Caffeine + Forslean VS Pink Magic ... A Scientific Comparison and Analysis

WilteredFire

WilteredFire

Member
To clarify my intentions of this thread is to learn more and discuss the science behind the usage of Caffeine + Forslean/Coleus 20% vs Pink Magic. Im not intending to bash USP's product but rather use this thread to open up a venue for discussion on some of the science behind their formulation from a slightly different perspective then that which may have or have not been discussed already on the forum :)

I want to discuss both of these options from a Cost vs Benefits/Reward/Efficiency perspective if that makes sense?

---=[Pink Magic]=---​

So from whats written about HOW pink magic appears to work, Im going to simply state these are working through cAMP, cGMP and Testosterone. These are the 3 main methods of action that are claimed to be used by Pink Magic if im not wrong. So taking this into mind lets see what Pink Magic is said to do to cAMP, cGMP and Testosterone...

1) Raise cAMP and cGMP by inhibiting phosphodiesterase from the Nelumbo nucifera and Rhamnus nakaharai.
2) Increased LH and Testosterone from an aqueous extract of Massularia acuminata.

---=[Caffeine + Forslean]=---​

1) Caffeine inhibits phosphodiesterase which prevents cAMP and cGMP from degrading/breaking down.
2) Forslean/Forskohlii has been shown to directly increase cAMP levels and has been shown in human studies to lead to favourable increases in Testosterone, and has been shown to have a stimulatory effect on the cAMP levels of testicular Leydig Cells. Am I right here that the Caffeine's PD inhibiting activity combined with Forslean positively increases Steroidogenesis?

==========================================================​

So we have the components in Pink Magic that can increase cAMP + cGMP by inhibiting various phosphodiesterase ... And the other component that has been shown to raise Testosterone + LH favourably we can say, but in Animal Studies...Which raises the question, would this work the same way in humans, and if so, how effectively?

And on the other side of the Wrestling ring...We have the Caffeine + Forslean/Forskohlii 20% Extract...

The Caffeine being able to Inhibit phosphodiesterase thereby decreasing the breakdown of cAMP + cGMP. And then we have Forslean/Forskohlii which has is shown to Directly increase cAMP levels and lead to an Increase in Testosterone, and this has been shown in Human studies as opposed to Animal studies and shown to give favourable Decrease in BodyFat as well increases in Lean Body Mass.

==========================================================​

So...If we were to use a dose of approx 200mg Caffeine Anhydrous + 50mg of Forslean/Forskohlii active per day VS one daily serving of Pink Magic....Which one would be able to deliver the best results? So in terms of inhibiting the breakdown of cAMP + cGMP/Increasing cAMP + Raising Test levels...Which product would be able to do that more effectively?

Bearing in mind the cost of one bottle of Pink Magic, in comparison with the cost of Caffeine Anhydrous pills + Forslean/Forskohlii which should be able to give you enough for a 2-3month cycle, right?

Would the Caffeine + Forslean duo give more Muscle Mass + Fat Loss Gains in Comparison with 1 Bottle of Pink Magic's gains?

What would be the advantages/disadvantages of the Caffeine + Forslean in comparison to the Pink Magic? Is there something that one of these products is able to do significantly better than the latter?

I hope im not asking too much here, My main questions are based around the Cost vs Reward ratio for both of these products. If im wrong on any of the things ive pointed out in my post, please do tell me what to adjust/edit and I'll be happy to do so, im just trying to learn more like all of you :)

Kind regards,
Vish
 
I found this:

With regard to dosing, the typical dosage of forskolin is 25-60 mg per day divided between 2-3 doses, with 50-60 mg being considered the ideal range by the majority of users. The ideal drug to use in combination with forskolin would be the cAMP phosphodiesterase inhibitor Rolipram. Rolipram, prescribed as an antidepressant, slows the breakdown of cAMP, and this would prolong and amplify the effect of forskolin. Unfortunately Rolipram is not yet available in the United States, but is an option for our European and Japanese readers. In animal studies Rolipram has been shown to be a potent lipolytic agent .In countries where Rolipram is not available, other options might be ephedrine and caffeine, as well as yohimbine. In fact, caffeine is a weak cAMP phosphodiesterase inhibitor that might prolong cAMP activity and amplify the effect of forskolin in a fashion similar to the prescription drug Rolipram. In fact, one popular theory about how caffeine promotes lipolysis is that by acting as a phosphodiesterase inhibitor it too prolongs and amplifies the lipolytic effects of cAMP.
 
nice read
thats something to think about
 
cAMP is a super common second messenger. It's responsible for all kinds of stuff. What it does it largely tissue dependent.

