D Aspartic Acid & Negative side effects

Well I'm not a PhD and I don't have a Masters - don't even have a batchelors.

I'm just a dumb old Visigoth who likes to dead lift and squat - I'm very horny but not too smart. I might have three brain cells that always occupied with either sex, food, or motorcycles.

Soooo ...

Here's the deal ...

Can someone explain this stuff in simple idiot's terms?

I looked up "NMDA RECEPTOR" on Wikipedia and the definition there made my head hurt.

So what are the possibilities here? Is it possible that DAA ...

A. Will make me stupider? (I know - prolly impossible but I have to ask)
B. Will make me an angry person ... or an excessively happy one ... or will it make me give my grandkids the "stink eye" and talk about how their generation sucks?
C. Will it turn me homo?
D. Will it make me fantasize about Rosanne Barr?

Basically - what's being alleged here as potential sides?

Anyone out there who can explain this in layman's terms?
 
I beleive the argument in this thread is geared primarily towards bulk DAA.

You start stacking with other things, and the numbers in the claim start to lose their meaning. You know what I mean.
 
HondaV65 said:
Well I'm not a PhD and I don't have a Masters - don't even have a batchelors.

I'm just a dumb old Visigoth who likes to dead lift and squat - I'm very horny but not too smart. I might have three brain cells that always occupied with either sex, food, or motorcycles.

Soooo ...

Here's the deal ...

Can someone explain this stuff in simple idiot's terms?

I looked up "NMDA RECEPTOR" on Wikipedia and the definition there made my head hurt.

So what are the possibilities here? Is it possible that DAA ...

A. Will make me stupider? (I know - prolly impossible but I have to ask)
B. Will make me an angry person ... or an excessively happy one ... or will it make me give my grandkids the "stink eye" and talk about how their generation sucks?
C. Will it turn me homo?
D. Will it make me fantasize about Rosanne Barr?

Basically - what's being alleged here as potential sides?

Anyone out there who can explain this in layman's terms?
Click to expand...

Aspartic Acid Aspartate is a neurotransmitter in the brain, facilitating information from one neuron to another. Too much aspartate allows an influx of calcium into the brain cells, triggering an excessive amount of free radicals which kill the cells. Aspartate is referred to as an "excitotoxin" because of the nerve cell damage that it causes. Many chronic illnesses have been attributed to long term excitotoxin exposure, including multiple sclerosis, ALS, memory loss, hormonal problems, hearing loss, epilepsy, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, hypoglycemia, dementia, brain lesions and neuroendocrine disorders. In 1971, Dr. John Olney, neuroscientist and one of the world's foremost experts on excitotoxins, informed G.D. Searle that his research had revealed that aspartic acid caused holes in the brains of mice.

And a little more complicated but still easy to follow explaination...

Glutamate receptors are excitatory - they literally excite the neurons containing them into electrical and cellular activity. There are 4 main classes of glutamate receptors: the NMDA (N-methyl-D-aspartate) receptor, the quisqualate/AMPA receptor, the kainite receptor, and the AMPA metabotropic receptor. Each of these receptors has a different structure, and has somewhat different effects on the neurons they excite. The NMDA is the most common glutamate receptor in the brain (13). The NMDA, kainite and quisqualate receptors all serve to open ion channels. The NMDA receptor is the most complex, and has more diverse and potentially devastating effects on receiving neurons than the others. When glutamate or aspartate attaches to the NMDA receptor, it triggers a flow of sodium (Na) and calcium (Ca) ions into the neuron, and an outflow of potassium (K). It is this ion exchange that triggers the neuron to "fire" an electric current across its membrane surface, in turn triggering a neurotransmitter release to whatever other neurons the just-fired neuron synaptically contacts. The kainite and AMPA ion channels primarily permit the exchange of Na and K ions, and generally cause briefer and weaker electric currents than NMDA receptors. Thus, when glutamate/aspartate acts through kainite/AMPA receptors, it is weakly excitatory, but when glutamate/aspartate act through NMDA receptors, they are strongly excitatory. (14) NMDA receptor activation is the basis of long-term potentiation, which in turn is the basis for memory consolidation and long-term memory formation. (14) After the neuron has fired, membrane pumps then pump the excess sodium and calcium back outside the neuron. (15) This is necessary to return the neuron to its resting, non-firing state. Neurons in a resting state prefer to keep calcium inside the cell at a level only 1/10,000 of that outside, with sodium levels 1/10 as high as outside the neuron (15) These pumps require ATP energy to function, and if they cannot keep up or if neuronal energy production is low for any reason the pumps may, gradually fail, allowing excessive calcium/sodium build up inside the cell which is disasterous (exitotoxic) (1-3)
 
