The #1 Cortisol Blocker

Page 5 of 13 First ... 34567 ... Last

  1. Quote Originally Posted by Primordial Perf View Post
    I hope you're enjoying your delusional self-proclaimed victorys.

    -Pp
    LMAO, you're the only delusional one here.


  2. Quote Originally Posted by Primordial Perf View Post
    You’re just reposting the same unrelated research you posted before, which I’ve already replied to.

    I’m giving you a polite invite to exit the thread. I suggest you take it, before you get chewed up any further. I doubt this thread is hurting your sells as much as you think it is. Relax and stop embarrassing yourself. (and your company)

    Replace the 7OH and 5AT with PS and you will have a solid product. Nothing wrong with a reformulation.

    -Pp
    Im not in here because I think PS powder is hurting my sales, it isnt. Im here because you are lying, just like you were at mind and muscle when you posted this same crap. Ive considered PS in the past and may consider it in the future but that has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Ive never said PS wasnt good, Ive actually posted the opposite. However your comments about the nonanabolic- nonandrogenic metabolites of DHEA being suppressive is false and the above studies show that whether you want to believe it or not.
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by Designer Supps View Post
    Im not in here because I think PS powder is hurting my sales, it isnt. Im here because you are lying, just like you were at mind and muscle when you posted this same crap. As I said I think PS is a good compound but at the moment there would be no reason for me to use it instead of something that is better. The only person getting embarrassed here is you.
    Yep, the same “crap” was posted on M&M and we came to the same conclusion – DHEA’s metabolites lower testosterone production.

    Here it is for anyone who wants to see -
    http://www.mindandmuscle.net/forum/i...howtopic=33280

    -Pp

  4. Care to prove that they are anti-androgenic?

  5. Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Care to prove that they are anti-androgenic?
    They may not be direct anti-androgens, but they can have anti-androgenic effects. Here is one study that shows 7-oxo DHEA raising epitestosterone. (there are more studies on this)

    Delayed effects of short-term transdermal application of 7-oxo-dehydroepiandrosterone on its metabolites, some hormonal steroids and relevant proteohormones in healthy male volunteers.
    J Sulcova, R Hampl, M Hill, L Starka, and A Novacek
    Clin Chem Lab Med, January 1, 2005; 43(2): 221-7.


    Epitestosterone is generally considered an "anti-androgen" because it doesn’t poses significant androgenic/anabolic activity.

    -Pp
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by Primordial Perf View Post
    Yep, the same “crap” was posted on M&M and we came to the same conclusion – DHEA’s metabolites lower testosterone production.

    Here it is for anyone who wants to see -
    http://www.mindandmuscle.net/forum/i...howtopic=33280

    -Pp
    Actually you were the only one who came to that conclusion.

    And there is another study that was mentioned in an article by David Tolson saying that there was no change in testosterone or estradiol levels and only T3 was increased (J Ex Physiology online. 1999 2(4). Double-Blind Study Evaluating the Effects of Exercise Plus 3-Acetyl-7-oxo-dehydroepiandrosterone on Body Composition and Endocrine System in Overweight Adults. Colker CM, Torina GC, Swain MA, Kalman DS.)

  7. Quote Originally Posted by Primordial Perf View Post
    They may not be direct anti-androgens, but they can have anti-androgenic effects. Here is one study that shows 7-oxo DHEA raising epitestosterone. (there are more studies on this)

    Delayed effects of short-term transdermal application of 7-oxo-dehydroepiandrosterone on its metabolites, some hormonal steroids and relevant proteohormones in healthy male volunteers.
    J Sulcova, R Hampl, M Hill, L Starka, and A Novacek
    Clin Chem Lab Med, January 1, 2005; 43(2): 221-7.


    Epitestosterone is generally considered an "anti-androgen" because it doesn’t poses significant androgenic/anabolic activity.

    -Pp
    LMAO. You are still quoting the same transdermal study. Transdermal application of 7OXO is not relevant to oral use.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by Designer Supps View Post
    Actually you were the only one who came to that conclusion.
    Really?

    I remember you saying you “dont recommend [7OH] for PCT”. Is this because you know it suppresses the HPTA?

    It’s funny you’re mentioning 7-oxo studies now. Earlier you refused to acknowledge the relationship between 7OH, 5AT and 7-oxo. I guess whatever’s convenient for you eh?