Having used forskolin in both a lab and personal setting, I know it's efficacy. PM I can't comment on, but largely dislike the way it's being presented. However, it's marketing has no real impact upon its effects.
 
Thanks for the links maxximal, some interesting reading there for sure! Hope we can get some more input here as it would be good.
 
MAxximal said:
I found this:

With regard to dosing, the typical dosage of forskolin is 25-60 mg per day divided between 2-3 doses, with 50-60 mg being considered the ideal range by the majority of users. The ideal drug to use in combination with forskolin would be the cAMP phosphodiesterase inhibitor Rolipram. Rolipram, prescribed as an antidepressant, slows the breakdown of cAMP, and this would prolong and amplify the effect of forskolin. Unfortunately Rolipram is not yet available in the United States, but is an option for our European and Japanese readers. In animal studies Rolipram has been shown to be a potent lipolytic agent .In countries where Rolipram is not available, other options might be ephedrine and caffeine, as well as yohimbine. In fact, caffeine is a weak cAMP phosphodiesterase inhibitor that might prolong cAMP activity and amplify the effect of forskolin in a fashion similar to the prescription drug Rolipram. In fact, one popular theory about how caffeine promotes lipolysis is that by acting as a phosphodiesterase inhibitor it too prolongs and amplifies the lipolytic effects of cAMP.
Click to expand...

I thought people use a much higher dose than that?Saw a product the other day where one serving was 300mg.
 
Resolve said:
cAMP is a super common second messenger. It's responsible for all kinds of stuff. What it does it largely tissue dependent.

Having used forskolin in both a lab and personal setting, I know it's efficacy. PM I can't comment on, but largely dislike the way it's being presented. However, it's marketing has no real impact upon its effects.
Click to expand...

Also can anyone comment on personal use of forskolin?Where to buy, what dose, does it work, what it does etc.
 
dacookie said:
I thought people use a much higher dose than that?Saw a product the other day where one serving was 300mg.
Click to expand...

look in the % and the actives like this:

Coleus Forskohlii Extract (standardized to 10% forskohlin) (ForsLean®)
250 mg

Coleus Forskohlii (Standardized For 60mg Forskolin) 300mg
 
MAxximal said:
look in the % and the actives like this:

Coleus Forskohlii Extract (standardized to 10% forskohlin) (ForsLean®)
250 mg

Coleus Forskohlii (Standardized For 60mg Forskolin) 300mg
Click to expand...

Yeap, was just browsing through quickly and didnt see the standardized.
 
Resolve said:
cAMP is a super common second messenger. It's responsible for all kinds of stuff. What it does it largely tissue dependent.

Having used forskolin in both a lab and personal setting, I know it's efficacy. PM I can't comment on, but largely dislike the way it's being presented. However, it's marketing has no real impact upon its effects.
Click to expand...

How is it being presented besides the over 70 logs on the product before release?
 
also the combo Pink Magic and forskolin are amazing....

One stops degradation and the other increases cAMP that is why Recreate is an amazing addition to Pink Magic.
 
USPLabs said:
also the combo Pink Magic and forskolin are amazing....

One stops degradation and the other increases cAMP that is why Recreate is an amazing addition to Pink Magic.
Click to expand...

Sweet!


Sir the web re-release of USP Labs cAMPHIBOLIC is on the way?
 
WilteredFire said:
To clarify my intentions of this thread is to learn more and discuss the science behind the usage of Caffeine + Forslean/Coleus 20% vs Pink Magic. Im not intending to bash USP's product but rather use this thread to open up a venue for discussion on some of the science behind their formulation from a slightly different perspective then that which may have or have not been discussed already on the forum :)

I want to discuss both of these options from a Cost vs Benefits/Reward/Efficiency perspective if that makes sense?

---=[Pink Magic]=---​

So from whats written about HOW pink magic appears to work, Im going to simply state these are working through cAMP, cGMP and Testosterone. These are the 3 main methods of action that are claimed to be used by Pink Magic if im not wrong. So taking this into mind lets see what Pink Magic is said to do to cAMP, cGMP and Testosterone...

1) Raise cAMP and cGMP by inhibiting phosphodiesterase from the Nelumbo nucifera and Rhamnus nakaharai.
2) Increased LH and Testosterone from an aqueous extract of Massularia acuminata.