thesinner said:
What I'm simply getting at is that if your total test is say, 500 ng/dL. That's about middle of the road in terms of healthy test levels. If it increases by a third, you're total test going up by a third leads to 667 ng/dL, which is still about middle of the road in terms of healthy test levels.

In the end, it's only going to help increase test levels a bit. I think Bubsnt hit the nail on the head. It's an excitotoxin, which may raise test levels a little bit. I have a feeling that in a few years this substance will be like creatine monohydrate to a lesser degree. Some people love it, some people only get side effects, and some people are 'non-responders'.
Click to expand...

i agree, it almost can be said with anything in the supplement world, some stuff works for ppl some people it doesn't, and it could have increased test, without bloodwork i'm not sure, all the tests show it does and a lot of people love the stuff, so i'm not doubting that, just didn't see any noticeable differences and in most cases, people see something
 
Young Gotti said:
i agree, it almost can be said with anything in the supplement world, some stuff works for ppl some people it doesn't, and it could have increased test, without bloodwork i'm not sure, all the tests show it does and a lot of people love the stuff, so i'm not doubting that, just didn't see any noticeable differences and in most cases, people see something
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the catch 22.

As a consumer, you don't actually care about increasing your test levels. It's whether or not they carry over to muscle/strength gains in the gym.
 
This really is a dose-dependency topic and until we have peer-reviewed proof of what an excitotoxic dose is... it's just a crap shoot.

Also, duration makes all the difference. If it's recommended to take DAA at 3g a day for 14 days but it takes 90 days for excitotoxicity to occur at this dose... you get my drift.

****, how much DAA is even bioavailable/excreted after oral ingestion of a 3g dose?

The studies just aren't there for anyone to feel 100% safe taking DAA - but as someone else mentioned a good deal of people take all sorts of narcotics that are known to be harmful.

What if DAA turns out to prevent all forms of brain cancer? No one has any clue at this point.
 
thesinner said:
What I'm simply getting at is that if your total test is say, 500 ng/dL. That's about middle of the road in terms of healthy test levels. If it increases by a third, you're total test going up by a third leads to 667 ng/dL, which is still about middle of the road in terms of healthy test levels.

In the end, it's only going to help increase test levels a bit. I think Bubsnt hit the nail on the head. It's an excitotoxin, which may raise test levels a little bit. I have a feeling that in a few years this substance will be like creatine monohydrate to a lesser degree. Some people love it, some people only get side effects, and some people are 'non-responders'.
Click to expand...

ok, bob-i have a question for you. will it effect someone like me, who has been on trt for a considerable amount of time, differently than someone who starts out with normal range test level.
 
obvious said:
This really is a dose-dependency topic and until we have peer-reviewed proof of what an excitotoxic dose is... it's just a crap shoot.

Also, duration makes all the difference. If it's recommended to take DAA at 3g a day for 14 days but it takes 90 days for excitotoxicity to occur at this dose... you get my drift.

****, how much DAA is even bioavailable/excreted after oral ingestion of a 3g dose?

The studies just aren't there for anyone to feel 100% safe taking DAA - but as someone else mentioned a good deal of people take all sorts of narcotics that are known to be harmful.

