Confusion with Ursolic Acid/Ursobolic Yielding Poor Results

[DocRok]

I am in no way affiliated with E-Pharm or the Kunkel et al study of "gene expression" in regards to ursolic acid exposure. I would also like to apologize if the information I am posting is redundant, however from the recent posts I have read there is still a bit of lingering confusion with negation of the studies relevance.

My purpose for posting is to present a possible oversight/miscalculation in reference to Ursobolic and the actual true yield of product in each tablet; as reported by the manufacturers of E-Pharm, then relate it back to the study.

Simply put, E-Pharms' Ursobolic fails to present the necessary amount of compound to initiate the level of results Kunkel et al concluded. A 220lb individual would require over a bottle/day of product, let me explain.

E-Pharm/Ursobolic: (from label) 120 tabs, 600mg TOTAL EXTRACT Rosemary (means nothing),

**[150mg total ursolic acid, extracted/25% yield; not great]**

A. 220lb/2.2lbs = 100kg (example, easy conversion)

B. The study maintained parameters of (200mg/kg)

C. 100kg * 200mg = 20,000

D. 20,000/150mg (ursobolic) = 133.33 tablets

I contacted a pharmaceutical-chemical supply company producing 98% yields of ursolic acid; the cost $1700/kg, 99% yield $2300/kg.

20grams/workout * (5days/week) = 100 grams .. etc.

At this point, unless research discovers new analogs to increase the efficacy/potency of the compound (ursolic acid) is currently a more expensive substance per mg than using AAs. new analogs ie: piracetam --> aniracetam --> pramiracetam, etc.

The Kunkel et al study is a springboard and template for other studies reflecting possible effective natural alternatives to AA.

Despite the amazing outcomes we all had hoped for, the numbers where there the whole time. We can take the "glass is half full approach" and investigate the potential benefits from this compound aside from "noticeable" anabolic properties. One may want to take Ursobolic with nolv/clom/hcg to capitalize on it's anti-atrophic properties post-cycle. If someone has Cushings Syndrome or any metabolic disease that causes atrophic changes ursolic acid may slow down that process and demonstrate benefits. If a patient/family member is in the hospital or immobile for a lengthy period of time, this product may be useful; anti-atrophic. Did you break a bone (cast), are you recovering from an injury or surgery; this may be beneficial for those populations as well. We can't forget the claims of lipolytic effects either.

Does using ursolic acid within the parameters outlined in the study produce effects similar to that of the study? For me, yes and no.

I purchased enough Ursolic Acid (95% yield, 500grams) to last me 30 days and personally used it, I work out 4 days a week and took the product 5 days a week (weekends off). 3 times a day: BF, lunch and dinner. I can spare you the math (different for everyone) and provide you with my experiences. I found the product to provide more of a lipolytic effect than anabolic; short term. I gained 5% lean muscle, however I could eat whatever I wanted and it didn't touch me (reduction of 8% BF calculated from BodPod), the results were similar to stanzolol or any good low androgen. I did burp up dust like other users have reported, my libido was in the toilet and I got sick twice that month (I rarely get sick). I have currently retained the lean muscle I gained and the lipolytic effects seemed to linger for a few weeks.

I hope I wasn't rambling on too much, all the best to you guys.

 

[ka0tik]

great post, hopefully Dr Houser or Pat Arnold will chime in

 

[shinivan]

I am in no way affiliated with E-Pharm or the Kunkel et al study of "gene expression" in regards to ursolic acid exposure. I would also like to apologize if the information I am posting is redundant, however from the recent posts I have read there is still a bit of lingering confusion with negation of the studies relevance.

My purpose for posting is to present a possible oversight/miscalculation in reference to Ursobolic and the actual true yield of product in each tablet; as reported by the manufacturers of E-Pharm, then relate it back to the study.

Simply put, E-Pharms' Ursobolic fails to present the necessary amount of compound to initiate the level of results Kunkel et al concluded. A 220lb individual would require over a bottle/day of product, let me explain.