---=[Caffeine + Forslean]=---​

1) Caffeine inhibits phosphodiesterase which prevents cAMP and cGMP from degrading/breaking down.
2) Forslean/Forskohlii has been shown to directly increase cAMP levels and has been shown in human studies to lead to favourable increases in Testosterone, and has been shown to have a stimulatory effect on the cAMP levels of testicular Leydig Cells. Am I right here that the Caffeine's PD inhibiting activity combined with Forslean positively increases Steroidogenesis?

==========================================================​

So we have the components in Pink Magic that can increase cAMP + cGMP by inhibiting various phosphodiesterase ... And the other component that has been shown to raise Testosterone + LH favourably we can say, but in Animal Studies...Which raises the question, would this work the same way in humans, and if so, how effectively?

And on the other side of the Wrestling ring...We have the Caffeine + Forslean/Forskohlii 20% Extract...

The Caffeine being able to Inhibit phosphodiesterase thereby decreasing the breakdown of cAMP + cGMP. And then we have Forslean/Forskohlii which has is shown to Directly increase cAMP levels and lead to an Increase in Testosterone, and this has been shown in Human studies as opposed to Animal studies and shown to give favourable Decrease in BodyFat as well increases in Lean Body Mass.

==========================================================​

So...If we were to use a dose of approx 200mg Caffeine Anhydrous + 50mg of Forslean/Forskohlii active per day VS one daily serving of Pink Magic....Which one would be able to deliver the best results? So in terms of inhibiting the breakdown of cAMP + cGMP/Increasing cAMP + Raising Test levels...Which product would be able to do that more effectively?

Bearing in mind the cost of one bottle of Pink Magic, in comparison with the cost of Caffeine Anhydrous pills + Forslean/Forskohlii which should be able to give you enough for a 2-3month cycle, right?

Would the Caffeine + Forslean duo give more Muscle Mass + Fat Loss Gains in Comparison with 1 Bottle of Pink Magic's gains?

What would be the advantages/disadvantages of the Caffeine + Forslean in comparison to the Pink Magic? Is there something that one of these products is able to do significantly better than the latter?

I hope im not asking too much here, My main questions are based around the Cost vs Reward ratio for both of these products. If im wrong on any of the things ive pointed out in my post, please do tell me what to adjust/edit and I'll be happy to do so, im just trying to learn more like all of you :)

Kind regards,
Vish
Click to expand...

I think some clarification as to the basic biochemical and pharmacological principles of the phosphodiesterase-cGMP/cAMP is necessary, here.

First, we need to recognize that phosphodiesterase is not a singular enzyme, but is instead a multiple family of enzymes that have differing physiological roles in the body. These differing roles depend not only on the nucleotide that the particular PDE degrades - in other words, cGMP or cAMP - but also the tissues that they are expressed in. Thus, simply stating a compound is a "PDE inhibitor" is an insufficient explanation, as one needs to stipulate a) which tissue type is being spoken about (the same PDE can have differing effects in differing tissues) and b) which PDE sub-type is being spoken about (this would naturally include which nucleotide it competitively degrades).

As for caffeine, it is a competitive but non-selective phosphodiesterase inhibitor. So, what does this mean? Well, to say that it is "competitive" is to say that it binds to the active site of the enzyme, preventing the enzyme-substrate complex to be formed, reducing the total product of the complex. And in turn, to say that it is "non-selective" is to say that it binds to the active sites of an entire family of enzymes equally. This non-selectivity, in addition to the fact that it is not very potent, is largely why caffeine has not been sought after more as a therapeutic PDE inhibitor: inhibitors which are non-specific to PDE sub-types are generally ineffective targeted therapies.

Second, we need to recognize that neither of our nucleotides are as simple as they are being made out to be, either: as Resolve very acutely points out, cAMP and cGMP are widely distributed second messengers, and as a result, when speaking about increasing and/or decreasing them, one needs to be specific to the tissue type. The phosphorylation of cAMP-dependent protein-kinase (PKA), for example, has differing effects depending on tissue type.

These initial two reasons are largely why lumping both caffeine and forskolin together into a broader category of "PDE inhibition," leads to little more than spinning our biochemical wheels, so to speak. It also makes the comparison between Pink Magic and the combination difficult to bear out, owing particularly to the non-selective phosphodiesterase inhibition of caffeine. For its own sake, however, the data on both Nelumbo and Rhamnus seem to resoundingly suggest that these herbs potently inhibit two phosphodiesterase enzymes which are particularly interesting for the concept of "muscle growth" - that being PDE3 and 4, which have both been implicated in chronic muscular distrophy and atrophy, and in the general category of "muscle-wasting" altogether. Thus, a viable postulate is that targeted inhibition of these two PDE subtypes would have the opposite effect, and lead to muscle building.

