If you could only take 1 natty anabolic substance, what would it be?
- Thread starter john10960
- Start date
GQdaLEGEND
Legend
used to xgels(ara) .. now im leaning towards phosphatic acidXT
alvin1
Well-known member
Same for me, as it ease my joint pain, to almost them been non existent. Laxogenin and turkesterone have the same effect than ecdysterone on me also.
Last edited:
sns8778
Board Sponsor
It's really difficult to answer this in the most literal sense because some ingredients can work very different depending on what they are combined with, how they are dosed, etc.
You take SR10X Symplocos for example - we use it in Anabolic XT, Recomp20, and Cloma-Plex - and all are great products, but all of them are going to give slightly different results.
Pepti-Plex is another great example - PeptiStrong is a great ingredient, but there is a lot more to Pepti-Plex than PeptiStrong and PeptiStrong alone won't give many of the benefits by itself that people see with the overall formula.
Most of my favorite products overall are formulation products:
I love the ingredients and the science, so I enjoy stuff like this - its just hard to narrow it down sometimes to one ingredient bc of the way that sometimes certain things can really help others shine and work better.
You take SR10X Symplocos for example - we use it in Anabolic XT, Recomp20, and Cloma-Plex - and all are great products, but all of them are going to give slightly different results.
Pepti-Plex is another great example - PeptiStrong is a great ingredient, but there is a lot more to Pepti-Plex than PeptiStrong and PeptiStrong alone won't give many of the benefits by itself that people see with the overall formula.
Most of my favorite products overall are formulation products:
- Anabolic XT
- Anabolic Effect
- Pepti-Plex
- Recomp20
- Phosphatidic Acid XT
- Cloma-Plex
- Recovery Fix
- X-Gels (Arachidonic Acid)
- Anacyclus XT
- Recomp20 (not single ingredient, but SR10X + Cocoabuterol)
- Phosphatidic Acid XT - there is more in it than one ingredient, but Mediator is the featured one.
- Epi-Plex - the natural anabolic part is single, but the new version does add VasoFlo+ which makes it even better for endurance and pumps and also makes it great for cardiovascular and endothelial health.
- Beta Ecdysterone-500 from Muscle Addiction
- Turkesterone-750 from Muscle Addiction
- Ursa-Gel from Xtreme Performance Gels
- Prime XT - Tribulus Aquaticus (we've had a lot of demand for this)
- Alpha One by CEL - not ready to go into details on this yet, but will be single ingredient.
I love the ingredients and the science, so I enjoy stuff like this - its just hard to narrow it down sometimes to one ingredient bc of the way that sometimes certain things can really help others shine and work better.
sns8778
Board Sponsor
Very overlooked but good answer.
I can't take Monohydrate myself bc it bloats me terribly, but would definitely say Creatine HCI or Magnesium Creatine Chelate; so could say creatine in general and then whatever forms works best for a person.
Darkhorse192
Well-known member
probably epi
GQdaLEGEND
Legend
Darkhorse192
Well-known member
I was under the impression that ecdysterone was bullshit?
john10960
Member
thanks for reply guys.
I had an edit in there that said excluding creatine and protein but it’s all good.
couple questions. What is ecydysterone? And what is epi?
also, I use pro synthesis build by MA and it has 1500 phos acid.
could I stack that with phos acid XT for better results? What is the safe limit for phos acid?
thanks!
I had an edit in there that said excluding creatine and protein but it’s all good.
couple questions. What is ecydysterone? And what is epi?
also, I use pro synthesis build by MA and it has 1500 phos acid.
could I stack that with phos acid XT for better results? What is the safe limit for phos acid?
thanks!
GQdaLEGEND
Legend
bullshyt ..i would say no .. maybe doesnt work is a better statement
i know plenty who thought it was but ran it with me and were quite impressed by it.
GQdaLEGEND
Legend
heres a quick write up from MA about ecdy
At Muscle Addiction, we listen to our customers, and we’ve had a lot of requests for us to offer a Beta-Ecdysterone product.
Beta-Ecdysterone, also called 20-hydroxyecdysterone, is contained in several plants, including Cyanotis arachnoidea, a plant rich in phytoecdysteroids which are compounds considered as potential catalysts for increased muscle protein synthesis as well as lean muscle, strength, and endurance benefits.
Beta-Ecdysterone-500 provides 500 mg. per capsule of a potent Beta-Ecdysterone Cyclodextrin complex with Bioperine added for enhanced absorption.
Users May Experience:
- Increased Lean Muscle & Strength
- Enhanced Fat Loss
- Improved Energy Levels
- Enhanced Recovery
- Improved Protein Synthesis
- Increased Stamina and Endurance
How long can Beta-Ecdysterone-500 be used for?
