Anyone not getting results from -epi? check in here.

Have you gotten results from your epi product?

  • yes

    Votes: 71 64.5%

  • no

    Votes: 39 35.5%
  • Total voters
    110
De__eB said:
Not really? A demonstrable mechanism exists by which ArA, and other phospholipid substrates can enhance signaling of myokine pathways.

In fact, I could probably make a feasible marketing case that arachidonic acid should inhibit myostatin, given various logical leaps based on IL-6 and NF-Kb pathway interactions with myostatin.

--

Did you even read my post? I not once said the ingredient didn't work.

I simply said that myostatin inhibition as a primary target/effect is unlikely given the clinical effects of myostatin inhibition on the scale seen in related studies compared to the anecdotal effects in users.
Click to expand...

Oh I do. I remember when Bill L got hammered about it. Surprised you don't remember that.

I read your post, and my post was simply a reminder that Bill got hammered over an ingredient in which everyone stated "did not work", was "unhealthy"...all based on "research". In short, things evolved.
 
Admin said:
Oh I do. I remember when Bill L got hammered about it. Surprised you don't remember that.

I read your post, and my post was simply a reminder that Bill got hammered over an ingredient in which everyone stated "did not work", was "unhealthy"...al based on "research". In short, things evolved.
Click to expand...

Compare the research for ArA, even the ones painting it as a villain to the ONE myostatin inhibition study for (-)epi... HUGE world of difference between quality of research there.
 
kissdadookie said:
Compare the research for ArA, even the ones painting it as a villain to the ONE myostatin inhibition study for (-)epi... HUGE world of difference between quality of research there.
Click to expand...

Your statement in itself shows that you were not around for that.....how the people you might quote today, hammered him back then.
 
koi1214 said:
Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...


Waiting for another 3 paragraphs. Then I will post one sentence...which will cause another 3 paragraphs. :lol:
 
Admin said:
Oh I do. I remember when Bill L got hammered about it. Surprised you don't remember that.

I read your post, and my post was simply a reminder that Bill got hammered over an ingredient in which everyone stated "did not work", was "unhealthy"...al based on "research". In short, things evolved.
Click to expand...

Predates me being around.

You're well aware that one of my biggest disdains for the industry is marketing.

Catechins are anti-inflammatory via numerous pathways.

One such example is NF-kB inhibition.

Under certain conditions, NF-kB inhibition negates the upregulation of Myostatin. But only under certain conditions.

So one could accurately say that a catechin is an anti-inflammatory NF-kB inhibitor and that consequential to that, you'll sometimes see a myostatin inhibition.

But the whole 'We've identified the holy grail of muscle building through extensive research, <pictures of myostatin knockout animals here>, <outlandish claims here>' schtick is just disingenuous at best.

--
 
So you like subtle marketing better. :lol:


I just find the selective outrage quite funny.
 
De__eB said:
You're well aware that one of my biggest disdains for the industry is marketing.

--
Click to expand...

Normally I'd agree with that, in this case though, perhaps the only case, the composition surpassed expectations
 
all these studies everyone is always talking about....are there any human studies on long term effects of epicatechin use?
 
Admin said:
So you like subtle marketing better. :lol:


I just find the selective outrage quite funny.
Click to expand...

I like accurate marketing based on demonstrable claims. Given that there is literally zero data to definitively state that (-)-epicatechin even inhibits myostatin (Merely a change in follistatin/myostatin ratio, not an inhibition of myostatin was indicated) . Does that not make marketing it as a potent myostatin inhibitor disingenuous?

FWIW...
Invalid Link Removed

--


To be fair to the BLR and OL's of the world, at least the companies selling (-)-epicatechin are selling a compound that actually exists and appears to actually work, and not fictitious oligopeptide BCAAs :34:, so they're at least a step ahead of some of their competitors ;)
 
thebigt said:
all these studies everyone is always talking about....are there any human studies on long term effects of epicatechin use?
Click to expand...

One can only extrapolate that from numerous studies on various catechins. It would appear that these things are very well tolerated and should pose no real adverse effects even with long term use.
 
De__eB said:
I like accurate marketing based on demonstrable claims. Given that there is literally zero data to definitively state that (-)-epicatechin even inhibits myostatin (Merely a change in follistatin/myostatin ratio, not an inhibition of myostatin was indicated) . Does that not make marketing it as a potent myostatin inhibitor disingenuous?
Click to expand...

If those are your criteria, I find it odd you are in this industry then. :lol:

And no, I don't try to assume the intent of a person (being disingenuous) based simply on marketing copy.
 
kissdadookie said:
One can only extrapolate that from numerous studies on various catechins. It would appear that these things are very well tolerated and should pose no real adverse effects even with long term use.
Click to expand...

Curious..whats your educational background?
 
kissdadookie said:
Oh good lord no, that's like a decade ago at least.
Click to expand...

So in this field, or anything in terms of physiology and nutrition, you are self taught?
 
kissdadookie said:
I've mostly gone through and read as much as I can, sometimes get my butt handed to be in corrections as well ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, you tend to use terms of phrases that signify being self taught...but thats besides the point. It was more towards this and if you would be interested.

Invalid Link Removed
 
kissdadookie said:
One can only extrapolate that from numerous studies on various catechins. It would appear that these things are very well tolerated and should pose no real adverse effects even with long term use.
Click to expand...

if that is the case then it is truely a remarkable ingredient....i have found very, very few things that caused the remarkable results some are reporting, that didn't come with risk of side effects.

maybe brunel can find a bacon that won't make you fat, raise cholesterol or be a cancer risk....let me know when this happens, please!!!!
 
kissdadookie said:
Interesting... lemme go read through it.
Click to expand...