What if DAA turns out to prevent all forms of brain cancer? No one has any clue at this point.
Click to expand...

unfortunatly that is where the whole problem lies.. No one know the safety of the product because it hasn't been tested.. One way or the other. Companies just picked it up because it increased gnrh, lh, fsh, and test.. And they expect me to test it for safety.. At least if I take meth it has years of studies and user feedback I can refer to...
 
Where is Pat Arnold?

Furthermore, i think Dr. Dana Houser is doing a self study on DAA at 3gms a day over a 12 month period. Maybe he could chime in??

I've taken DAA with Clomid during pct. worked outwell, but i was also incorporating AI as a down stroke im my pct, so there was overlap. therefore, i can only speculate on DAA effects.

i need to run DAA solo for 14 days, and will post.
 
mikeshark00 said:
Where is Pat Arnold?

Furthermore, i think Dr. Dana Houser is doing a self study on DAA at 3gms a day over a 12 month period. Maybe he could chime in??

I've taken DAA with Clomid during pct. worked outwell, but i was also incorporating AI as a down stroke im my pct, so there was overlap. therefore, i can only speculate on DAA effects.

i need to run DAA solo for 14 days, and will post.
Click to expand...

Pat has already chimed in. Provided us what he could.

I doubt Dinoii is taking brain biopsies looking for damage, but I could be wrong. :D
 
thebigt said:
ok, bob-i have a question for you. will it effect someone like me, who has been on trt for a considerable amount of time, differently than someone who starts out with normal range test level.
Click to expand...

It might.

DAA occurs naturally within the body. If low amounts of the necessary enzyme for natural production exist, this might be a possible outlet for increasing test levels.

The purpose of any supplement is to obtain sufficient amounts of a desired substrate, which cannot be obtained by normal diet.

Look at ZMA. Unless you have a zinc or magnesium deficiency, the results are quite hampered.
 
thesinner said:
It might.

DAA occurs naturally within the body. If low amounts of the necessary enzyme for natural production exist, this might be a possible outlet for increasing test levels.

The purpose of any supplement is to obtain sufficient amounts of a desired substrate, which cannot be obtained by normal diet.

Look at ZMA. Unless you have a zinc or magnesium deficiency, the results are quite hampered.
Click to expand...

so becuase my natural test has and is shutdown, the benefits of daa could possibly be more beneficial? possibly act like hcg? the difference between someone on pct, and someone on trt taking daa, is that i am continuing to inject test while taking the daa. even though in both cases shutdown has occured, and a 1/3rd increase in natural test would be very beneficial, it seems to me that it would be even more advantageous on top of the injected test, no facts involved, just my thoughts.
 
thebigt said:
so becuase my natural test has and is shutdown, the benefits of daa could possibly be more beneficial? possibly act like hcg? the difference between someone on pct, and someone on trt taking daa, is that i am continuing to inject test while taking the daa. even though in both cases shutdown has occured, and a 1/3rd increase in natural test would be very beneficial, it seems to me that it would be even more advantageous on top of the injected test, no facts involved, just my thoughts.
Click to expand...

It really depends on what metabolic mechanisms are limiting your natural test production. Throwing in injected test complexes things a bit, as well.

If you are injecting test, steroidogenesis (making pregnenolone from cholesterol) starts to shut down. That's why LDL levels tend to go up.
 
