[BigVrunga]

Has anyone successfully brewed up their own gel using Carbomer940? Ive been reading and searching as much as I could, and the best instuructions I could find were in this thread:

Help with making gel

It sounds simple enough. I tried an 8Oz test run, (I mixed all the ingredients together, adjusted the PH, and then tried adding the Carbomer 940 to no avail - which isnt what's recommended but once I saw that Carbomer clump up I know what people are talking about when they say its a pain in the ass)

Using this reciepe:
Isopropyl Alcohol 40%
Isopropyl Myristrate 12%
Isopropyl Palmitate 12%
Oleic Acid 10%
Propylene glycol 10%
DMSO 10%
D-Limolene 6%

Im about to just order some spray heads from lemelange and go with a spray, just to get my cycle started. Also considering adding PEG400 to the mix.

Any advice??

BV

[BigVrunga]

Well, gave another shot following these directions:

Carbomer 940 can be used to gel a mix better than 934.
Mix .5 g carbomer to the 10% gycerol and mix well.
It will take up to 15 minutes for the carbomer to wet and disperse
Adjust the pH of this initial mix to 7.2-7.4 with triethanolamine or a drop or two of NaOH
Add this to the rest of the ingredients and check pH again.
If you use OA the pH will instantly drop to acidic and you will have to adjust again.
If gelling the brew be sure to use an adequate volume of d-Limonene as this is the emulsifier that allows the water and oil based ingredients to mix.

When making a gel the order of addition is very important.
First, add the carbomer to the PG/glycerol/PEG-400 and allow to "wet".
If you are not using a hand mixer it will take up to 30 minutes to properly wet. Mix well.
Second, add the other water soluble ingredients and mix well. Adjust with the TEA (triethanolamine)
...usually it will take about 1 mL per gram of carbomer give or take a bit. It will gel immediately.
I would not recommend adding the DMSO until the end as polar compounds (DMSO and i-prop) tend to make the carbomer clump.
After it gels add the oil soluble ingredients and mix well. Voila! A lotion is born!
Chemo

And still no success!! I was using NaOH to basify, and I dont think that's a good idea. Adding all the water-soluble ingredients together (except the IPA and DMSO, I tried to bring the PH up to 7.4 and after a few drops of concentrated NaOH solution, a white precipitate fell out of the solution.

I think triethanolamine is the only way to go here. Plus, the lithmus paper I have dosent seem to read PH properly once greasy materials like P.Glycol, IPM, and IPP are added to the mix.

Any way, I tried mixing everything together, and I got a murky whiteish solution, and big glop of clear gel at the bottom. I added NaOH dropwise with constant stirring trying to get it to dissolve, but nothing.

In order to do this right, Im going to need triethanolamine and a good digital PH meter,and its too much of a hassle.

So spray it is!! Ill work on this gel stuff later, considering I already have the Carbomer940.

BV

[DR.D]

Well, gave another shot following these directions:



And still no success!! I was using NaOH to basify, and I dont think that's a good idea. Adding all the water-soluble ingredients together (except the IPA and DMSO, I tried to bring the PH up to 7.4 and after a few drops of concentrated NaOH solution, a white precipitate fell out of the solution.

I think triethanolamine is the only way to go here. Plus, the lithmus paper I have dosent seem to read PH properly once greasy materials like P.Glycol, IPM, and IPP are added to the mix.

Any way, I tried mixing everything together, and I got a murky whiteish solution, and big glop of clear gel at the bottom. I added NaOH dropwise with constant stirring trying to get it to dissolve, but nothing.

In order to do this right, Im going to need triethanolamine and a good digital PH meter,and its too much of a hassle.

So spray it is!! Ill work on this gel stuff later, considering I already have the Carbomer940.

BV

Add more NaOH to thicken the gel, but I was never able to make a good high capacity gel with a number of carbomers. Liquids can hold much greater concentrations. I may try some other matrix one day, maybe HPC or something, I'll let you know if it works, but I'd say don't waste you time bud.

[BigVrunga]

Thanks for the input once again, Dr.D. I agree, the spray has just as good or better absorption and is FAR less of a pain to mix in your kitchen. Ive been looking into MethylCellulose as another gelling agent, seems like that's what's most often used in commercial gel-type products, like lotions and soaps. Maybe adding some PEG400 might increase the solubility of products in the gel?

