Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Epicatechin dosage?

The Express 42

Well-known member
I see a lot of products in the 200-250mg range, has anyone had success or noticed a difference going over 500mg's? When I have tried the 250mg I didn't notice much so just curious if theres an advantage to upping the dose.
 
You could try out a Difference product, maybe Thea will suit you better.

Check out these, They are getting much heat.

Follidrone 2.0
Ep1c Unleased (oral or TD)
Anafuse ( with laxogenin )
EPI 2.0 ( 450 MG daily)

Think these have sort of a
"selective absorption promoter "

I have only ran the Ep1c Unleashed by OL, with there Str3ngth Unleashed (laxogenin) Got frest results.

Maybe some other will shine in soon.

Anyway Good luck brother! :-)
 
appreciate the response! yeah have been looking into follidrone 2.0 and maybe adding 250mg of some bulk epicatechin and see where it goes.
 
I can agree with chestbro... I finished a run with Ep1c Unleashed Transdermal with pretty good results.. but then again I was using it during a 16-week keto diet. It definitely made me hold on to some strength.
 
Cel epi-plex gives you 300mg per dose. Dose it twice a day for 600mg. It's a no prob blend so you know exactly how much epi you are getting.
 
Let's see if this is still in my pic repository...

Yup. The more the better in this study (it appears...). Whether or not it will actually do anything (other than generally being healthy) is person dependent it seems. The "Bigger Muscles" theory seems to have been busted though.
 

Attachments

  • Epi.jpg
    Epi.jpg
    43.5 KB · Views: 2,034
Let's see if this is still in my pic repository...

Yup. The more the better in this study (it appears...). Whether or not it will actually do anything (other than generally being healthy) is person dependent it seems. The "Bigger Muscles" theory seems to have been busted though.

Always in with the great info.
 
appreciate the response! yeah have been looking into follidrone 2.0 and maybe adding 250mg of some bulk epicatechin and see where it goes.

I'd like to see if you notice a difference if you end up doing this. I really haven't experimented with epicatechin dosage myself.
 
I am going to be running epidrone at 4 caps in my next cycle, but I am using it as test base for my super dmz 2.0 so the dmz, msten, and epiandro will probably over shadow any benefits, thats 664mg of epicatechin though. I might pick something up for my pct and try to run it over 500 and it should shine there if it makes any difference
 
I am going to be running epidrone at 4 caps in my next cycle, but I am using it as test base for my super dmz 2.0 so the dmz, msten, and epiandro will probably over shadow any benefits, thats 664mg of epicatechin though. I might pick something up for my pct and try to run it over 500 and it should shine there if it makes any difference

It will be 100% a waste to run the natty epi with that stack. Save it for PCT.
 
You could also look at CEL epiplex. 300mg of epi in each dose and around $30 a bottle. You can play with dosing double at 600mg for the same cost as bulk.
 
Sparta has Epicurus, EpiCat with Tetrasorb, great product, i logged it on a cut. Laxo (if you wanted to stack the two) is better transdermally. BPS Androcrine is a great Laxo product.
 
The dose depends on if it's straight epic or has some sort of absorption enhancer. As mentioned, Sparta has Epicurus with tetrasorb as well as CEL epi-plex has their enhancer. Both are stellar products and often on sale for great prices
 
Are these absorption methods superior to cyclodextrin?

Every brand will argue theirs is better than the others. Honestly it's hard to say since all are newer and the compounds they're being used on relatively untested even in their original forms/extracts
 
Folidrone 2.0 blows all other Epi(-) products entirely away.

Curious as to why you feel this and what it's based on? I have not used, but do see why it's a great profile.
 
Curious as to why you feel this and what it's based on? I have not used, but do see why it's a great profile.

I have used Folidrone 1.0 and OL's clone and bulk.
I base mo on my personal experience and the personal use of numerous (at least a 100) AM posts, reviews and logs.
And the fact that BLR has a reputation for bringing only new products to the market and only products that work better than expected.
And the fact that I have been using and following supplements closely since the early 80's.

How can someone such as yourself who works in the supplement industry not have tried what has been touted for many months as being the best product of 2016 throughout AM?
And what experience do you have with the ingredients in the profile other than Epi(-) to state its a 'great profile'?
 
Are these absorption methods superior to cyclodextrin?

I dont believe Epicatechin really benifits from Clycodextrin. Epicatechin should have good solubility -- and epicatechin even has quite decent oral bioavailability. (Around 33%.) Its a BCS Class III compound: High solubility, low permeability, which is to say poor absorption from the GI tract. Epicatechin will really benifit from the use of intestinal permeation enhancers.
 
Epicatechin will really benifit from the use of intestinal permeation enhancers.
Enter Olympus Labs' PhytoFUSE™

By complexing Epicatechin with Phosphatidylcholine, the interfacial tension between the compound and GI fluid is decreased, thereby improving permeation across intestinal epithelial cells, enhancing bioavailability.