If you can take the pure arrogance, douchebaggery and outright hostility Ive thrown your way...albeit subtle..lol...then you would be a good fit.

Contact me. I'm out.
 
thebigt said:
if that is the case then it is truely a remarkable ingredient....i have found very, very few things that caused the remarkable results some are reporting, that didn't come with risk of side effects.

maybe brunel can find a bacon that won't make you fat, raise cholesterol or be a cancer risk....let me know when this happens, please!!!!
Click to expand...

Oh heck yeah! So much promise in these phytochemicals which have been mainly shown to be strong anti-oxidants/anti-inflammatories. Typically one hears anti-oxidants/anti-inflammatory plant extracts and they assume that it’s like a glorified vitamin c or something. Often times though, they do a ton of remarkable things with more to be found as they understand what XYZ is doing more in depth. Plus they are usually really safe to use.

After I deload/taper, most likely I’m going to pick one of these (-)epi products and give it a go. See what happens.
 
I find it cool, amazing, odd, and a weird twist that all the back and forth and commentary against dook may have just landed him a job here.
 
Admin said:
If those are your criteria, I find it odd you are in this industry then. :lol:

And no, I don't try to assume the intent of a person (being disingenuous) based simply on marketing copy.
Click to expand...

You make a good point, but alas, I obviously believe that supplements can help people achieve their goals, and so here I am.

I find the human body fascinating, the manipulation of the it even moreso. The insane complexity of the untold thousands of molecular pathways and processes by which the human body functions is nothing less than awe-inspiring.

I also enjoy a good debate ;)
 
kissdadookie said:
Oh heck yeah! So much promise in these phytochemicals which have been mainly shown to be strong anti-oxidants/anti-inflammatories. Typically one hears anti-oxidants/anti-inflammatory plant extracts and they assume that it’s like a glorified vitamin c or something. Often times though, they do a ton of remarkable things with more to be found as they understand what XYZ is doing more in depth. Plus they are usually really safe to use.

After I deload/taper, most likely I’m going to pick one of these (-)epi products and give it a go. See what happens.
Click to expand...

thanks!!!

it might be awhile, but one day i plan on trying it!!!

good luck!!!
 
De__eB said:
You make a good point, but alas, I obviously believe that supplements can help people achieve their goals, and so here I am.

I find the human body fascinating, the manipulation of the it even moreso. The insane complexity of the untold thousands of molecular pathways and processes by which the human body functions is nothing less than awe-inspiring.

I also enjoy a good debate ;)
Click to expand...

I've fought my wars. I'm retired ;)
 
kisaj said:
Probably gonna piss off some people too. LOL
Click to expand...

why? I think dook makes nice paragraphs which make for easy reading, and though he's a bit little quixotic about CM you have to admire his sticktoitiveness
 
Touey said:
why? I think dook makes nice paragraphs which make for easy reading, and though he's a bit little quixotic about CM you have to admire his sticktoitiveness
Click to expand...

Touey has just added new words for Webster to include in their dictionary...
 
I'm curious, but is there not a point in time when no research exists for a compound? If this time exists, do the benefits of said compound exist without such research? If they do, then perhaps epi is one of those ingredients where perhaps the MOA is not known yet and research will soon uncover this fact, or perhaps it will seek to disprove its efficacy.

But for one to argue so much against a compound must surely mean that there is evidence that leads to that conclusion? I for one feel that not enough evidence exists in either direction to say so with any kind of authority. Do I think that this ingredient has myostatin inhibiting properties, no, but that is just my opinion based on what I know of myostatin inhibition but I cannot yet state with any real authority that such benefits do not exist.

Or is my argument too late to the conversation?
 
Jiigzz said:
I'm curious, but is there not a point in time when no research exists for a compound? If this time exists, do the benefits of said compound exist without such research? If they do, then perhaps epi is one of those ingredients where perhaps the MOA is not known yet and research will soon uncover this fact, or perhaps it will seek to disprove its efficacy.

But for one to argue so much against a compound must surely mean that there is evidence that leads to that conclusion? I for one feel that not enough evidence exists in either direction to say so with any kind of authority. Do I think that this ingredient has myostatin inhibiting properties, no, but that is just my opinion based on what I know of myostatin inhibition but I cannot yet state with any real authority that such benefits do not exist.

Or is my argument too late to the conversation?
Click to expand...

Too much logic in one post. Banned.
 
Jiigzz said:
I'm curious, but is there not a point in time when no research exists for a compound? If this time exists, do the benefits of said compound exist without such research? If they do, then perhaps epi is one of those ingredients where perhaps the MOA is not known yet and research will soon uncover this fact, or perhaps it will seek to disprove its efficacy.

But for one to argue so much against a compound must surely mean that there is evidence that leads to that conclusion? I for one feel that not enough evidence exists in either direction to say so with any kind of authority. Do I think that this ingredient has myostatin inhibiting properties, no, but that is just my opinion based on what I know of myostatin inhibition but I cannot yet state with any real authority that such benefits do not exist.

Or is my argument too late to the conversation?
Click to expand...

Like 90% of the new designer steroids have no research. They are modified from parent compounds. It certainly does not mean they don't work.

Granted none of it's legal to sell as supplements...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top