Im going to give it one more shot. Starting with 50ML DH2O, adding .5g Carbomer940 and then bringing up the PH until I get a gel. Then, Ill add my water soluble ingredients, D-Lim, Proylene Glycol and finally Oleic Acid. We'll see what happens!

For those that are interested, here's some info on why Carbomer and MethyCellulose work the way they do, and some info on how to use them in a solution:

http://www.chemistrystore.com/Using%...lcellulose.htm

http://www.personalcare.noveoninc.co...inalsafety.pdf

Thanks,
BV

[BigVrunga]

Partial success!!! Added 1/4tsp Carbomer940 to 50ml DH20, let it sit for 10minutes after some vigorous stirring. Added 5 drops Concentrated NaOH, and VIOLA! Superthick gel!!! Nice!

Mixed in 30ml IPA, and it stayed in gel form.

Now, Im trying this:

Started with 97ml 91% IPA, added 1/2tsp Carbomer940. I thought about it, and I dont know what ingredient in the original to replace with the DH20. So, if I can gel up the 97IPA I need, and then each ingredient one at a time I may have it. Water solubles first, then the D-Lim, then the PG. After each ingredient, if I see the solution start to crash, Ill add NaOH dropwise until it goes back to a gel.

Hmmm...its crazy, but it just might work!

BV

[BigVrunga]

YES! Ive got a beaker with 240mL of a creamy white lotion that looks, feels, smells, evaporates, and burns exactly like the original BDC T-gel. Whoohoo!!

Basically, the original liquid transdermal recipe is not suited to gelling with Carbomer, it has to be modified.

I started with 25ml DH2O and added 1/4tsp Carbomer940. After this had become throroughly saturated, I brought the PH up with a concentrated NaOH solution (1tsp NaOH in 50ml DH20). The solution became a thick gel immediated after about 4drops of NaOH.

Then I added 75ml 91% IPA, which thinned out the gel a bit and mixed right in. Started adding 23ml Oleic Acid next, and the solution broke up into a clumpy gel, started to turn a milky white.

I added the Oleic Acide a little at a time,adding NaOH dropwise each time to bring the PH up and put the mix back into a gel. I had to add about 1.5ml NaOH before I came back to a smooth consistency.

Started to add IPM, and it would not mix with the gel. After some thorough mixing, nothing. I added a little DH2O and it went right in. That was the key. Still a bit clumpy though. Added more NaOH and it smoothed out a little bit, but still not what I wanted. I had about 100ml of gel that I had made earlier from 50ml dH2O, Carbomer, and IPA. I dumped the solution I was working on (about 125ml worth) in with this and mixed it together, and the extra IPAgel gave it a nice consistency. It seemed a little out of solution (some IPM and IPP wouldnt go in) - a little more dH2O fixed that up.

I took 175ml of this IPM/IPP/IPA/Oleic Acid gel and poured it into a separate beaker. To this I added 25ml DMSO, which mixed right in. Added 15ml D-Limolene, and finally 25ml Propylene Glycol, which mixed nicely thanks to the D-Lim and gave the gel a nice, smooth, lotion-like thickness. No clumping whatsoever, its perfectly smooth and has properties very similar to T-Gel.

Broke out my digital PH meter, measured the PH of the final mix at ~5.8

So, the PG,DMSO,and D-Lim are still at their original concentrations of 10%,10%,and 6%. The IPA,IPM,IPP,and OA have all been cut with dH2O to facilitate gelling with the Carbomer. I dont have exact measurements yet, but I can estimate that its more like:


IPA 25%
IPM 9%
IPP 2%
OA 8%
DMSO 10%
PG 10%
D-Lim 6%
dH2O 30%

I dont know how much the PH solubility or absorption was affected by cutting with water - Im pretty sure that since the DMSO is still at 10% it wouldnt be reduced from the original formula.

It evaporates quickly and leaves the skin feeling soft and slightly greasy. It burns a bit at first, but so did T1 the first few times I applied it.

Now Ill mix up some spray (WAY less of a hassle!!), and see which one I like better.

BV

[BigVrunga]

That's kind of what I did by gelling up water and IPA initially. Its the OA that drops the PH, but its also a penetration enhancer so its not something you want to leave out.