:cool2:
 
I have used Folidrone 1.0 and OL's clone and bulk.
I base mo on my personal experience and the personal use of numerous (at least a 100) AM posts, reviews and logs.
And the fact that BLR has a reputation for bringing only new products to the market and only products that work better than expected.
And the fact that I have been using and following supplements closely since the early 80's.

How can someone such as yourself who works in the supplement industry not have tried what has been touted for many months as being the best product of 2016 throughout AM?
And what experience do you have with the ingredients in the profile other than Epi(-) to state its a 'great profile'?

Well that's quite an ironic statement. OL clone? Didn't EvoMuse put out Epi first in MyoSynergy? So by your logic it's Folliclone 1.0?
 
Well that's quite an ironic statement. OL clone? Didn't EvoMuse put out Epi first in MyoSynergy? So by your logic it's Folliclone 1.0?

Myosynergy does include Epi(-), but is quite different from Folidrone 1.0 / Ep1c.
Ep1c was a very well made copy of Folidrone 1.0 that was put out after shorty after its success. Having used Ep1c, it was a great product for its time. Have you tried Folidrone 2.0?
 
Myosynergy does include Epi(-), but is quite different from Folidrone 1.0 / Ep1c.
Ep1c was a very well made copy of Folidrone 1.0 that was put out after shorty after its success. Having used Ep1c, it was a great product for its time. Have you tried Folidrone 2.0?

I'm curious how a single ingredient can be a "well made copy". IIRC, Folli 1.0 was 500mg (-)-Epi with a maltodextrin carrier, and Ep1c was 300mg (-)-Epi with a rice flour carrier. Neither were the first Epicatechin products to market.

Not trying to bicker; it just seems odd to call that a "clone".
 
I have used Folidrone 1.0 and OL's clone and bulk.
I base mo on my personal experience and the personal use of numerous (at least a 100) AM posts, reviews and logs.
And the fact that BLR has a reputation for bringing only new products to the market and only products that work better than expected.
And the fact that I have been using and following supplements closely since the early 80's.

How can someone such as yourself who works in the supplement industry not have tried what has been touted for many months as being the best product of 2016 throughout AM?
And what experience do you have with the ingredients in the profile other than Epi(-) to state its a 'great profile'?


loled. Shill much? Almost every single post you have made is on Follidrone 2.0 or BLR.

I heard Folidrone 1.0 was great though, very tren-like. Weird how none of the other (-)epi products gave tren-like results.
 
I have used Folidrone 1.0 and OL's clone and bulk.
I base mo on my personal experience and the personal use of numerous (at least a 100) AM posts, reviews and logs.
And the fact that BLR has a reputation for bringing only new products to the market and only products that work better than expected.
And the fact that I have been using and following supplements closely since the early 80's.

How can someone such as yourself who works in the supplement industry not have tried what has been touted for many months as being the best product of 2016 throughout AM?
And what experience do you have with the ingredients in the profile other than Epi(-) to state its a 'great profile'?

Choosing not to use a product even though it is taughted as a great product is a choice for several reasons. The question I asked was not meant as an attack yet your response was. All I was curious was to why you personally felt it was a great product. I was interested in your opinion. Nothing more. Much like yourself I do read up on products some I use others I choose not to, but I do look into the ingredients and seeing what each does is why I agreed it has a great profile. Don't be so quick to attack people who ask simple questions.
 
I've used only FD2 and EU, I'd lean towards FD2. The added ingredients do help out a lot. I added Endure+ along side and it definitely made a difference on my workout days.
 
I dont believe Epicatechin really benifits from Clycodextrin. Epicatechin should have good solubility -- and epicatechin even has quite decent oral bioavailability. (Around 33%.) Its a BCS Class III compound: High solubility, low permeability, which is to say poor absorption from the GI tract. Epicatechin will really benifit from the use of intestinal permeation enhancers.

Enter Olympus Labs' PhytoFUSE™

By complexing Epicatechin with Phosphatidylcholine, the interfacial tension between the compound and GI fluid is decreased, thereby improving permeation across intestinal epithelial cells, enhancing bioavailability.

:cool2:

Safety concerns over the use of intestinal permeation enhancers: A mini-review Invalid Link Removed any input on this?
 
Have had great results from both CEL Epi-plex and Ep1c Unleashed (caps & TD split doses)

While using both products I was stacking them with Dermastr3gnth Unleashed.

Results varied but my diet was completely different which is what I'm going to attribute that to. When I say varied, I was very impressed and happy both go arounds, but when eating more the first time (with epi-plex) I gained more obviously and when I had cut calories and cut carbs I really leaned out(with Ep1c).
 