    -Pp

  9. Quote Originally Posted by Designer Supps View Post
    LMAO. You are still quoting the same transdermal study. Transdermal application of 7OXO is not relevant to oral use.
    The transdermal studies are relevant because they give a very clear picture of what happens when these DHEA metabolites get into the system (an amplified result of what happens when administered orally).

    Read the full text of any oral 7-oxo study. You will see the same general trend of reduced sex hormones, including a reduction in total Testosterone. It may not be significant enough to put in an abstract, but it’s a reduction of Testosterone none the less. This is enough to make me not want to use it for PCT, when minimizing suppression of the HPTA is critical.

    Phosphatidylserine has a clear benefit of being able to suppress cortisol release, while simultaneously increasing testosterone production. (This is at least a step in the right direction)

    If you have more studies or in-house blood tests for DHEA metabolites, feel free to post them up. As far as I can tell all the research has been laid on the table. At this point, it’s ultimately the consumer’s decision.

    -Pp


    Safety and pharmacokinetic study with escalating doses of 3-acetyl-7-oxo-dehydroepiandrosterone in healthy male volunteers.
    M Davidson, A Marwah, RJ Sawchuk, K Maki, P Marwah, C Weeks, and H Lardy
    Clin Invest Med, October 1, 2000; 23(5): 300-10.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by Primordial Perf View Post
    Phosphatidylserine has a clear benefit of being able to suppress cortisol release, while simultaneously increasing testosterone production. (This is at least a step in the right direction)

    Whoa, whoa, whoa, so PS is a test booster now?


    Studies please.

    And if you are using "HORMONAL EFFECTS OF PHOSPHATIDYLSERINE DURING 2-WKS OF INTENSE WEIGHT TRAINING" please provide the full text, I can't even access the abstract.


    Thanks

  11. Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Whoa, whoa, whoa, so PS is a test booster now?


    Studies please.

    And if you are using "HORMONAL EFFECTS OF PHOSPHATIDYLSERINE DURING 2-WKS OF INTENSE WEIGHT TRAINING" please provide the full text, I can't even access the abstract.


    Thanks
    Yes, but PS’s ability to increase testosterone is secondary in action. For instance, if you’re under any kind of physical or mental stress, PS will mitigate the drop in testosterone associated with the rise in cortisol… or perhaps increase testosterone if you’re suppressed from chronically high cortisol levels.

    -Pp

    Here is the abstract -

    HORMONAL EFFECTS OF PHOSPHATIDYLSERINE DURING 2-WKS OF INTENSE WEIGHT TRAINING
    [Annual Meeting Abstracts]
    Fahey, T. D.; Pearl, M.
    California State University, Chico

    A double-blind, crossover design study, measured the effects of 800 mg/d soybean derived phosphatidylserine (PS) or placebo (C) during 2-wk intense weight training on cortisol (CT), adrenocorticotropin hormone (ACTH), testosterone (TS), luteinizing hormone (LH), well-being (WB), and muscle soreness (MS) in 11 trained males. Subjects did 5 sets of 10 repetitions of 13 exercises, 4 times/wk for 2, 2-wk periods (3-wk recovery). Venous blood was sampled 6 mornings (T1-T6) and 15-min following the 8th work-out (T7). WB and MS were estimated using 10-point scales. CT was the same in PS and C in T1-T6 but decreased between T6 and T7 in PS (15.6 ± 1.7 to 10.0±0.9μg/dL, mean±SEM, P<0.05) but not in C. ACTH did not change in PS in T1-T7 but increased in C between T4 and T5-7 by over 50%. TS increased in PS between T1 (3.3±0.3 ng/mL) and T3 (4.4±0.5 ng/mL) and fell in both treatments between T3 and T7 (3.3±0.3 ng/mL, PS; 3.3±0.4, C). LH increased significantly between T1 (1.5±0.1 mlU/mL) and T6(2.2±0.3 mlU/mL) in PS but did not change in C. WB was greater in P than C in T2-T6. In C, WB at T3 was markedly depressed (4.9±0.8). MS increased in both treatments and was greater in C than PS at T2 (61%) and T5(55%). Cortisol decreased in PS after exercise, possibly by depressing ACTH. PS attenuated the negative effects of intense weight training on perception of well-being and muscle soreness

  12. Quote Originally Posted by Primordial Perf View Post
    Really?

    I remember you saying you “dont recommend [7OH] for PCT”. Is this because you know it suppresses the HPTA?