TheLastRonin said:
http://www . lean bulk . com/forum/

ask-dr-houser/13065-daa-toxicity-hpta.html


Won't link so copy paste and put the spaces together.
Click to expand...

yeah, those people don't have a vested interest in any DAA products :wink1:

I would go give my input there but don't have time or attention for multiple forums.. There are some obvious problems with their input, as well as, the aspartame studies quoted..
1. Aspartame is %40 L-DAA, given a 165lb person at 75mg/kg that is still only 2/3 of the dose of DAA that people are taking.
2. Aspartame requires metabolism which is a rate limiting step for DAA production. This means that taking equal amounts of DAA and % wise of Aspartame are going to cause far different blood concentrations of DAA. Aspartame will not reach the same blood plasma level that straight DAA does even if you take the equivilant same amount
3. DAA is an NMDA agonist itself
4. Because of the higher blood concentrations of DAA, more is free to convert to NMDA at any given time. Addionally, given the secretion rate of DAA it is possible that you would never reach the blood acumulation level of DAA with Aspartame that you would with DAA supplementation

Comparing Aspartame to DAA is like comparing L-lysine-D-amphetamine to D-amphetamine. It is far easier to reach nerotoxicity with an equivilant dose of D-amphet than with L-lysine-D-amphetamine
 
bubsnt3 said:
Aspartic Acid Aspartate is a neurotransmitter in the brain ... (snip)
Click to expand...


Thanks for answering my questions - I didn't understand all of it but I got enough of it to understand exactly what the big deal might be.

I will ease off the DAA I think - until there is more evidence on it's short and long term toxic effects. I use test boosters occasionally - but I really don't need to even though I'm 49 - my body still responds to training pretty well.

Which kind of "segways" into another discussion - and that is this crazy quest (by many) to reach a free testosterone level of 10,000 or something like that. I think people forget - that there is a lot more to the equation than testosterone ...

Now me - I have always responded to training - even if I eat badly - I can still build lean muscle. There have been times when I had to leave the gym (for whatever reason) and I stayed away for three, four years even - and I'd get fat as pig and you'd swear my muscle was totally gone - but whenever I came back I was able to quickly regain (within months) what I lost - and lose all the fat I had gained. It amazes me ...

I don't think I am the only one like this. I think a lot of people on this board are like me.

Does this mean I have high testosterone? Well, I don't know - because I have never paid attention to the blood tests when given one. But - I don't think so - because I have to WORK HARD to get down to 13% BF or lower. I can get under 18 no problem - but going under 13 is a trick for me!

I think it means something else.

I had a friend in the Navy who was the biggest horn-dog I've ever seen. He ****ed everything that moved - and when he wasn't ****ing with it he was yanking it - guy thought about nothing but sex. He couldn't help it - and felt a bit tormented by it - so he went to a psyche and the psyche actually tested his hormone profile. He came back on the high end for everything male related - which explained a lot concerning his sex drive.

And he was a lean mother ****er too - not an ounce of fat on him. However - when we'd drag him into the gym to get his mind off shagging - he'd work like hell, eat like hell - and not gain an ounce of muscle.

And I think - my dumb theory - is that the guy just didn't have it on the other end - the part where your muscles actually RESPOND to the presence of hormones and training and nutrition.

I think many guys have "so-so" test levels - but their muscles just respond disproportionally to the presence of test and training - and they get big because of that.

So I don't think testosterone is the "be all / end all".

Then again - I'm pretty stupid and prolly should go lift something right now before I start thinking I'm smart.
 
HondaV65 said:
Thanks for answering my questions - I didn't understand all of it but I got enough of it to understand exactly what the big deal might be.

I will ease off the DAA I think - until there is more evidence on it's short and long term toxic effects. I use test boosters occasionally - but I really don't need to even though I'm 49 - my body still responds to training pretty well.

Which kind of "segways" into another discussion - and that is this crazy quest (by many) to reach a free testosterone level of 10,000 or something like that. I think people forget - that there is a lot more to the equation than testosterone ...

Now me - I have always responded to training - even if I eat badly - I can still build lean muscle. There have been times when I had to leave the gym (for whatever reason) and I stayed away for three, four years even - and I'd get fat as pig and you'd swear my muscle was totally gone - but whenever I came back I was able to quickly regain (within months) what I lost - and lose all the fat I had gained. It amazes me ...

