Chemical formula for "The One"?

SOLARUS

Member
i've been searching but can't find it in any threads....also, on AN's website, you can't get the label information.

could somebody post what the bottle says on it? "prohormone to DHT" is REALLY vague....hell, andro is 2 conversions away, DHEA is 3...

i would like to know what i'm ingesting....granted, the results speak for themselves, but still.

also, is the compound in Vida?
 
hydroxyimine? that's a new one on me.

looks like a very close relative of phera-plex....and judging by the reviews, it seems to have a very similar pharmacologic action.

has anyone tried both?
 
The ONE: What is it? Threads. Label information.

SOLARUS said:
i've been searching but can't find it in any threads....also, on AN's website, you can't get the label information.

could somebody post what the bottle says on it? "prohormone to DHT" is REALLY vague....hell, andro is 2 conversions away, DHEA is 3...

i would like to know what i'm ingesting....granted, the results speak for themselves, but still.

also, is the compound in Vida?
Click to expand...

Actually, it HAS been posted in NUMEROUS threads!

Read:
* http://anabolicminds.com/forum/company-promotions/112713-2009s-biggest-product.html
* http://anabolicminds.com/forum/company-promotions/113105-here-ans-write.html
* http://anabolicminds.com/forum/company-promotions/114757-one-important-release.html
* http://anabolicminds.com/forum/company-promotions/115406-one-beautiful-packaging.html
* http://anabolicminds.com/forum/company-promotions/115407-wait-one-really.html


The ONE

Name: 17a-methyl-etioallocholan-17b-ol-3-hydroxyimine

Standard: Testosterone

Androgenic: 140

Anabolic: 380

Estrogenic Activity: none

Progestational Activity: none

Derivation/Analog of: Dihydrotestosterone (DHT)

DHT was first synthesized in 1935. The ONe is an oral prohormone (PH) of DHT. The primary active ingredient (17a-methyl-etioallocholan-17b-ol-3-hydroxyimine) of The ONE was first described by Z. Cekan and B. Pelc. (1966). 17a-methyl-etioallocholan-17b-ol-3-hydroxyimine has never commercially produced and is a completely novel molecule.


On the AN site you CAN see the label information if you click on 'view the label information'. Attaching the FULL label and the ingredient profile.
 

Attachments

  • TheOne.jpg
    TheOne.jpg
    598.4 KB · Views: 443
  • The ONE Facts.jpg
    The ONE Facts.jpg
    17.6 KB · Views: 447
that label-view button on the manuf's website didnt work for me, i tried it.

also, a person can't search for 3-letter words on AM...doesnt work.
 
SOLARUS said:
hydroxyimine? that's a new one on me.

looks like a very close relative of phera-plex....and judging by the reviews, it seems to have a very similar pharmacologic action.

has anyone tried both?
Click to expand...

not really similar to phera (DMT), either in structure or action.....
 
its too bad that they couldnt use maybe a methoxy or something instead of a methyl, I mean after all this time cant they find a better, safer way?
 
rms80 said:
not really similar to phera (DMT), either in structure or action.....
Click to expand...
care to elaborate? i see very strong similarities. it's certainly "The One"'s closest cousin that the public is familiar with.

and i havent read every log, but the apparent shared effects are:

> high anabolic, moderate androgenic
> libido effects vary greatly; some good some bad
> "feels" mild but is potent
> good strength gains
> very little bloat

as compared to DMT/madol/etc, sounds like users are getting a better CNS stim effect from TO, and more lethargy too...so there are apparently differences.

given the chemical similarities, i wonder if there hasnt been a comparison discussion that i missed...
 
SOLARUS said:
care to elaborate? i see very strong similarities. it's certainly "The One"'s closest cousin that the public is familiar with.

and i havent read every log, but the apparent shared effects are:

> high anabolic, moderate androgenic
> libido effects vary greatly; some good some bad
> "feels" mild but is potent
> good strength gains
> very little bloat

as compared to DMT/madol/etc, sounds like users are getting a better CNS stim effect from TO, and more lethargy too...so there are apparently differences.

given the chemical similarities, i wonder if there hasnt been a comparison discussion that i missed...
Click to expand...

I'm sort of confused as to what you call chemical similarities because The ONE isn't any particularly more similar to pheraplex than it is to epistane, or epistane is to superdrol.