    It’s funny you’re mentioning 7-oxo studies now. Earlier you refused to acknowledge the relationship between 7OH, 5AT and 7-oxo. I guess whatever’s convenient for you eh?

    -Pp
    What I said was LX was not created as a PCT product although it can be used since it increases total testosterone, free testosterone, lowers estrogen, lowers cortisol, increases lean mass, decreases fat mass and helps to prevent futrure gains of fat. It doesnt suppress HPTA and you dont have a single study to show that it does. I dont sell hormones or products that suppress HPTA so I dont see the need in coming out with a product specifically to remedy that situation. However LX will work very well during PCT.

    You were the one who said the compounds were the same. I have repeatedly said that they are different. Since you dont understand the difference I can still prove that you are wrong just by using all of the 7OXO studies.

    Transdermal use isnt relevant because it prevents 7oxo from going through the liver. Its a HUGE difference but since you dont understand how these compounds work its easy to see why you are so confused.

  13. wow, am I the only one looking at this thinking it'a a bit immature? I think this sets in stone the fact that I will never buy a designer supplement product. I don;t even know what the hell you guys are talkign about, but even I can tell that you are going back and forth. Perhaps you BOTH have good supplements?

    E L E

  14. Quote Originally Posted by gibbob2 View Post
    wow, am I the only one looking at this thinking it'a a bit immature? I think this sets in stone the fact that I will never buy a designer supplement product. I don;t even know what the hell you guys are talkign about, but even I can tell that you are going back and forth. Perhaps you BOTH have good supplements?

    E L E
    nuff said.

    -Pp

  15. Designer Supplements has been around for a long time now and has produced many great products. He is trying to debunk information which is being presented by PP for the good of the board. I would side with Designer any day of the week over a new company like PP. And no one is debating if the products are good or not, but rather the information the PP is selling products by and saying it is so much better than LX when there is no science to back it up.

  16. Quote Originally Posted by joebo View Post
    Designer Supplements has been around for a long time now and has produced many great products. He is trying to debunk information which is being presented by PP for the good of the board. I would side with Designer any day of the week over a new company like PP. And no one is debating if the products are good or not, but rather the information the PP is selling products by and saying it is so much better than LX when there is no science to back it up.
    Exactly.

  17. Quote:
    Originally Posted by joebo
    If you could choose just one fat loss product that you have used in the past, what would it be? I'm looking to drop about 7 lbs and looking for a little help in doing so.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted By Designer Supps
    If youre going to be serious about your diet Ill send you a bottle of Adrenalean for free. Try it out and let me know how it worked towards the 7lbs of fatloss. PM me your addy if you are interested.

    Heres where I found this...
    If you could choose only one fat loss product...



    Yeah I would back a company too if they were given me free product. Primordial may be a new company but I have received nothing but good info and results from them...these bros know their stuff

  18. I've received free product from a lot of companies and in return have provided negative feedback on these companies. No one is debating the effectiveness of any product, but again the fact that the information that is being given to promote a product is misleading.

  19. Quote Originally Posted by vpower View Post
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by joebo
    If you could choose just one fat loss product that you have used in the past, what would it be? I'm looking to drop about 7 lbs and looking for a little help in doing so.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted By Designer Supps
    If youre going to be serious about your diet Ill send you a bottle of Adrenalean for free. Try it out and let me know how it worked towards the 7lbs of fatloss. PM me your addy if you are interested.

    Heres where I found this...
    If you could choose only one fat loss product...



    Yeah I would back a company too if they were given me free product. Primordial may be a new company but I have received nothing but good info and results from them...these bros know their stuff
    There is also this:
    Wanna get Adrenalean? Testers Wanted!!

    And a special on Nutraplanet for Adrenalean and a free t-shirt.

  20. There is nothing wrong with free products. What makes all this interesting is after gibbob2 shows support for PP, joebo comes in to support DS. All perfectly fine. However, when it is shown that joebo has a biased opinion, he responds with
    "I've received free product from a lot of companies and in return have provided negative feedback on these companies."
    Which is obviously untrue, shown by his comment 35 minutes earlier.

    But all this is in good fun, so who really cares?

