GH
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 09-25-2005, 10:22 PM
  3. 1fasts view on CEE...
    By t_dot_porkchop in forum Supplements
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-23-2005, 01:40 PM
  4. Basskillers View On IGF-1LR3 PRE-DILUTED
    By Supra in forum IGF-1/GH
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 04-17-2004, 11:15 PM
  5. Objective view on steriod use
    By Bone in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-27-2003, 06:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in