Beta-Ecdysterone is non-hormonal and can be used for extended periods of time. The average cycle length can be anywhere from 8 to 16 weeks with some people using Beta-Ecdystrone-500 for longer periods of time as part of their daily supplement regimens.
What is Beta-Ecdysterone-500 commonly stacked with?
Beta-Ecdysterone-500 can be stacked with Muscle Addiction Turkesterone-750, Test Fix, Recovery Fix, EpiAndro300, EpiAndro Lean, ECA Stack, or other Muscle Addiction products to help you reach your individual goals.
Does Beta-Ecdysterone-500 require PCT?
No. Beta-Ecdysterone-500 is a natural non-hormonal recomposition catalyst that does NOT require post cycle therapy (PCT).
Can Beta-Ecdysterone-500 be used during PCT?
Yes, Beta-Ecdysterone-500 can be used during post cycle therapy (PCT) to help not only retain lean muscle and strength gains but to also help continue to achieve new gains in lean muscle, strength, endurance, and more.
and epi i believe is being reffered to epicaatechin .. heres an example .. i agree thats also a great single ingrident
Invalid Link Removed
botk1161
Active member
You could take more PA, but I think you would benefit more from utilizing another supplement.
sns8778
Board Sponsor
Here is a link to a good Beta Ecdysterone product that gets good feedback: https://competitiveedgelabs.com/product/epi-plex/
By Epi, he most likely means Epicatechin. Here is a link to a great Epicatechin product and the write up goes into some good details about what it is and how it works: https://muscleaddiction.com/product/beta-ecdysterone-500/
As for Phosphatidic Acid XT with the other product you're referring to - the main thing to keep in mind with Mediator Phosphatidic Acid is that it needs to be used daily for best results. You could use them together, as some people double the dose on Phosphatidic Acid XT anyway, but if it were me personally, if I already used Phosphatidic Acid daily, I would stack it with Pepti-Plex instead.
cronikgains
Member
Epicatechin works well for me.
sns8778
Board Sponsor
There was a lot of soap opera'ish drama on here about the ingredient and much of it was what was bs, not the ingredient.
Like many ingredients, there are different types, levels of quality, potencies, etc.
As you know yourself, never a good idea to stereotype every product in a category based on one product or type.
We offer Beta Ecdysterone and Ajuga Turkestanica as standalone products under Muscle Addiction, and both get great feedback. Then we offer them together in Ecdy-Plex under CEL and the feedback on that is great and it sells very well, to the point if frequently sells out of stock.
One thing that caused a lot of the drama over the ingredient is that some brands and people overhyped it to the point where nothing was going to live up to that type of hype - and its unfortunate because then there's always a backlash on any ingredient that that happens to. But its not the ingredients fault, its the fault of the people that market it that way and create unrealistic expectations.
Another thing to consider, and I say this a lot - is that it is one of those ingredients that works much better for some people than others. Like Beta Ecdysterone-500 or Ecdy-Plex, most people like it and really enjoy it, but it does work better for some than others and there are definitely some hyper responders to it that get extremely great results.
I wasn't a hyper responder to it, but it definitely worked very well for me.
I can only speak for ours - and as I said, there are certainly some not so great extracts and standardizations out there.
Sparta12
Well-known member
I just got a prescription to get some tadalafil and also bought some beet root powder haha. Is it correct that you can take tadalafil for months and not become reliant on it? (in the sense you cant get an erection with out using it) my reading implies that not only you do not rely on it (maybe for the diamond dick status) but your normal erections should be better off it because it makes it all more efficient ?Tadalafil
With a side of beet root
Rad83
Well-known member
Everything is better on it. But nothing is worse off it…I don’t feel that I’m reliant on it.
I literally count the droplets of the product as they drip into a beverage (I use 14 drops at the moment) and my beet root product has betanin in it…it’s from dollar general. I can’t take cialis more than 2 days in a row…back/leg pain. This stack gives me the closest thing to an “on look” in the upper body when not on anything.
LeanEngineer
Legend
It's hard to choose just one. I was scrolling through our natural anabolic page at Strong Supplement Shop just now
https://www.strongsupplementshop.com/natural-anabolics?page=1
I've had good results with Anabolic Effect by CEL multiple times so I'd probably recommend it
https://www.strongsupplementshop.com/anabolic-effect-by-cel
https://www.strongsupplementshop.com/natural-anabolics?page=1
I've had good results with Anabolic Effect by CEL multiple times so I'd probably recommend it
https://www.strongsupplementshop.com/anabolic-effect-by-cel
Smont
Legend
Creatine 100%
Theres a reason its the most researched natty supplement and has been a staple for over 25 years. I gage all natural anabolics on a scale of zero-creatine
Smont
Legend
john10960
Member
Thanks for your reply.
I was looking at snes xgels a second ago. It says that one may need to increase protein and calorie intake due to the mechanism of action of ANA.
