New Bruce Kneller Product? Or Novedex Reformulation?
- 06-01-2005, 02:32 PM
New Bruce Kneller Product? Or Novedex Reformulation?
This was sent to me via email from a friend who owns a nutrition store:
Technical Brief for 2-Ene Steroidal Compounds for Sale as Food Supplements
Written & Edited By:
Bruce W. Kneller
Name of compound(s): 5alpha-androst-2-en-17-one;
Alternate nomenclature(s): 17-keto-2-etioallocholene;
Brief: 17-keto-2-etioallocholene (Pheromone 1) and 17b-hydroxy-2-etioallocholene (Pheromone 2) are naturally occurring, oestrous-related pheromonones of the female Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) that are known to induce behavioral responses in elephant bulls (Reproduction. 2001 Mar;121(3):475-84). Neither compound is known to be found naturally in primates, including humans although Pheromonone 1 could possibly be found naturally on human skin as it is a potential, metabolic by-product of dehydroepiandrosterone degradation when incubated with human axillary bacterial isolates in various culture media (J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 1997 Sep-Oct;63(1-3):81-9).
Currently, neither Pheromonone 1 or 2 are federally scheduled as C-III or considered â€œanabolic steroidsâ€? at the Federal or any State level.
It is clear that Pheromonone I and Pheromonone II are chemically unrelated to testosterone for the following reasons â€“
- Testosterone is saturated in the A-ring at carbon # 4 while Pheromonone 1 and 2 are saturated in the A-ring at carbon #2.
- Testosterone is aromatizable to various estrogens in the human body by the CYP class of enzymes found in humans while Pheromonone I and II can not be converted to estrogens by humans because they are already reduced fully at carbon # 5.
- Testosterone also has a ketone functional group at carbon # 3 in the A-ring while Pheromonone 1 and Pheromonone 2 do not have any functional group attachments anywhere in the A-ring.
- Additionally, testosterone is formed endogenously in humans by the metabolization of androstenedione. Neither Pheromonone 1 or Pheromonone 2 is formed endogenously in any primates, including humans.
Although a synthetic, carbon #17 alpha-alkylated analog to Pheromonone 1 (17alpha-methyl-5alpha-androst-2-en-17beta-ol aka â€œMadolâ€?) was found by the World Anti-Doping Agency in Montreal and The UCLA lab and the Doping Control Laboratory of Athens recently and labeled a â€œDesigner Steroidâ€?, this is clearly a synthetic analog to the Pheromonone I and has, chemical, pharmacological and pharmacokinetic properties that are unique and significantly different than Pheromonone 1 and Pheromonone 2.
Clearly, although chemically â€˜relatedâ€™ to Madol or methylandrostenol, Pheromonone 1 and Phermone 2 are distinctly different in that they are naturally occurring and are likely to be far less hepatotoxic because they both lack the carbon #17 alpha-alkylation that Madol possesses. It is unlikely that Pheromome 1 and Pheromonone 2 will have the same hepatic metabolites as Madol for this reason also.
Madol, which was first reported in a patent in 1961, was shown to have high anabolic (muscle-building) effects, but it was never approved for use and has not been widely studied since that time. It is possible that Pheromonone 1 and Pheromonone 2, if administered to humans in high enough dosages, might impart a similar, high anabolic effect but this has not been clearly proven or demonstrated in any clinical study to date ever.
Pheromonone 1 and Pheromonone 2 are clearly be legal to sell as dietary supplements in the United States because of the information demonstrated in this brief. Both compounds are clearly naturally occurring and found in food stuffs (elephants). Neither has ever been characterized as an anabolic steroid or controlled substance by any Federal or State agency to date. Neither compound is chemically related to testosterone and neither compound has been proven to be anabolic in humans to date.
Pheromonone 1 and Pheromonone 2 have been demonstrated to cause or induce certain behavioral patterns in Asian bull elephants. It is also possible that these compounds might impart the same effect(s) in humans but this has yet to be proven. It is also possible that many people might find these potential effects to be desirable and positive.
Interesting article. I have not given it much thought, other than I am perplexed as to whether this is simply a re-formulation of Novedex XT or some new product. Will do the research on it later. Comments? Now that I think about it... this may not even reference a new product, but may actually just be discussing Novedex XT.... beats me....
- 06-01-2005, 02:58 PM
06-01-2005, 04:22 PM
06-01-2005, 08:21 PM
ergomax phera plex and this are all the same me thinks
i believe ALRI has the patent on it though???