E-Pharm/Ursobolic: (from label) 120 tabs, 600mg TOTAL EXTRACT Rosemary (means nothing),

**[150mg total ursolic acid, extracted/25% yield; not great]**

A. 220lb/2.2lbs = 100kg (example, easy conversion)

B. The study maintained parameters of (200mg/kg)

C. 100kg * 200mg = 20,000

D. 20,000/150mg (ursobolic) = 133.33 tablets

I contacted a pharmaceutical-chemical supply company producing 98% yields of ursolic acid; the cost $1700/kg, 99% yield $2300/kg.

20grams/workout * (5days/week) = 100 grams .. etc.

At this point, unless research discovers new analogs to increase the efficacy/potency of the compound (ursolic acid) is currently a more expensive substance per mg than using AAs. new analogs ie: piracetam --> aniracetam --> pramiracetam, etc.

The Kunkel et al study is a springboard and template for other studies reflecting possible effective natural alternatives to AA.

Despite the amazing outcomes we all had hoped for, the numbers where there the whole time. We can take the "glass is half full approach" and investigate the potential benefits from this compound aside from "noticeable" anabolic properties. One may want to take Ursobolic with nolv/clom/hcg to capitalize on it's anti-atrophic properties post-cycle. If someone has Cushings Syndrome or any metabolic disease that causes atrophic changes ursolic acid may slow down that process and demonstrate benefits. If a patient/family member is in the hospital or immobile for a lengthy period of time, this product may be useful; anti-atrophic. Did you break a bone (cast), are you recovering from an injury or surgery; this may be beneficial for those populations as well. We can't forget the claims of lipolytic effects either.

Does using ursolic acid within the parameters outlined in the study produce effects similar to that of the study? For me, yes and no.

I purchased enough Ursolic Acid (95% yield, 500grams) to last me 30 days and personally used it, I work out 4 days a week and took the product 5 days a week (weekends off). 3 times a day: BF, lunch and dinner. I can spare you the math (different for everyone) and provide you with my experiences. I found the product to provide more of a lipolytic effect than anabolic; short term. I gained 5% lean muscle, however I could eat whatever I wanted and it didn't touch me (reduction of 8% BF calculated from BodPod), the results were similar to stanzolol or any good low androgen. I did burp up dust like other users have reported, my libido was in the toilet and I got sick twice that month (I rarely get sick). I have currently retained the lean muscle I gained and the lipolytic effects seemed to linger for a few weeks.

I hope I wasn't rambling on too much, all the best to you guys.

wow, great post and experience. I wonder why would you have experience libido issues w this. I think i read somewhere that it was sperm motility affected in the study on rats but did not affected libido nor sperm count.
What you say the libido loss was similar to running a ph ? plese elaborate if you may.

thanks

 

[nattydisaster]

Thats not how you determine human dose.

Your dosing idea only works for a 220lb rat

 

[EasyEJL]

Simply put, E-Pharms' Ursobolic fails to present the necessary amount of compound to initiate the level of results Kunkel et al concluded. A 220lb individual would require over a bottle/day of product, let me explain.

E-Pharm/Ursobolic: (from label) 120 tabs, 600mg TOTAL EXTRACT Rosemary (means nothing),

**[150mg total ursolic acid, extracted/25% yield; not great]**

A. 220lb/2.2lbs = 100kg (example, easy conversion)

B. The study maintained parameters of (200mg/kg)

C. 100kg * 200mg = 20,000

D. 20,000/150mg (ursobolic) = 133.33 tablets

C is where you went wrong. Read this article

http://www.fasebj.org/content/22/3/659.full

determining the human dose is

200mg/kg * 3 (mouse factor) = 600 / 37 (human factor) = 16.2 mg/kg in humans. So a realistic dose for a 220lb human is in the 1600mg range. Granted that still is a high dose from the ursobolic product (33ish caps) but not ridiculous.

Btw, your 133 caps was wrong anyhow, since the 150mg is per 3 caps, should have been 400 caps.

 

[shinivan]

interesting. Ursobolic indeed seems underdosed mmm.. I wonder why Patrick Arnold would suggest 9-18 caps as the upper limit. The upper limit maxes you up to have only about HALF of the effects rats experienced in the study.

 

[EasyEJL]

interesting. Ursobolic indeed seems underdosed mmm.. I wonder why Patrick Arnold would suggest 9-18 caps as the upper limit. The upper limit maxes you up to have only about HALF of the effects rats experienced in the study.