Could someone explain more about this? I’ve heard quite a few mention xgel and since I’ve been vegetarian since birth I think it could be a good choice for me.
thanks!!
I was looking at snes xgels a second ago. It says that one may need to increase protein and calorie intake due to the mechanism of action of ANA.
Could someone explain more about this? I’ve heard quite a few mention xgel and since I’ve been vegetarian since birth I think it could be a good choice for me.
thanks!!
LucasBagoDoce
Member
Currently cutting and testing if Pepti-Plex + PA XT + Recomp20 would help hold on to more mass than I usually do while on a cut.
Results have been pretty impressive. Diet has been on check, but I give that combo good credit. Started cutting at 164lbs (I’m 5”8’) and now I lost a LOT of fat, abs are very visible again and lost 1,5lbs in a month and a half. Currently 162.5lbs and much more ripped.
Results have been pretty impressive. Diet has been on check, but I give that combo good credit. Started cutting at 164lbs (I’m 5”8’) and now I lost a LOT of fat, abs are very visible again and lost 1,5lbs in a month and a half. Currently 162.5lbs and much more ripped.
zSplit
New member
The main idea is that ArA can play a role in the process of muscular repair mediated by the conversion of prostaglandins (PGF2alpha) which supposedly leads to a heightened/elevated affinity for muscular repair on a cellular level. It may also increase the affinity for other anabolic hormones. Thus, it makes sense to increase your protein intake while on ArA.
I've never noticed any drastic difference between eating around maintenance and eating several hundred calories above. I've experimented with both, and achieved almost identical results strength wise. The full dosage exclusively pre-workout with a glycerol and carnitine product (LCLT) yield the best results.
You can tinker around with your caloric intake on subsequent cycles, and see what works best for you. I'd also recommend trying both X-Gels (SNS) and X-Factor (Molecular Nutrition). I'm picky, and personally don't like the inclusion of soybean oil in X-Gels, but to each their own.
Last edited:
zSplit
New member
They're both gel caps and yield 40% which is what you want. I wouldn't touch ArA except for MN and SNS as other companies only yield 5-10% max which renders it basically useless.
zSplit
New member
Unless it says not to on any individual product, there shouldn't be an issue I wouldn't think, but if you wanted to be sure you can ask Molecular Nutrition, since the ingredient was largely developed and studied by them.
Resolve10
Well-known member
You probably could, nut its an oil so it won't mix well and I can't imagine how inconvenient it would be to continually drain all those caps (or how hard it might be to actually get it all out) or even the taste.
Also worrying about soybean oil in your x-gels feels like a level of neuroticism that is pretty unwarranted. Not sure when MN switched to the current source they use for ArA, but X-gels and X-factor were sourced from the same in the past anyways and no one ever seemed to have issues.
sns8778
Board Sponsor
I'm sorry, but this post kind of creates an inaccurate picture - you're implying that X-Gels contains soybean oil, but X-Factor doesn't, when X-Factor plain as day has a 'Contains: Soy' statement on the back of their container:
Invalid Link Removed
Arachidonic Acid 40% is a liquid, so it would be oil inside the softgels.
The powered form of ARA that would go into regular capsules is max a 10%, so you would have to take 2,500 mg. to equal 1 softgel of X-Gels.
The high percentage potency of ARA is an oil form, so it isn't suitable for vegetable capsules.
I actually am looking into a vegetarian softgel for X-Gels, but those are more likely to leak on some ingredients and also can raise the cost quite a bit, so I'm non-committal on that for the moment.
sns8778
Board Sponsor
I'm glad to hear that you're enjoying that stack. Congratulations on your progress.
GQdaLEGEND
Legend
haha i change my answer to one single ingrident > 17a-methyl-5a-androst-2-ene-17b-ol
zSplit
New member
You're right Steve, it does say that. I was unclear in my reply, I guess. What I meant is that it doesn't deliberately contain soybean oil, but is likely just manufactured in a facility that also manufactures soy. I personally see a difference between the former and latter, and it's only a personal preference.
I reached out to Molecular Nutrition just now and asked for clarification, and they confirmed the latter statement. I know the quality behind SNS, don't get me wrong, but I see a difference between a product deliberately containing soybean oil, and one that's just manufactured in a facility that manufacturers soy, which is basically almost anything and everything. This is not a "veganism thing" for me, it's a personal preference.
Thanks for your response though, because it was good on my part to double-check and verify my original assumption.
sns8778
Board Sponsor
I'm sorry, but that's not true.
If something says that it "Contains: Soy" or "Contains: Milk" or "Contains: Egg" - it does contain them.
A cross contamination warning would be something like:
This product is produced in a facility or on equipment that also handles wheat, gluten, soy, etc.
Contains is a statement of fact.
May contain is a statement of caution.
That's federal labeling law, not my opinion.