06-01-2005, 08:23 PM
06-01-2005, 09:18 PM
06-01-2005, 10:51 PM
Looks like a non methylated pherplex or ergomax. You prob need to take alot of it to get the effect.Originally Posted by buffb2
06-02-2005, 03:35 AM
06-02-2005, 04:28 AM
This is Ergomax - methyl group + some other group (eludes me at the moment and I'm headed to bed)Originally Posted by Dr. Death
Without the "other group", the product has ZERO bioavailability. We would have to assume that this non-methylated version has had something added to it to increase BV.
06-02-2005, 10:36 AM
So this might be my second chance to try "Ergomax" without methylation (is that a sniglet?)? While one might need to take more, one could expect similar effects?
06-02-2005, 10:47 AM
I just read up on this over at BB.com and both PA and Sledge said it was inactive unless methylated.
06-02-2005, 11:18 AM
Wonder if you could take the powder out of the caps, mix it seperate it from the binder using your favorate recipe, then make a suspension or dermal out of it?
06-02-2005, 12:58 PM
Well to be perfectly fair to Bruce... they said the base (nothing added) is COMPLETELY inactive, but whatever Bruce did to it has no book value. However, there is absolutely no reason to think it should aid oral bioavailability at this time (until Bruce provides some kind of rationale)Originally Posted by LCSULLA
06-02-2005, 01:18 PM
06-02-2005, 04:01 PM
06-02-2005, 04:16 PM
Right. It's not scheduled.. What is the active compound? I'll go searching online looking for someone in China to deliver it here. It's not illegal to order, right?
06-03-2005, 12:19 AM
06-03-2005, 12:29 AM
Because it's TMG, which is the 2nd BALCO designer steroid. Not that this actually is a big deal in the real world of bodybuilding, but the clowns and asshats in the media don't know anything else, and the entire operation, DSHEA and all, could come crashing down if a BALCO-like media storm occurs when/if a company is caught selling this. Luckily, ALRI did the wise thing and pulled it.Originally Posted by 400runner
06-03-2005, 12:38 AM
06-03-2005, 12:57 AM
06-03-2005, 01:01 AM
lol wtf does this mean? am I going to become attracted to female Asian bull elephants?Originally Posted by Pax
06-03-2005, 01:04 AM
Androgens, Progestins, Estrogens, and Pheromones are all hormones. Pheromones just haven't been looked at as activators of the AR by most people, until now (because of legal reasons).Originally Posted by coofoostu
By all accounts, this elephant pheromone (methylated) DMT/Ergomax LMG was an AWESOME steroid.
The base (un-methylated) is useless.
06-03-2005, 01:08 AM
But it says nothing about muscle growth, body comp improvement, etc. It just says "behavorial patterns."Originally Posted by SilentScream27
06-03-2005, 01:36 AM
I'm assuming he didn't put "adds tons of lean mass" since this might attract the wrong attention?Originally Posted by coofoostu
06-03-2005, 01:40 AM
Yeah you're probably right. But I would have thought he would at least said something like "could prossibly promote muscle growth".Originally Posted by 3v1l
06-03-2005, 10:32 AM
I think BK is trying to keep it on the "DL", if you know what I mean.Originally Posted by coofoostu
I also think everyone will agree with me that if Phera-Plex and Ergomax LMG stayed in the market it would have been a great supp, but I see ALRI's reasoning for pulling it.
06-03-2005, 11:11 AM
I thought it was stated repeatedly by ALR that Ergomax was not DMT.
And I think everyone should wait for the results from this product to come in before throwing it in the trash already. I'll definitely try it.
06-03-2005, 11:15 AM
06-03-2005, 01:53 PM
I was talking about Promadol...but yeah...if they brought back Ergomax I'd "try" about ten bottles myself.Originally Posted by LCSULLA
06-03-2005, 06:24 PM
Similar Forum Threads
- By Royd The Noyd in forum Company PromotionsReplies: 56Last Post: 06-11-2014, 11:28 PM
- By snakebyte05 in forum IGF-1/GHReplies: 4Last Post: 10-31-2004, 11:23 PM
- By John Armstrong in forum AnabolicsReplies: 2Last Post: 10-24-2004, 05:56 PM
- By rhatid in forum AnabolicsReplies: 5Last Post: 07-25-2003, 04:27 PM