You dont have to add a lot of base to get the solution to gel, I just kept stirring and adding NaOH drop by drop and it gels as soon as the proper PH is reached. Initially gelling the Carbomer in H2O and IPA made a huge difference, though.

You could make a decent gel from H2O,IPA,DMSO,DLim,and PG but I dont know how effective it would be.

BV

[BigVrunga]

It could work - Sodium Bicarbonate is a weaker base than NaOH, but then again is is triethanolamine, which is the base most often used in cosmetics. You might have to add too much Sodium Bicarbonate, which could affect the solubility of the PH's you're trying to dissolve in the gel.

The issue here is - you might have to initially buffer the water/carbomer solution too high in order for it to stay in gel form after adding the oleic acid. If the PH goes too high, the carbomer will precipitate right out of the mix.

An idea might be to mix the Oleic acid/water FIRST, then bring that to a PH of 7.5 - 8 and try to gel that with the carbomer. THEN add IPA,IPM. Once you get the IPM mixed in you're golden - the other products gel up just fine. I did water/carbomer into a gel, and then IPA, then the Oleic. After gelling the Oleic acid, I didnt really need to adjust the PH again.

The final PH of my mix was around 5.8, which is right about what commercial lotions and soaps are at.


BV

[BigVrunga]

Klaus,
I understand what you're getting at - it could work very well but I dont have the materials to experiment with it at the moment.

From what Ive seen, PH isnt so much of an issue with making the gel. Its that a good concentration of H2O has to be present in order for all the ingredients in the orignal BDC spray recipe to gel correctly. If there isnt enough water, you can add as much base as you want and all you'll get is a clumpy mess.

Im going to try and nail down a reliable method here - so far its:

1.)dH2O/Carbomer
2.)adjust PH until a gel forms
3.)add IPA
4.)add Oleic acid
5.)adjust PH until it goes back into a gel
6.)add IPM/IPP
7.)add water until smooth
8.)add DMSO(10%)
9.)add D-Limoene(6%)
10.)add PG(10%)

You dont need an electric mixer or anything, I was using a glass stir rod and everything mixed just fine.

Now, to see if 10g of 4AD will dissolve in the gel I just made...

BV

[DR.D]

Oh, I was under the impression that pH was causing the clumpiness, not the H2O concentration. Hmm... that does make it a bit more complicated.

Yes, it is, but after a certain inflection point, the pH has no greater gelling effect. In fact, after about 7.5 it's detrimental.

[DR.D]

Yes, a good case indeed! I was thinking dibasic potassium phosphate, but I'm not sure what it would do to the formula dynamics. Only with the IPM would it work for sure I'd say. These more complex formulas create a lot of stability issues. I don't remember the effective pH range for penetration, but the optimum is slightly acidic I'd guess, so maybe another buffer than what I was thinking would be better. Solubility characteristics will be the limiting factor.

[BigVrunga]

I think its a great idea, but the PH of the solution really isnt that big of an issue from what Ive seen.

The PH was causing the clumpiness to a degree, but the added H2O is what allowed the IPA/OA/H2O gel to mix with the other ingredients.

With Carbomer and PH, I noticed that too acidic of a solution caused the gel to break up into 'globs'. The carbomer was still dissolved, but it was very clumpy. Too high of a PH, and the Carbomer crashed out of solution.

Without enough H2O, the IPM/IPP wouldnt mix with the gel.
The average PH of your skin is 5.5, I think that's ideal for most lotions. Dont know what the ideal for penetration enhancement is, though.

[BigVrunga]

Well, 10g of 4AD wouldnt go into the gel. It took about 6 grams and then started to separate. I finally got 10g in about 320ml of gel, which is definately less than ideal!

Im going to give this another shot with PEG400.

BV

[DR.D]

You may need to increase the alcohol concentration, or dissolve you hormones in the alcohol before you add. Like I said, I experimented a lot with this years ago, but then decided, why? What's wrong with solution? I know that works and could think of no real advantage in the gel. Even had I figured it out, I couldn't think of an application where I'd favor it over the liquid. If you look at the EtOH concentration of Rx AndroGel, they use 68.9% and that's only at 1% test! It takes too long to dry also and requires a big surface area. Why not make a high-power liquid w/ 10%+ concentrations capacity to cover small, thin areas? Nevertheless, if you get the formula right, let me know and I'll probably try it anyway! I'd think that the alcohol content will have to be kept as high as possible and water minimized. Also, have you thought of using alternate acids like cap or lin in place of the OA?