The lethargy on The ONE also is different, its not standard steroid lethargy like superdrol/pheraplex, its more of a later in the day drop in energy as if you had been pounding red bull all morning. Spacing the doses out some has fixed that for everyone.
 
searl12 said:
its too bad that they couldnt use maybe a methoxy or something instead of a methyl, I mean after all this time cant they find a better, safer way?
Click to expand...
they tried.

i am sure there are plenty of guys who'd sell you their methoxy-TST bottles if you want. that stuff wasnt worth the caps it was bottled in.

arguably, 17a methylation isnt always bad. i've used an epi product for weeks @ 40mg and had no marked liver enzyme impact on a blood test. i'm not saying it's good for you, but honestly a lot of the negative effects of steroids arent attributed to the methylation....test injections will increase LDL and crush LDL, can increase BP, give you gyno, kill your hairline, or take forever to recover from, etc etc.

sidenote:

why do they call this stuff a "prohormone to DHT"?? it is neither a) a prohormone, nor b) metabolised/reduced/converted into DHT in any way.
 
EasyEJL said:
I'm sort of confused as to what you call chemical similarities because The ONE isn't any particularly more similar to pheraplex than it is to epistane, or epistane is to superdrol.

The lethargy on The ONE also is different, its not standard steroid lethargy like superdrol/pheraplex, its more of a later in the day drop in energy as if you had been pounding red bull all morning. Spacing the doses out some has fixed that for everyone.
Click to expand...
you're right, all 3 are structurally similar.

i wish i had more chemistry chops to really dig into it....but the modification at C2 for superdrol (i dont know what group is there) apparently renders the steroid unable to exert any appreciable androgenic effect, despite sharing its general form with DHT. epistane is actually similar in this regard (very little androgenicity), but i'm not sure why this is the case, chemically.

the phera-__ compounds (3-ene, 2-ene, alphas and betas) all have considerably more androgenic action en vivo....why? i really dont know....so i guess trying to predict a steroid's actions on paper is somewhat futile, but it does get you in the ballpark in terms of [approximate] effects.
 
searl12 said:
its too bad that they couldnt use maybe a methoxy or something instead of a methyl, I mean after all this time cant they find a better, safer way?
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity is there anything that prevents them from using it in its original form? Just absurdly high non cost effective doses needed due to low bioavailability or something? It seems so strong that there would be a huge market for a non-methyl version even if it cost more and wasn't as strong since you wouldn't need liver support or anything.
 
SOLARUS said:
so i guess trying to predict a steroid's actions on paper is somewhat futile, but it does get you in the ballpark in terms of [approximate] effects.
Click to expand...

Yeah, at best it gives you a sort of starting point, and an idea where to begin testing dosage at. About the only thing you can guarantee from paper is whether the compound will aromatize or not.
 
dpfisher said:
Just out of curiosity is there anything that prevents them from using it in its original form? Just absurdly high non cost effective doses needed due to low bioavailability or something? It seems so strong that there would be a huge market for a non-methyl version even if it cost more and wasn't as strong since you wouldn't need liver support or anything.
Click to expand...

At a guess I would say because it would be a completely different compound and react in a completely different way. Adding methyl groups to compounds can change the properties of them so much you can have something very far away from what you started with. Non methylated compounds should not be thought of as safer , bioavailable versions of their methylated cousins but as different compounds all together.
 
SOLARUS said:
they tried.

i am sure there are plenty of guys who'd sell you their methoxy-TST bottles if you want. that stuff wasnt worth the caps it was bottled in.

arguably, 17a methylation isnt always bad. i've used an epi product for weeks @ 40mg and had no marked liver enzyme impact on a blood test. i'm not saying it's good for you, but honestly a lot of the negative effects of steroids arent attributed to the methylation....test injections will increase LDL and crush LDL, can increase BP, give you gyno, kill your hairline, or take forever to recover from, etc etc.

sidenote:

why do they call this stuff a "prohormone to DHT"?? it is neither a) a prohormone, nor b) metabolised/reduced/converted into DHT in any way.
Click to expand...


Same point here. They could use a methoxy group but again it would be a different compound that may only be good for feeding to houseplants!!

I think you will find it is a prohormone that does infact convert to DHT. In the radio interview with the guy from AN( sorry I cant remember your name he actually states how many steps away it is, if I remember correctly 1 ! )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top