It was for this reason that these two herbs, in particular, were chosen.
 
crazyfool405 said:
but for that price you can run a cycle of test ... so doesnt strike me as efficient
Click to expand...

I made a post about how silly this analogy is in another thread, but it bears repeating here. There is no "absolute norm" to efficiency, it is entirely relative: which is to say, efficiency must be considered as it relates to the person doing the purchasing or whatever other activity it may be.

In reality, not every individual who may consider Pink Magic considers synthetic testosterone to be a viable alternative, so rendering it "inefficient" in an efficacy comparison to testosterone is entirely irrelevant on those grounds alone.

In the same way, I can state that a three week cycle of methasterone will yield a similar net weight gain (non-specific as to actually LBM synthesized) as a twelve week cycle of testosterone cypionate, for potentially less money and time - therefore, testosterone is inefficient! See how silly that seems? Similar logic applies here.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
I made a post about how silly this analogy is in another thread, but it bears repeating here. There is no "absolute norm" to efficiency, it is entirely relative: which is to say, efficiency must be considered as it relates to the person doing the purchasing or whatever other activity it may be.

In reality, not every individual who may consider Pink Magic considers synthetic testosterone to be a viable alternative, so rendering it "inefficient" in an efficacy comparison to testosterone is entirely irrelevant on those grounds alone.

In the same way, I can state that a three week cycle of methasterone will yield a similar net weight gain (non-specific as to actually LBM synthesized) as a twelve week cycle of testosterone cypionate, for potentially less money and time - therefore, testosterone is inefficient! See how silly that seems? Similar logic applies here.
Click to expand...

Logic, where can I buy that around here..
 
Mulletsoldier said:
I made a post about how silly this analogy is in another thread, but it bears repeating here. There is no "absolute norm" to efficiency, it is entirely relative: which is to say, efficiency must be considered as it relates to the person doing the purchasing or whatever other activity it may be.

In reality, not every individual who may consider Pink Magic considers synthetic testosterone to be a viable alternative, so rendering it "inefficient" in an efficacy comparison to testosterone is entirely irrelevant on those grounds alone.

In the same way, I can state that a three week cycle of methasterone will yield a similar net weight gain (non-specific as to actually LBM synthesized) as a twelve week cycle of testosterone cypionate, for potentially less money and time - therefore, testosterone is inefficient! See how silly that seems? Similar logic applies here.
Click to expand...

for me personally id rather spend my money on a real cycle then 4 weeks of PM Prime and another supplement.

however i will say that i Want to buy USP products just based on your posts,
 
I swear i'm going to lose it... I need to Sticky Mullet's last two posts with a title of "If you think it's too damn much and want to compare it to Testosterone cost/benefit ratio,please read."
 
For some people 70+/- dollars outweighs 45+/- dollars and potential jail time. Even if your gains could potentially be much better there are many other variables to throw in that equation as well. It isn't like Joe Snuffy walks down the street and gets a reliable dealer WITH a reliable product. Everybody and their mom would be jucing and supplements, for the most part, would be dead if steroids were legal. It makes no sense to compare the two.
 
Jayhawkk said:
For some people 70+/- dollars outweighs 45+/- dollars and potential jail time. Even if your gains could potentially be much better there are many other variables to throw in that equation as well. It isn't like Joe Snuffy walks down the street and gets a reliable dealer WITH a reliable product. Everybody and their mom would be jucing and supplements, for the most part, would be dead if steroids were legal. It makes no sense to compare the two.
Click to expand...

PLus all the ancillary supplements needed for post cycle theraphy. The $45 quickly becomes $175...
 
okay then lets compare PM to another test booster, like formadrol, novedex,testopro, freetest, these products range anywhere from $20-$40 so are you reassuring me that PM will absolutley without a doubt blow all of these out of the water? none of these even come close to PM?will PM put all of these products to shame?

im just wondering not trying to offend usp cuz i love jacked but just saying if im gonna drop $70 on a product i expect it to be without a doubt the best in the biz, so that no other product even coms close.
 
