Methyl 1-Test far inferior to regular test according to TMag--is this true?

  1. New Member
    Herakleitus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1
    Rep Power
    136
    Level
    1
    Lv. Percent
    74%

    Methyl 1-Test far inferior to regular test according to TMag--is this true?


    ****, this is a repost - well, the other title wasn't helpful if you don't care to know who Cy Wilson is...

    Obviously the boys at T-Mag are Biotest pimps, and so they are bound to lose sales of Mag-10 to Methyl 1-Test, since they don't carry this, but is there anything to their allegations? 25% the anabolic potency of Test prop, and 50% the adrogenic activity?! But at what dose? They also don't reference the bioassays which purportedly show this. What should we make of this?

    http://www.t-mag.com/nation_articles/289cy.jsp
    "Methyl 1-Test: The True Story

    Q: What is Methyl 1-test? Is it potent? Is it legally sold as a supplement or what? I'm so confused!

    A: 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) decreased anabolic and androgenic activity in bioassays. It had about one-fourth the anabolic potency of Testosterone propionate and about half 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."
    Last edited by Herakleitus; 11-29-2003 at 10:17 AM.

  2. Senior Member
    Biggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    1,285
    Rep Power
    789
    Level
    30
    Lv. Percent
    50.17%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    you'll want to check here
  3. Registered User
    Iron Warrior's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  265 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,328
    Rep Power
    13071
    Level
    51
    Lv. Percent
    28.9%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    No way, it's not even more potent than T-1 Pro let alone M1T
    •   
       

  4. New Member
    88wheelie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    28
    Rep Power
    148
    Level
    5
    Lv. Percent
    41.95%

    For someone who is smart enough to be the first to realise the earth spins I am surprised you are reading anything by t-mag let alone reposting some nonsense from then.

    Lets not cheapen this forum with adverts disguised as questions/research.

  5. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Rep Power
    588
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    15.44%

    Someone called his b.s on the study he posted at the end of his article. When he said "It had about one-fourth the anabolic potency of Testosterone propionate and about half the androgenic activity" I guess it wasn't true in the study he posted. So he posted that rebuttal on that other thread. I don't know if you can still find it in the t-mag forum because they censor their posts. My user name and password were banned when I pointed out that a one month supply of m-1-t cost 43 dollars on dps and a one month supply of mag-10 would cost close to 300. Why anyone still listens to them is beyond me.........one word myostat or myocrap.
  6. Board Supporter
    hypo's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    524
    Rep Power
    425
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    69.29%

    haha, Mag 10 is twice as anabolic as test prop? LMAO
  7. New Member
    Rictor33's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    390
    Rep Power
    340
    Level
    17
    Lv. Percent
    26.42%

    mag 10 is a ****ing joke, i'd like to see this thread removed just for the stupidity in this t-mag ****. 1-ad is better than mag-10 and that isnt half as potent as m1t.
  8. New Member
    Milo Hobgoblin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    45
    Posts
    81
    Rep Power
    185
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    26.22%

    What an ASS!!!

    90% of a steroid molecule' Androgenic/Anabolic properties come from alterations to ring 1 and 2 NOT RING 4. ****ing scumbags trying to sell their bull**** mag 10.

    The alterations to ring 4 are purely for half life adjustments and biochemical protection.

    Ring 3 is rarely adjusted.
  9. The True Warrior is one who conquers oneself
    hamper19's Avatar
    Stats
    5'7"  191 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,471
    Rep Power
    884
    Level
    32
    Lv. Percent
    31.19%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Isn't Tmag for girls?
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Non methyls worth adding to a test e cycle?
    By lector606 in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-22-2009, 11:17 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-13-2007, 10:48 AM
  3. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-24-2003, 09:45 PM
  4. Do you perfer to frontload test or use dbol?
    By JBlaze in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-08-2003, 12:16 PM
  5. attempting to run test prop or 4-ad inject
    By Bean in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-05-2003, 05:13 AM

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