[BigVrunga]

I'd think that the alcohol content will have to be kept as high as possible and water minimized.

You're right - my mix had too high a concentration of water. I may have been able to get 1test or OH test in there, but its not happening with 4AD, which dosent like to dissolve in anything!

I cant see any advantage over the gel either, but I just want to be able to say:

"Oooh, I made my own gel!"

Ive already justified my $5.00 purchase of carbomer940 by wasting $8.50 of 4AD.

Im giving the gel one more go - already have the pump sprayers on order from Lememlange in order to use the liquid. The original homebrew formula has near 30% absorption, so there is no need to play around. But then again where's the fun in that?

I ordered a bottle of PEG400 to see if I cant up the solubility of the original formula a bit.

BV

Also, have you thought of using alternate acids like cap or lin in place of the OA

Thought of it, but I dont want to spend any more $$ and Ive already got the OA. Good thing with homebrewing you buy in bulk - I think Ive got enough material to make 17 8Oz bottles of transdermal spray, for the cost of 6 bottles of pre-made gel.

[DR.D]

Yeah, it's fun to order bulk materials and play with different ideas. As long as it's cheap, your just have to spend the time really, but that's good and that's how you develope insight. You already got way more advanced with this than I did, I was only experimenting with 4 or 5 reagents in my formula!

Klaus is right about the right buffer being a good idea, not only to stabilize the gel but also for making 'universal' gels that could support different actives. But solubility of the hormone is going to be the intrinsic problem I think. If you had a super potent hormone, it would be better because only low concentration would be required.

[BigVrunga]

Ugh, I tried doing the gel again, this time with Chemo's exact instructions from the 'Recipe...' thread. Not even close. The carbomer HAS to initially mix and gel with water before it even gets off the ground.

Thing is, if you have to dilute your overall transdermal mix with H2O in order to make a proper gel, then what's the point of making a gel? There's got to be a magic ratio of ingredients, I think I almost hit it the last time...

I need to make 9 8Oz bottles of transdermal formula for myself, my bro, and a friend. So Im going to have to go with a spray for sure now, because I dont want to waste any more products. If I have some stuff left over Ill mess around with trying to find a good gel formulation, I think Im on the right track -

Tried 4 times to make the gel, and came very close once. I wonder if I took 2% from each ingredient, and added 14% PEG400 if Id have the solubility Im after. But then again, would I be negatively affecting skin penetration effectivenes in favor of hormone solubility?

BV

[DR.D]

If I took from anything, it would be the lim, fatty acid and water to increase alcohol. What's your carbomer concentration? If it's less that 1%, you could up it a little too to accommodate. Also, are you stirring the heck out of it for like hours to get it real smooth first?

[Cuffs]

Hey BigV. Hurry up and figure this out, I'm losing patience.

If I remember right, Chemo talked about using an electric mixer to blend the ingrediants. I don't know if that would help.

[BigVrunga]

I didnt think it did bro. I dumped everything in my blender and whipped it up like mad, still wouldnt go into a gel! And that's following Chemo's exact instructions from the 'Recipe...' thread.

I did succeed in making the gel, but 8Oz would only hold about 6g of 4AD. Im sure, with proper tweaking of the recipe, I could nail it. The key is in the amount of water in the mix. To get maximum solubility with the 'Traditional' spray recipe, you've got to find a way to minimize the H2O and maximize the IPA.

4AD is an extreme pain in the ass when it comes to dissolving, as it isnt really soluble in any of the ingredients by themselves at room temp...Chemo is truly a freaking mastermind - finding a way to dissolve 10g of 4AD in 4Oz of gel!!! I think a big part of it is the PEG400, as Ive read him saying on the board how he got 15g of 4AD to dissolve in just a PEG400 and IPA solution.

If I took from anything, it would be the lim, fatty acid and water to increase alcohol. What's your carbomer concentration? If it's less that 1%, you could up it a little too to accommodate. Also, are you stirring the heck out of it for like hours to get it real smooth first?