I don't think I am the only one like this. I think a lot of people on this board are like me.

Does this mean I have high testosterone? Well, I don't know - because I have never paid attention to the blood tests when given one. But - I don't think so - because I have to WORK HARD to get down to 13% BF or lower. I can get under 18 no problem - but going under 13 is a trick for me!

I think it means something else.

I had a friend in the Navy who was the biggest horn-dog I've ever seen. He ****ed everything that moved - and when he wasn't ****ing with it he was yanking it - guy thought about nothing but sex. He couldn't help it - and felt a bit tormented by it - so he went to a psyche and the psyche actually tested his hormone profile. He came back on the high end for everything male related - which explained a lot concerning his sex drive.

And he was a lean mother ****er too - not an ounce of fat on him. However - when we'd drag him into the gym to get his mind off shagging - he'd work like hell, eat like hell - and not gain an ounce of muscle.
And I think - my dumb theory - is that the guy just didn't have it on the other end - the part where your muscles actually RESPOND to the presence of hormones and training and nutrition.

I think many guys have "so-so" test levels - but their muscles just respond disproportionally to the presence of test and training - and they get big because of that.

So I don't think testosterone is the "be all / end all".

Then again - I'm pretty stupid and prolly should go lift something right now before I start thinking I'm smart.
Click to expand...

That's my problem, it's bad genetics. There's not one person in my family that has large muscles.
 
TheLastRonin said:
People said they wanted Dr. Houser's opinion and there it is.
Click to expand...

Wish you would have quoted the rest.. His initial view is a little flawed.. Although I didn't read the whole thread.. But I see what you are saying.. Thanks for the link..

I would go give my input there but don't have time or attention for multiple forums.. There are some obvious problems with their input, as well as, the aspartame studies quoted..
1. Aspartame is %40 L-DAA, given a 165lb person at 75mg/kg that is still only 2/3 of the dose of DAA that people are taking.
2. Aspartame requires metabolism which is a rate limiting step for DAA production. This means that taking equal amounts of DAA and % wise of Aspartame are going to cause far different blood concentrations of DAA. Aspartame will not reach the same blood plasma level that straight DAA does even if you take the equivilant same amount
3. DAA is an NMDA agonist itself
4. Because of the higher blood concentrations of DAA, more is free to convert to NMDA at any given time. Addionally, given the secretion rate of DAA it is possible that you would never reach the blood acumulation level of DAA with Aspartame that you would with DAA supplementation

Comparing Aspartame to DAA is like comparing L-lysine-D-amphetamine to D-amphetamine. It is far easier to reach nerotoxicity with an equivilant dose of D-amphet than with L-lysine-D-amphetamine
 
bubsnt3 said:
Wish you would have quoted the rest.. His initial view is a little flawed.. Although I didn't read the whole thread.. But I see what you are saying.. Thanks for the link..
Click to expand...

I saw no reason to quote it as I am not for your opinion or his and you already have a post with it on there. I was merely posting the link as a messenger. Short term sides IMO are nil and long term are reached for and inconclusive. People can make assumptions all they want one way or the other, until there are concrete facts, nobodies layman's opinion matters frankly.
 
TheLastRonin said:
I saw no reason to quote it as I am not for your opinion or his and you already have a post with it on there. I was merely posting the link as a messenger. Short term sides IMO are nil and long term are reached for and inconclusive. People can make assumptions all they want one way or the other, until there are concrete facts, nobodies layman's opinion matters frankly.
Click to expand...

As I stated earlier, someone could say the same thing about Methylenedioxypyrovalerone but taking that stance with substances on your body is you call.. That is what this thread is about. DAA is an exitotoxin and that is not an opinion.. Scientific fact regarding this has been posted multiple times.. The only thing even debatable is how much is too much.. And without human studies all we have is guesses. My point has been posted on this multiple times and I feel like I am being more argumentative than helpful at this point so I will sign off..

Thanks everyone for the input!
 