  21. Quote Originally Posted by gibbob2 View Post
    wow, am I the only one looking at this thinking it'a a bit immature? I think this sets in stone the fact that I will never buy a designer supplement product. I don;t even know what the hell you guys are talkign about, but even I can tell that you are going back and forth. Perhaps you BOTH have good supplements?

    E L E

    neither are arguing which has better supps they have respect for each other in that aspect. they are just debating the science of compounds. just read and learn something instead of trying to turn this debate in to an argument.

    Thanks
    GJJ

  22. Quote Originally Posted by grila jujitsu View Post
    neither are arguing which has better supps they have respect for each other in that aspect. they are just debating the science of compounds. just read and learn something instead of trying to turn this debate in to an argument.

    Thanks
    GJJ
    Good Call. Lots of good info....a must read

  23. Quote Originally Posted by joebo View Post
    PP is selling products by and saying it is so much better than LX when there is no science to back it up.

    I never said PS was so much better than LX. To be fair, LX has a combination of ingredients which make it a totally different kind of product – it really is like comparing apples and oranges.

    I posted research that shows DHEA metabolites suppress testosterone production (7oxo which is related to 7OH and 5AT). Any educated member can refute these claims, but science is science and this is what the research shows, whether Designer Supps likes it or not.

    Designer Supps keeps crying BS, but posts no relevant research to support his stance. At this point I think we are beating a dead horse.

    -Pp

  24. Quote Originally Posted by Squires View Post
    There is nothing wrong with free products. What makes all this interesting is after gibbob2 shows support for PP, joebo comes in to support DS. All perfectly fine. However, when it is shown that joebo has a biased opinion, he responds with
    "I've received free product from a lot of companies and in return have provided negative feedback on these companies."
    Which is obviously untrue, shown by his comment 35 minutes earlier.

    But all this is in good fun, so who really cares?
    I obviously don't post negative if the product works, but I was trying to get across that I have recieved product for free to test which didn't live up to what it should have and in return I've posted my honest feedback which was negative for the product. It has nothing to do with DS or PP. I honestly could care less about either company, but moreso about the products they create. I have no loyalty to any company. if you make a good product I will purchase it. I do however believe DS to have a very deep background in the sciences and not knowing much about PP, I would tend to trust DS before PP. Who is ultimately right, I don't know.

    On a side note, if you believe I have a biased opinion towards any company because they will provide a free bottle of product to log, then you might as well disregard most members on this board as most have participated in sponsored logs, so in turn we have a board of biased members.

  25. Quote Originally Posted by joebo View Post
    I obviously don't post negative if the product works, but I was trying to get across that I have recieved product for free to test which didn't live up to what it should have and in return I've posted my honest feedback which was negative for the product. It has nothing to do with DS or PP. I honestly could care less about either company, but moreso about the products they create. I have no loyalty to any company. if you make a good product I will purchase it. I do however believe DS to have a very deep background in the sciences and not knowing much about PP, I would tend to trust DS before PP. Who is ultimately right, I don't know.

    On a side note, if you believe I have a biased opinion towards any company because they will provide a free bottle of product to log, then you might as well disregard most members on this board as most have participated in sponsored logs, so in turn we have a board of biased members.
    very well said joebo. I'm with you Im not on any companies side. I do understand Ps is a great compound. I also understand Lean extreme is as well. Both lower cortisol and lean xtreme has some other compounds that increase fat burning and testosterone, like . From my understanding the studies show a eight percent decrease in test levels from TRANSDermal, not oral. Eight percent is basically nothing and the eight percent could be from anything. ie the guys may have not gotten enough sleep, or been exposed to lawn moving chemicals, etc many other factors. regardless eight percent did not come from the oral use and only the tub on use , is my understanding correct?
    Millennium Sport Technologies Representative
    Mind and Muscle Code AM10
    Classic Physique competitor, Facebook- Great Physique Fitness, Online coaching
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. IYO, what's the best cortisol blocker?
    By bluehealer in forum Supplements
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 02-27-2013, 06:13 PM
  2. How important is a cortisol blocker for PCT?
    By Lithuanian Bear in forum Supplements
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-26-2008, 06:31 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-31-2005, 03:29 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-15-2005, 08:48 AM
  5. Cortisol blockers?
    By Thracian in forum Post Cycle Therapy
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-28-2005, 08:35 PM
Log in
Log in