Hey Dr.D...had the carbomer at 1g for the 240ml of gel. And yeah, I stirred it like a bastard! The method I outlined here:

1.)dH2O/Carbomer
2.)adjust PH until a gel forms
3.)add IPA
4.)add Oleic acid
5.)adjust PH until it goes back into a gel
6.)add IPM/IPP
7.)add water until smooth
8.)add DMSO(10%)
9.)add D-Limoene(6%)
10.)add PG(10%)

worked great, the gel had a great consistency, it just didnt have the solubility that we really need. I know I used too much water, and could probably find the right mix with a little more trial and error. I didnt get the exact amount of water in the mix, either, the gel I was working on started to separate when I added the IPM, and I added a little water and it went right into a gel. The PG made the texture nice and smooth, very 'T-Gel' like.

I wanted to ask you - what is the advantage of using triethanolamine over NaOH? I know that triethanolamine is used in the cosmetic industry to adjust PH, is it better for the skin?

For now, the gel experiment has to go on the back burner. Im making this full out homebrew cycle for myself, my brother, and a friend, and I realized last night I have about 1000 gel caps to whip up with my cap-m-quick. And I can do 50 every 20 minutes. There really isnt any advantage of a gel over a spray, other than a gel might be a little nicer to apply. But, with the spray, you have the concentrated skin conditioners/penetration enhancers with no H2O added to the mix. I would estimate that the transdermal absorption % of the homebrew spray w/DMSO is pretty close to the new T-Gel. Plus, its SO much easier to work with a liquid when transferring from your glassware to the spraybottle.

Still, though - gels are just so cool

So, for the transdermal mix Im going to go with the original spray recipe, with some PEG400 added to the mix. If I have some materials left over, Ill try to get the gel down.

I got it to point, maybe we can all work on it (possibly even incorprating Klaus' buffered base-gel idea), and come up with the ultimate homebrew gel recipe! That would make a phat sticky!

BV

[DR.D]

Nice R&D Mr.BV!

[Wimpie]

Heya BV, I second the nice work nod, thanks for taking this to the next level.

One observation that I made was a comparison of your "Frankengel" ingredients and those on the T-Gel label. Considering that ingredients are listed by volume, it may be that D-Limonene acts as a solvent and may contribute to greater PH dispersion. Water is another of the top ingredients which reflect what you have found with your gel attempts. Perhaps fine tuning the ingredients, ala T-Gel, would be beneficial.

IPA - Solvent
D-Limonene - Emulsifier and possible solvent.
IPM - Penetration enhancer.
DI Water - ?
Ocytl Salicylate - Penetration enhancer/skin conditioner?
DMFA - Penetration enhancer, some say better than DMSO.
Triethanolamine - PH
Carbomer 940 - Thickening
INCI Polymer - Thickening?

Wimpie

[BigVrunga]

Thanks for the kind words guys...It really would be sweet if we could come up with a complete Homebrew Gel formula that worked 100%. Looks like a little more effort and we're there!

Hey Wimpie - heh...'Frakengel'...

I was looking over the ingredients for the new T-Gel, and I also notice that Oleic Acid isnt in the list. I wonder if its omitted because it throws the PH off too far, causing you to use too much base? That could limit solubility as well...

Im curious about the DMFA...isnt that N,N,dimethylformamide? IF that's the case, check out the MSDS:

https://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/95221.htm

Now compare that to DMSO, which isnt toxic at all. I think I would rather stick with the DMSO!

I did a little research on the D-Limolene too, check it out:
http://www.floridachemical.com/whatisd-limonene.htm

Looks like its a fairly potent organic solvent!! That could definately explain the great solubility of the new T-Gel, and the higher concentration of D-Lim in the mix.

Its common knowledge that PEG400 is a very effective solvent for hormone bases - Ive already got some on order, Im going to try adding it to the liquid transdermal recipe. Thinking of taking 2% from the PG, 4% from the IPA, and 2% from the IPP and adding it to the mix in an 8% concentration.

Yeah, like you said Wimpie the gel mix only needs a little more time and effort to get it right...Does anyone know of a relatively insoluble product (similar to 4AD) that's dirt cheap that we could use to test future gel experiments? Id hate having to continue to throw good PH's away after a failed attempt.