I'm kind of surprised that no one has mentioned the protective effects that have been seen when pairing DHEA supplementation with that of NMDA agonists:

The experiments reported here show that the neurosteroid DHEA has powerful ameliorating effects on excitatory amino acid-induced neurotoxicity. This conclusion is strengthened by this effect being demonstrated both in vitro and in vivo for NMDA.
Click to expand...

DHEA, together with DHEAS, is the most abundant steroid in the blood of young adult humans. Levels in humans decline with age and during certain types of illness or stress. We have found that DHEA(S) can prevent or reduce the neurotoxic actions in the hippocampus of the glutamate agonists N-methyl-D-aspartic acid (NMDA) both in vitro and in vivo or a-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) and kainic acid in vitro.

Pre-treatment with DHEA (10–100 nM for 6–8 h) protected primary hippocampal cultures from embryonic day 18 (E18) embryos against NMDA-induced toxicity (0.1, 1, 10, and 50 mM). DHEA added either with NMDA (1 mM) or 1 h later had lesser, but still significant, protective actions. DHEAS also reduced NMDA-induced toxicity (1 mM), although the lowest effective dose of DHEAS (100 nM) was higher than that of DHEA (10 nM).

DHEA (100 nM) protected cultured neurons against the neurotoxic actions of either AMPA (25 mM) or kainic acid (1 mM) as well. In vivo, s.c. pellets of DHEA, which resulted in plasma levels that resembled those in young adult humans, protected hippocampal CA1y2 neurons against unilateral infusions of 5 or 10 nmol of NMDA.

Because the release of glutamate has been implicated in the neural damage after cerebral ischemia and other neural insults, these results suggest that decreased DHEA levels may contribute significantly to the increased vulnerability of the aging or stressed human brain to such damage.
Click to expand...

Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and DHEA-sulfate (DHEAS) protect hippocampal neurons against excitatory amino acid-induced neurotoxicity
V. G. Kimonides, N. H. Khatibi, C. N. Svendsen, M. V. Sofroniew, and J. Herbert
PNAS, Feb 1998; 95: 1852 - 1857.

Invalid Link Removed


Maybe taking Erase or another DHEA product a couple of hours before taking your dose of DAA is a good idea, if you're going to take it. Just another thing to consider.
 
bubsnt3 said:
As I stated earlier, someone could say the same thing about Methylenedioxypyrovalerone but taking that stance with substances on your body is you call.. That is what this thread is about. DAA is an exitotoxin and that is not an opinion.. Scientific fact regarding this has been posted multiple times.. The only thing even debatable is how much is too much.. And without human studies all we have is guesses. My point has been posted on this multiple times and I feel like I am being more argumentative than helpful at this point so I will sign off..

Thanks everyone for the input!
Click to expand...

There are many things debatable one of which being whether or not DAA is toxic in ANY amount, especially by ingesting small amounts. There are NO tests that prove this. There are only YOUR theories. SO you can post the same thing again and again and it still does not matter one little bit. You are making a guess. Just because it is an agonist does not mean it causes any type of neurotoxicity.
There is also no evidence as to the effect of anything major happening in the brain or making its way though the BBB and thus having a negative response. There is no scientific fact on this. There are some obscure studies that people are trying their best to link together. There is NO CONCLUSIVE STUDY ON THIS!
By the way NDMA is a proven excitotoxin, not DAA itself. There are no studies on this as yet so it can not be proven.
 
so basically the general consensus of this thread is that i should stop taking my daa? even if at the moment im having no sides?
 
swollen87 said:
so basically the general consensus of this thread is that i should stop taking my daa? even if at the moment im having no sides?
Click to expand...

I ain't yo daddy!!! :p

I don't think you would feel these sides brother. You would probable just end up in a old folk home at a early age. If all that's said is even true but I will not be taking my chances with this one.
 