Jayhawkk said:
I swear i'm going to lose it... I need to Sticky Mullet's last two posts with a title of "If you think it's too damn much and want to compare it to Testosterone cost/benefit ratio,please read."
Click to expand...

It really is a moot comparison, for precisely the reasons you mention in your second post. The comparison itself requires two stipulations to be valid, considering it is trying to make a categorical analogy (i.e., an analogy which is valid and true in all instance). The first, that all individuals have viable access to testosterone, for the price being thrown about. The second, that all said individuals are willing to risk the potential negatives with supplemental synthetic testosterone usage.

If neither of these two stipulations exist - and they do not, which is why categorical analogies suck a philosophical dick more generally - than the comparisons need to be made on an ad hoc (case-by-case) basis. If an individual can neither obtain testosterone for that price, nor desires to, than whether or not it is more effective dollar-for-dollar than PM or any other product is irrelevant.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
I think some clarification as to the basic biochemical and pharmacological principles of the phosphodiesterase-cGMP/cAMP is necessary, here.

First, we need to recognize that phosphodiesterase is not a singular enzyme, but is instead a multiple family of enzymes that have differing physiological roles in the body. These differing roles depend not only on the nucleotide that the particular PDE degrades - in other words, cGMP or cAMP - but also the tissues that they are expressed in. Thus, simply stating a compound is a "PDE inhibitor" is an insufficient explanation, as one needs to stipulate a) which tissue type is being spoken about (the same PDE can have differing effects in differing tissues) and b) which PDE sub-type is being spoken about (this would naturally include which nucleotide it competitively degrades).

As for caffeine, it is a competitive but non-selective phosphodiesterase inhibitor. So, what does this mean? Well, to say that it is "competitive" is to say that it binds to the active site of the enzyme, preventing the enzyme-substrate complex to be formed, reducing the total product of the complex. And in turn, to say that it is "non-selective" is to say that it binds to the active sites of an entire family of enzymes equally. This non-selectivity, in addition to the fact that it is not very potent, is largely why caffeine has not been sought after more as a therapeutic PDE inhibitor: inhibitors which are non-specific to PDE sub-types are generally ineffective targeted therapies.

Second, we need to recognize that neither of our nucleotides are as simple as they are being made out to be, either: as Resolve very acutely points out, cAMP and cGMP are widely distributed second messengers, and as a result, when speaking about increasing and/or decreasing them, one needs to be specific to the tissue type. The phosphorylation of cAMP-dependent protein-kinase (PKA), for example, has differing effects depending on tissue type.

These initial two reasons are largely why lumping both caffeine and forskolin together into a broader category of "PDE inhibition," leads to little more than spinning our biochemical wheels, so to speak. It also makes the comparison between Pink Magic and the combination difficult to bear out, owing particularly to the non-selective phosphodiesterase inhibition of caffeine. For its own sake, however, the data on both Nelumbo and Rhamnus seem to resoundingly suggest that these herbs potently inhibit two phosphodiesterase enzymes which are particularly interesting for the concept of "muscle growth" - that being PDE3 and 4, which have both been implicated in chronic muscular distrophy and atrophy, and in the general category of "muscle-wasting" altogether. Thus, a viable postulate is that targeted inhibition of these two PDE subtypes would have the opposite effect, and lead to muscle building.

It was for this reason that these two herbs, in particular, were chosen.
Click to expand...

Much respect for this...much respect.
 
crazyfool405 said:
however i will say that i Want to buy USP products just based on your posts,
Click to expand...

It's like pillow talk for supplement junkies:

:yawn: mmmmully, tell me just ONE more story, ahhhh. Pllleeeaasssse! I don't care which one, I just like the sound of your voice. Ok, fine, tell me the one about phosphodiesterase. Phos-pho-di-est-er-ase. Say it again. Again....
 
Haha, I do my best. Though I have heard that people refuse to buy USPlabs' products due to my post as well, so, definitely a mixed bag!
 
Mulletsoldier said:
Haha, I do my best. Though I have heard that people refuse to buy USPlabs' products due to my post as well, so, definitely a mixed bag!
Click to expand...

im willing to give it a go, i dont know why people would be afraid of your posts, its good to have someone knowledgeable help rather then someone who doesnt know **** recommend something they know nothing about.

but you may want to put cliff notes in some posts lol

if i can see it in a stack for a decent price (by my stardards) . Stacks tend to be much cheaper,

Or i can wait for a sale, but right now it is out of my budget
 
Mullet just says what strategic tells him to.

:lol: just kidding, both those guys are top notch!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top