BV

[DR.D]

Im curious about the DMFA...isnt that N,N,dimethylformamide?
BV

Yeah, if people are putting this on thier skin, it's far more toxic than DMSO. So what if you get a little better absorb?! It carries a value of 3 out of a possible 4 on the health warning, and sounds pretty nasty. I work in a lab and even double glove when I use that ****! Why do people favor it now?

[BigVrunga]

I dont know...maybe they dont know what it really is? I havent heard of a lot of people complaing of high blood pressure, vomiting, dizziness, etc while using any of the DMFA gels...maybe its a different chemical altogether?

I dont know though, I dont know of any other chemical called DMFA.

Id definately like a clear answer on this one!

BV

[Brodus]

Wow...this whole DMFA thing has got me thinking hard. I double-checked and found a bunch of stuff, too:

http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/tac/factshts/dimthfor.pdf

"Cancer: An increase in testicular germ-cell tumors, and cancers of the pharynx or buccal cavity were reported in workers exposed to dimethyl formamide."

[BigVrunga]

Tell me about it bro - either the DMFA used in the newer gels isnt dimethylformamide, or they didnt read the MSDS before throwing it in as an ingredient! This is from the link in your post Brodus:

Probable routes of human exposure to dimethyl formamide are inhalation and dermal contact.

Non-Cancer: Dimethyl formamide is a potent liver toxicant in humans. Acute overexposure caused liver damage in humans. Symptoms of acute exposure in humans include abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, jaundice, alcohol intolerance, and rashes. Dermal exposure may result in dermatitis in humans. Damage to the liver, kidneys, and lungs has been observed in animals acutely exposed to dimethyl formamide by inhalation (U.S. EPA, 1994a).

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) has established a Reference Concentration (RfC) of 0.03 milligrams per cubic meter, based on digestive disturbances and liver effects in humans. The U.S. EPA estimates that inhalation of this concentration or less, over a lifetime, would not likely result in the occurrence of chronic non-cancer effects. The U.S. EPA has not established an oral Reference Dose (RfD) for dimethyl formamide.

The one available study on adverse reproductive effects of dimethyl formamide in humans that reported an increased rate of spontaneous abortions among exposed pregnant women was complicated by concomitant exposure to a number of additional chemicals. In rats exposed by inhalation, reduced implantation efficiency, decreased mean fetal weight, and increased abortions have been reported. In rabbits, exposed by gavage, decreased mean fetal weight and increased percentage of malformed live fetuses per litter and increased percentage of litters with malformed fetuses were observed in the high-dose group (U.S. EPA, 1994a).

Cancer: An increase in testicular germ-cell tumors, and cancers of the pharynx or buccal cavity were reported in workers exposed to dimethyl formamide. The U.S. EPA has not classified dimethyl formamide with respect to its carcinogenicity (U.S. EPA, 1994a).

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified dimethyl formamide in Group 2B: Possible human carcinogen based upon limited human evidence (IARC, 1989b).
416

It does say that the EPA found that concentrations of less than .03mg per m^3 didnt result in any percieved side effects. That's for inhalation though, I dont know how that would translate to dermal contact.

If its liver toxic, and its used to enhance transdermal delivery of products that we know already stress the liver - then that definately isnt good at all.

I havent heard of anyone having any adverse reactions to any of the newer gels though - so perhaps its in a concentration that is deemed safe, or its a different chemical altogether.

We should find out though...

BV

[Brodus]

Agreed. Chemo is a smart guy; I have a hard time believing this info slipped by him.

On the other hand, I read last night the dermal exposure to 20% solution gave workers a whole host of side effects.

Very interested in this development...Custom's $22 8-ounce gel is now becoming more attractive! That plus a DMSO roll on, and you're good to go.

[BigVrunga]

Agreed. Chemo is a smart guy; I have a hard time believing this info slipped by him.

That's what Im thinking - why would he choose to go with a potentially dangerous chemical in the name of a less smelly, more potent dermal brew? Id rather taste garlic in my mouth all day long than rub dimethylformamide on my skin!

On the other hand, I read last night the dermal exposure to 20% solution gave workers a whole host of side effects.

Im assuming the concentration of DMFA in T-Gel is lower than that. But still, if its the DMFA that we're talking about, I wouldnt go near the stuff without a fume hood and an organic vapor mask.

Very interested in this development...Custom's $22 8-ounce gel is now becoming more attractive! That plus a DMSO roll on, and you're good to go.