No you can't say that either. The dosage required could be less, you just don't know without more studies. Plenty of compounds max out and adding more does nothing

 

[mr.cooper69]

Actually, the HED conversion figures are for a small human (60 kg). If you change the human weight to 220 lbs, the body surface area also shifts and you need to recalculate the conversion factor. There is a complicated and more accurate way of doing this which I won't get into, but you can use the more simplified formula provided by the FDA to get a ballpark figure:

HED = animal dose in mg/kg x (animal weight in kg/human weight in kg)

 

[shinivan]

Actually, the HED conversion figures are for a small human (60 kg). If you change the human weight to 220 lbs, the body surface area also shifts and you need to recalculate the conversion factor. There is a complicated and more accurate way of doing this which I won't get into, but you can use the more simplified formula provided by the FDA to get a ballpark figure:

HED = animal dose in mg/kg x (animal weight in kg/human weight in kg)

would you be able to calculate a dose with this formula you mention?? unfortunately i cant follow , anyone can give this a shot?? it is very interesting

thanks

 

[T-Bone]

Strong first post DocRock!. Rock on with your bad self!

 

[T-Bone]

First you say it is under-dosed. Then you say how much like the product.

 

[Cool]

One post like THAT and gone?

 

[DocRok]

Sorry, I was checking this post for a while and there were limited responses. I love this site, I just wanted to dip my toe in and share my experiences with individuals who share a common interest for life enhancement in all realms. Firstly, thank you for all responses and the warm welcome.
- Ka0tik: Tell Patrick Arnold to lift his patent on D-aspartic acid and N-methyl in reference to labeling products as test-boosters and GH supplements, so my friend and I can get a few of our other supplements out to market..hehe
- Cool: I'm back brother..
- EASYEJL: Great study, thank you for enlightening me. Seems as though my maff (jk) is stellar, my intention was to provide insight into my experiences with the product. "1.6 grams," that's a lot of tabs brother; about 27.5% of the bottle. Not ridiculous but that is subjective.
- TBone: LOL Rock on! .. thanks bro. That's correct, I liked it when I purchased the 95%, however Ursobolic is underdosed; my point was in reference to the yield of ursolic acid ~25% (Ursobolic). The amount I purchased from "the man in Chinatown" was 95% yield for an exorbitant amount of money (I understand why E-pharm remains with the 25% yield). For me it's more of a cost-effectiveness issue. I liked how it made me feel structurally, pumps increased, mild strength gains, moderate lipolytic effects, however it did seem to reduce my libido. I just felt indifferent, which is very unlike me; that's the only way I can describe it. Following a week cessation of ursolic acid, my libido returned.
-Shinivan: UA, for me it seems to exhibit a great potential. Imho it demonstrated (subjectively, not compared to AA) a mild-moderate anabolic effect and a moderate lipolytic property. As far as Patrick Arnolds bell curve response, would anyone mind sharing that literature, I'd like to read it.
Guys, please understand I'm not trolling in regards to ursolic acid. I feel it has great potential, however I would like to see new analogs introduced so we don't have to administer 33 tabs at a clip, to me that's not relevant. How does it modulate the receptor? Can we imporve on that? of course but how.. What can we tweak to improve affinity and increase modulation potential. My interest is because my friends and I run a supplement company, we are in the process of developing new supplements (analogs) for the sports and bodybuilding market. We currently offer a pre-workout product that we are proud of; no propietary blends, all dosages clearly marked on the label in accordance to research outcomes; No DMAA and a 90% re-order retention rate (~40 units sold daily). We are a relatively small company now, but we are growing and expanding at a steady rate. The product is called "Tsunami Strike" (special price, available until 8/1/12) PM me for the link (25$ + 7$ship) as I am not worthy of posting due to my low post count. It is now being marketed on several sites including: Bodybuilding.com, TsunamiStrike.com, A1Supplements.com, and Amazon.com. We will soon be adding creatine monohydrate to the formula as requested by many current users. Please PM me with ideas or questions. We are currently searching for a biochemist with a strong background in systems physiology. If anyone feels comfortable discussing new analogs and receptor potential, I'd love to hear your thoughts. Thank you for the insight, you guys are cerebral and I appreciate that.