Do you see the part on their label that says - Glycerin?
Vegetable glycerin, also known as glycerol, glycerine, or glycerin, is a clear liquid typically made from soybean, coconut or palm oils.
The label doesn't say it may contain soy, the label clearly says - Contains: Soy and therefore you know it comes from soybean.
It can be used interchangeably on labels - we could say glycerin and then do what they do and say contains soy, but instead we went the fully transparent route of saying soybean oil.
See the irony there?
You're trying to avoid soybean oil, but if you use that one, you're consuming it anyway because it isn't being clearly labeled.
Yet, in this case, you're criticizing us, when we're the ones being fully transparent about it.
zSplit
New member
I'm sorry you felt I was bashing you. That was not my intention.
Nonetheless, you're stating an argument that I'm not really trying to make. I'm not saying their product is soy free, I'm just saying there is a difference in potential quantity between what's present through cross-contamination vs. adding an ingredient on-top of something deliberately.
For example, if I order a product that is manufactured in the same facility as one that produces fish oil, are you saying there is no difference between the quantity in an actual fish oil cap vs. one that simply contains cross-contamination because they're produced in the same facility? Of course there is, otherwise, I may as well stop taking fish oil then, because a lot of manufacturers for supplements say "may contain fish and soy."
Now, specific in this instance, could they be dishonest and not forthcoming? Of course. But, there still is a difference in quantity between cross-contamination and actually adding an ingredient on-top of contaminations.
john10960
Member
Thanks for all the answers as well as your clarification SNS.
I’ve already ordered from MN but in the future since I use mostly SNS products I might as well go from SNS.
I plan on poking a hole and emptying the capsules. Would you increase the dosing at all because of this? In relation to the residual left over inside the capsule. Do you think it would be significant?
I’ve already ordered from MN but in the future since I use mostly SNS products I might as well go from SNS.
I plan on poking a hole and emptying the capsules. Would you increase the dosing at all because of this? In relation to the residual left over inside the capsule. Do you think it would be significant?
john10960
Member
Hi Z.
I think what SNS is saying is that if it comes from cross contamination it must clearly state “May contain” versus” contains”. So I believe he’s saying it’s not from cross contamination but rather directly from the fact glycerin is a by product of soybean oil.
zSplit
New member
I understand, but from what MN told me, they said it does not, and is only produced from a facility that manufacturers soy. So, if they aren't being truthful, then that's a different story, and I can't fix that. I can only go based on what I'm told. If they are being truthful, then there is a big difference between cross-contamination and deliberately adding an ingredient on-top of cross-contamination.
Technically, glycerin can be obtained from coconut or palm. Does theirs? According to them it's not from soybean, but again, I can only respond to what I'm told *shrug*.
Anyways, I don't really care that much. This discussion will end up diverting itself to "SNS vs. MN", which isn't my intention. So, I'm ending it here. Even if it said "may contains soy", the original argument would then have been "soy isn't bad anyways, and doesn't make one product inferior." So, it's moot.
Last edited:
sns8778
Board Sponsor
See that's my issue here - people come on here and spout untruthful information and it misleads people into purchasing from other companies.
And it penalizes the companies that actually do things the right way and label things transparently.
zSplit
New member
Nope, that's not a fair response at all. You're implying that I deliberately lied. Your issue is with the companies response then, not me. I responded properly given the information that was confirmed by the original company. Am I suppose to go knock on the door of every company, and watch them produce the product?
At some point, there is something called personal preference.
sns8778
Board Sponsor
No, what you did is that you made a false statement about a product that led to someone purchasing something else because you posted something that wasn't true.
You said that our product has soybean oil and theirs doesn't.
I literally replied to you with the labeling guideline that a brand can say Glycerin and then say 'Contains: Soy' like they did or they can just state the more clearer terminology of soybean oil.
I'm not debating you on this - it's not my opinion - its the labeling law.
If a product says "Contains: Soy" - it contains it.
A cross contamination warning means that it may contain it.
I laid this all out in great detail and very clearly in the post above.
Or you spoke with a customer service representative who it isn't their job to know the answers to that.
This is absolutely ridiculous bc the label laws here in the US are crystal clear.
If a label says "Contains: _____" it is legally a statement of fact, it does contain it.
A cross contamination warning is: This product is produced in a facility that processes other ingredients that include........
sns8778
Board Sponsor
You posted that ours contains soy and theirs doesn't. I posted a screen shot of their label that clearly says it does.
I don't care what their response is - their label plain as day says it.
No, no one asked to post anything by any company - but how about not post false information to begin with?
You're right - if you don't like me, cool - buy someone else's. That's your personal preference.
But coming on here and stating false information about one of our products to steer other people to buying someone else's isn't personal preference, its posting something that isn't true in order to negatively impact our company. Big difference.