You can get some sweet roll on bottles from minoxidil.com for like $.90 apiece.

If you look at the recipe to the new T-Gel, which holds 10g of PH's in 4Oz of gel, you can see that D-Lim and IPA are the top ingredients. Both are non-toxic, potent solvents and I think this is key to its solubility. With a little more effort, perhaps we can come up with a homebrew gel recipe that can dissolve nearly as much product.

Then again, there's the whole issue of the higher concentration = less transdermal absorption. It is better to spread the PH's out over as large a surface area as possible. Less product dissolved in more carrier would lead to a better absorption %, I think.

BV

[ShadowJack]

Tell me about it bro - either the DMFA used in the newer gels isnt dimethylformamide, or they didnt read the MSDS before throwing it in as an ingredient!

Here are several links for you to review, where Chemo has previously addressed the DMFA concerns:

First, let me address your toxiticity/carcinogen question:

• OSHA has specified a PEL (permissible exposure limit, skin) to be 30 mg/m2.  Each squirt from an LG brew will deliver ~18 mg so we are within limits.  Keep in mind, OSHA sets the limits based on an assumed occupation with constant exposure so they feel as though 30 mg on the skin is acceptable and we have used about half of that amount (18 mg).
• The compound is listed in group 2B ("possible carcinogen") and does not meet the criteria for a select carcinogen.  One fact you're not taking into account in those studies that indicate a carcinogenic effect is the amount of exposure as well as the length of exposure.  Look a little deeper and you will find that the extremely high levels maintained for extended times are used to INDUCE the activity.  Bottom line is don't take a bath in DMFA and definitely don't fall asleep in the tub if you do!
• For a moment let's compare the sides associated with our old friend DMSO:
  may cause vomiting, chills, headache, and dizziness...vomiting, abdominal pain, and lethargy...itching, scaling, and a transient burning sensation...irritation with redness, pain, and blurred vision...Chronic exposure to dimethyl sulfoxide can cause damage to the cornea of the eye.
  
  Yet it is used daily to great success given the proper ratio and the fact most do not overused or abuse it....DMFA is the same.  It lists the possible bad effects as a matter of convention and it is up to you to sort through and determine the amount that is acceptable to you so as to eliminate or reduce the possibility of replicating those bad sides.
  
  Would you let some bro say, "I gained 40 pounds of mass in a 12 week cycle!" without questioning him as to what he was on and how much?  My point here is not only is the effect of great importance but also the dose.  In the case of DMFA, look at the studies and compare the exposure amounts and length of time to what would be typical of an LG brew.  You will see the amounts are not even in the same ballpark...hell, not even in the same world.  I have seen one study go as high as 40,000 mg of exposure for a RAT for weeks at a time before carcinogenic activity was recorded.  My only question is HOW THEY GOT 40 GRAMS OF DMFA ON A RAT??  That is over 42 mL of pure DMFA...there is not enough skin area on a rat unless it were forced to literally swim in it!  Use these numbers as your baseline for comparison: .18 mg applied, 5 minutes exposure time

If you have any questions ask them quick since I will be gone after Friday with only sporadic visitation on the board.

Chemo

Link to thread: New Gel Penetration Enhancers??

============================== =============

Geez Michael...

Let me summarize the OSHA INFORMATION BULLETIN. There are actually 2 studies presented by this bulletin. The first addresses workers at an aircraft repair facility where they were exposed to inhalation of pure DMFA. The second deals with leather workers that were also exposed to inhalation of pure DMFA.

Factors that increase the possibility of testicular cancer:

• family history of abnormalities
• history of hernia
• mumps
• maternal hyperemesis gravidarum
• prenatal ionizing radiation exposure
• rural residence
• exposure to pesticides or unrefined petroleum products
• testicular trauma
• wearing jockey-type undershorts
• bicycle or horseback riding

According to the bulletin, riding a bike regularly is just as bad as inhaling pure DMFA for 3-15 years. In case you don't know...your lungs are much more efficient in getting things into your body than applying them to your skin. After all, your skin is designed specifically to keep things out. At a minimum we can conclude that application of DMFA to the skin should not be in excess of 3 years continuously. If one felt the need to dose a lotion for that long it would be in their best interest to look into other life saving measures such as therapy for their low self esteem.