StakedCop said:
I ain't yo daddy!!! :p

I don't think you would feel these sides brother. You would probable just end up in a old folk home at a early age. If all that's said is even true but I will not be taking my chances with this one.
Click to expand...

LOL... so daa could some day cause parkinsons or some type of neurological disorder?

im already a recovering addict... lol ive put plenty of holes in my brain already.... so on one hand, i could say fu*ck it, but that never seems to work out the way i plan......

if this stuff is actually potentially dangerous for my brain(or whats left of it), i think i should stop

i read ur first post in this thread when u started it... im assuming you stopped taking it?
 
swollen87 said:
LOL... so daa could some day cause parkinsons or some type of neurological disorder?

im already a recovering addict... lol ive put plenty of holes in my brain already.... so on one hand, i could say fu*ck it, but that never seems to work out the way i plan......

if this stuff is actually potentially dangerous for my brain(or whats left of it), i think i should stop

i read ur first post in this thread when u started it... im assuming you stopped taking it?
Click to expand...

Yes, I stopped the day I was made aware of the possible sides. I can't rely on my good looks forever so I need my brain, lol. Try to skim thru the posts i know it's a lot but it will be worth your time my friend.
 
StakedCop said:
Yes, I stopped the day I was made aware of the possible sides. I can't rely on my good looks forever so I need my brain, lol. Try to skim thru the posts i know it's a lot but it will be worth your time my friend.
Click to expand...

thanks... (i must spread some reputation around)
 
bubsnt3 said:
That is what this thread is about. DAA is an exitotoxin and that is not an opinion.. Scientific fact regarding this has been posted multiple times..
Click to expand...

Actually it still is just your opinion no matter how many times you repeat it.

I can't believe this thread is still going. The only one that keeps stating that DAA is an excitotoxin (btw, learn to spell the big words if you are going to toss them around) is bubs here. I'm not sure what his definition of excitotoxicty or an agonist is, but DAA has NOT been shown to be excitotoxic at any orally ingested level and if you have a single paper...JUST ONE!!!...then show it.

Using your logic, every agonist of the NMDA receptor including glutamate should cause excitotoxicity. I wrote an entire PhD thesis on the role of nitric oxide in glutamatergic transmission as it pertains to schizophrenia. I was earlier told I was lying about being a neuroscientist and I don't wish to post my personal info on here, but if you want a copy of my thesis, PM your email and I will gladly send it. That isn't to say everything I say is fact, but I would think I have a better grasp on this topic than somebody who just copies and pastes from wikipedia.

DAA has not been show to be excitotoxic. Doesn't mean it isn't, but it has not been shown to be even though this person keeps saying it does.

My challenge still stands. Got a paper? Show it! Really not that complicated.
 
neuroscientist on anabolicminds............

why do u even have any interest in daa... i bet you could make test in your sink..
 
Alek, I'm just trying to play safe. I don't think at any time I was rude or unprofessional with you so I don't think you're talking about me, lol. I do know, i don't know how to spell half the sh!t we're talking about let alone even know what any of it means. Which is the reason I have stopped supplementing with DAA.

PM is on it's way. Even tho the chance of me comprehending it is close to none...
 
StakedCop said:
Yes, I stopped the day I was made aware of the possible sides. I can't rely on my good looks forever so I need my brain, lol. Try to skim thru the posts i know it's a lot but it will be worth your time my friend.
Click to expand...

And bulbine is safer??? There is probably less known about that
 
mw1 said:
And bulbine is safer??? There is probably less known about that
Click to expand...

Ya know what **** it all I eat 3 pounds of raw meat a day and pop stims like candy. I'm ****ed anyway

Mdrol was a real safe supplement too, I hear... Wrong topic. Anyway, you've been hating on bulbine since day one. Start and thread and Talk about it I will join in
 
swollen87 said:
neuroscientist on anabolicminds............

why do u even have any interest in daa... i bet you could make test in your sink..
Click to expand...