Safety concerns over the use of intestinal permeation enhancers: A mini-review Invalid Link Removed any input on this?
Great question. I will do my best to address this, but I am just an enthusiastic researcher, I hope one of our more knowledgeable members will add to the discussion if I've missed anything.

In short: I don't think we have anything to worry about with Phosphatidylcholine (PC). In fact, it may actually be beneficial to the gut lining.

For the longer answer:
The intestinal permeation enhancers (PEs) referenced in this review are: fatty acid salts, bile salts, a carnitine, and a chelating agent. PC is a phospholipid, so while it does have beneficial effects on permeation enhancement, it is not one of the compounds in question in this review.

There are two primary reasons PC as a PE should not likely be a concern for us.

1. PC is, among other things, a zwitterionic surfactant. As a zwitterionic surfactant, PC shares some similarities to some of the compounds' primary MOA referenced in this review, but 2 are completely different and of those that share similarities, the secondary and tertiary effects are different. PC may reduce interfacial tension by fluidizing the membrane, but without any cytotoxity (damage to cells). In fact, this review points out that PE surfactants, (such as PC), have a "history of use in man in drug products and in the food processing industry, and that extensive safety testing was carried out on many of these..." PC doesn't share any of the other negative effects noted in some of these other PEs.

2. The epithelial membrane perturbation from fluidization to which they allude is observed to be rapidly reversible. "This indicates that the intestinal epithelia is highly robust and would suggest that any damage caused by PEs should be equally capable of being rapidly repaired, and this has been confirmed in a range of in vitro, ex vivo and in vivo preclinical intestinal models, as well as in a human study.." It's really no different than the constant damage/repair our gut linings go through on a daily basis being bombarded with various foods, alcohols, etc.

The alleged concern is over how sustainable the "damage-repair" cycle is over chronic use of PEs. The keyword here is "chronic". Presumably, in the context of these compounds' potential for eventual damage, chronic would seem to be many months/years of use of prescription drugs with PEs. So not only does PC appear to be much safer than some/all of these other PEs in and of itself, but most users here are only using PhytoFuse products for 4-8 week cycles anyway, negating the potential for "chronic" damage.

Additional concerns from the review:

3. One additional concern of note is that altering the state of junction openings of the intestinal lining may allow "translocation of potentially dangerous bystanders" such as endotoxin. In the following study, PC was found to actually help stop this.

"Both the transepithelial permeability of endotoxin and the transepithelial stimulation of leukocytes were nearly completely abolished after the apical supplementation of PC"
Invalid Link Removed

Additionally, this study showed that adding PC to an NSAID helped to protect from damage to intestinal epithelial cells:
Invalid Link Removed

4. Finally, they suggest that, even though all studies to date have demonstrated short-term safety with PEs, we may want to be careful in prescribing them to those with intestinal disorders/diseases such as IBS. While this suggestion may have some merit with other PEs, it's important to note that phosphatidylcholine and other phospholipids serve as major components of the intestinal mucus layer, and PC in particular has been shown to be helpful for those with IBS.

PC "produced significant benefit in the treatment of Ulcerative Colitis":
Invalid Link Removed

PC "exerted significant effects to aid in therapy of IBS (ulcerative colitis) by exerting both potent anti-inflammatory effects and improving membrane health and immune response, increasing hydrophobicity to potentially decrease diarrhea, and aiding the neurological signaling potential of the gut":
Invalid Link Removed
 
Safety concerns over the use of intestinal permeation enhancers: A mini-review Invalid Link Removed any input on this?

sodium caprate, sodium caprylate, and N-[8-(2-hydroxybenzoyl) amino] caprylate (SNAC)), bile salts, acyl carnitines, and EDTA

I'm unaware of any supplement using these.

Most PEs seem to cause membrane perturbation to varying extents that is rapidly reversible, and overall evidence of pathogen co-absorption is generally lacking.

Probably the Gold Standard: Meriva from Thorne -

Phytosomes are plant extracts bound to phospholipids (from sunflower oil in the case of Meriva 500-SF), essential components of human cells. Although the body does make phospholipids (such as phosphatidylcholine and phosphatidylserine), phospholipids can also be obtained from food or nutritional supplements. When taken orally, phospholipids are very well absorbed. The scientists at Indena found a way to attach a curcumin extract to phospholipids obtained from sunflower oil for optimal absorption, resulting in Meriva 500-SF. With Meriva 500-SF, the body readily absorbs the phospholipid with the attached curcumin, which results in more curcumin reaching the body’s cells that can benefit from it.

I wouldn't worry about anything similar.
 
The doses of SC used for oral peptides and protein are much much higher then what you might find in a supplement and even then at those doses there is no reason to assume it to be unsafe other then maybe being overly cautious.
 
Back
Top