STUDY #1 - AIRCRAFT REPAIRMEN

• 3 men were diagnosed with testicular cancer.
• They set the time required for exposure at 3 years continuously before onset of symptoms. 3 YEARS!!!

STUDY #2 - LEATHER TANNER WORKERS

• 3 men were diagnosed with testicular cancer
• In the first case, the man inhaled pure DMFA for 13 years before onset of symptoms.
• In the second case, the man inhaled pure DMFA for 14 years before onset of symptoms.
• In the third case, the man inhaled pure DMFA for 8 years before onset of symptoms.

As a direct comparison for applying a diluted solution containing DMFA this bulletin is poor. It does shed some valuable insight into the safety of the compound however. First, it should be common knowledge that inhalation standards are MUCH, MUCH lower due to the efficiency of your lungs at getting gasses into your body (and out). So, after 3-14 years of continuous inhalation there will be some complications.

DO NOT INHALE A BDC LOTION FOR 3-14 YEARS CONTINUOUSLY.

DO NOT APPLY A BDC LOTION FOR 3-14 YEARS CONTINUOUSLY.

Link to thread: OSHA warning on DMFA

============================== =============

Keep in mind that all the studies use a pure liquid for a standard. In this respect the amount that evaporates after application is negligible. Given the forumula will dispense about 18 mg per squirt (yes the .18 was a typo) one could expect about 30-40% loss due to the volatility of the compound (much like i-prop). This depends on such factors as any breeze on the application area, how vigorously it is rubbed in, and anything else that makes it evaporate at an accelerated rate which would decrease its amount accordingly.

The fact is that the amount included was based on OSHA recommendations for liquid exposure. Now, if you are not familiar with OSHA they always recommend very low limits and are acceptable amounts for CONTINUOUS exposure and no undesirable side effects. The cited 30 mg is the amount OSHA has deemed to be safe for continuous exposure...not the break point for carcinogenic activity which is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH higher (as some are trying to associate with the formula).

Chemo

Mike,

The level of DMFA is within the OSHA limits. Are you saying that the ingredients in your line do not come close to the OSHA exposure levels?

Link to thread (on bb.com): Lgp 4-ad+

============================== =============

Using your oral values and assuming a few conditions such as 100% transdermal absorbance, no loss on application, etc. would mean that a person would apply a DMFA transdermal product for 41 months continuously before that amount is dosed. If one felt the need to cycle a transdermal for almost 4 years straight that person should rather seek professional therapy.

Shall we consider the possible acute effects of dosing a 17-alkylated compound versus 1 bottle of a transdermal DMFA product? The fact is that dosing a methylated product presents a far greater chance of liver damage...especially when you consider that most of the consumers are PH based and have no idea how to listen to their bodies for signs of liver damage. The industry has created an atmosphere where thousands of uneducated, non-experienced beginners have potent 17-alklated compounds at their discretion...and for $10 a bottle.

Which is the greater of two evils: a month cycle of 17-alkylated oral steroids or transdermal DMFA lotion??

Chemo

To be perfectly blunt, I have only 2 posts on this thread with this one being magic number 3...hardly every ounce of strength defending DMFA.

As for being a scientist: you should know that true scientific work is seldom true innovation and is instead an extension of peer experimentation. Caleb based his innovation in using transdermal delivery of prohormones on commercial application (nicotine patch, birth control, etc.). Does that make his initial product release any less valid since he borrowed the idea from the pharmaceutical industry? Clearly not...since he trusted the work of scientists that came before him. That is how scienctific procedure continues to affect progress. In the scientific community it is not stealing ideas or being a cheap competitor...it is proving concept and affording peer reviewed data for forward progress.

With respect to my decision to include DMFA in my lotions: it was based on OSHA recommendations and the forumula is in compliance with their recommendations. I trust the abilities of the scientists that compiled the data and submitted the results in the name of the federal government.

BTW, there is no true innovation in the nutrition (specifically prohormone) industry...merely a lot of firsts for phamaceutical delivery methods applied toward prohormone delivery. The true innovators are the scientists that published their work for everyone's review/reference...do you disagree?

Chemo

Link to thread (on bb.com): Legal gear & dmso

============================== ==============

And there is one more thread at Avant, where Bobo re-posted Chemo's explanation: BDC's New Topical Gels