I don't have an interest in DAA and am not taking it or endorsing any company that produces it. I simply saw somebody misquoting scientific studies and asked them if they could produce another source and it blew up from there.

And I probably could, but the wife being a federal prosecutor would not appreciate it lol.
 
StakedCop said:
Alek, I'm just trying to play safe. I don't think at any time I was rude or unprofessional with you so I don't think you're talking about me, lol. I do know, i don't know how to spell half the sh!t we're talking about let alone even know what any of it means. Which is the reason I have stopped supplementing with DAA.

PM is on it's way. Even tho the chance of me comprehending it is close to none...
Click to expand...

You've been nothing but great with me and I appreciate it. I don't think DAA does as much as some propose it does in regards to test production and it may cause problems like increased anxiety. There are plenty of other products out there.

Email sent!
 
buck6196 said:
I did some research before I bought a tub from NP and thought I would give it a run to see if it lived up to the hype.

I got a wierd headache the seemed to be in the center of my brain, it was constant - not overpowering but strong enough to know something was not right. That was from day one.

The DAA is now on the shelf until further notice.
Click to expand...

How much were you taking. I think people should start at a very small dose and slowly titrate up.

I am planning to run DAA on-cycle with my Havoc and tren cycle to see if it helps shutdown. Will be running it with p5p, b12 and IGF-2 (for l-dopa source).
 
DangerouStyle said:
How much were you taking. I think people should start at a very small dose and slowly titrate up.

I am planning to run DAA on-cycle with my Havoc and tren cycle to see if it helps shutdown. Will be running it with p5p, b12 and IGF-2 (for l-dopa source).
Click to expand...

Adding 200mg of B6 to that stack would be a good idea.
 
thebigt said:
my biggest concern is does test levels fall off the chart after using. lol-do you need a pct for daa?
Click to expand...

this is not like taking an exogenous steroid which causes suppression while you are taking it and then when you stop you stay suppressed

this is something that does the opposite, and after discontinuation i would expect levels to simply return to normal. just like with SERMs and AIs which also work via upregulation of the HPTa
 
bubsnt3 said:
It is actually good science. No studies have been performed for the safety in humans.. DAA is a PROVEN EXITOTOXIN with agonist activity at the NMDA receptor.. And NMDA toxicity is not someones theory but proven science.. You are saying to ignore both anecdotal reports and available scientific literature because it is not "fact." ]
Click to expand...


the term excititoxin is really a misnomer. It assumes that all agonists of the NMDA receptor are neurotoxic no matter what the concentration. That obvoiusly is not true

Lack of NMDA agonists would surely **** your brain up as you can well imagine. Too much can be kill neurons. The question here is are we reaching the level of d-aspartic acid in the brain that is dangerous. There is no evidence that we are
 
Patrick Arnold said:
the term excititoxin is really a misnomer. It assumes that all agonists of the NMDA receptor are neurotoxic no matter what the concentration. That obvoiusly is not true

Lack of NMDA agonists would surely **** your brain up as you can well imagine. Too much can be kill neurons. The question here is are we reaching the level of d-aspartic acid in the brain that is dangerous. There is no evidence that we are
Click to expand...

but is there any evidence we are NOT
 
swollen87 said:
neuroscientist on anabolicminds............

why do u even have any interest in daa... i bet you could make test in your sink..
Click to expand...

first of all, the fact that he is a neuroscientist is probably why he is interested in DAA.. Particularly because DAA involves his exact area of specialization

second of all, he is not a chemist. neuroscientists cant synthesize jack squat in the lab, that is not what they do. that is more up my alley
 
swollen87 said:
but is there any evidence we are NOT
Click to expand...

no there isnt. but that essentially can be said for the majority of supplement ingredients out there. Even some drugs, which have only been studied for relatively short term safety

dont expect anyone to do a study to see what DAA usage does to someone after 50 years. and if someone does this study I will be dead by the time the results are in anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top