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

N-Methyl-D-Aspartate

corsaking

Well-known member
Hi

this ingredient seems to be appearing in some supplements as a replacement for d aspartic acid.

ive read that this -nmda- can trigger epilepsy .

Hss anyone read something similar?

since writing this i came across this Invalid Link Removed
 
Last edited:
from what I've read, the only way it can cause anything like epilepsy is if it was applied directly to the brain. It's a solid test booster and is in our new product, Intimidate. and no negative side effects in any of our alpha or beta testers :)
 
If used at the recommended dosage, like we advertise with Intimidate, the effects are the brain are next to nothing. To my understanding, it is overdose and direct topical application that cause the issues.
 
OK First, disclaimer: I don't care who takes NMDA or doesn't and I'm not going to speak on the safety of NMDA or whether it is a good supplement or not. This is not a critique of any actual supp out there. I just have a really simple question.

I see people keep saying that NMDA is only dangerous if it comes in contact with the brain, but it is being sold as a supp that increases testosterone. However you can't have it both ways.

Either it crosses the blood brain barrier and increases testosterone, which means it comes into direct contact with the brain OR it does not cross the blood brain barrier and won't do anything for test production. Could somebody please clarify this? Thank you.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
OK First, disclaimer: I don't care who takes NMDA or doesn't and I'm not going to speak on the safety of NMDA or whether it is a good supplement or not. This is not a critique of any actual supp out there. I just have a really simple question.

I see people keep saying that NMDA is only dangerous if it comes in contact with the brain, but it is being sold as a supp that increases testosterone. However you can't have it both ways.

Either it crosses the blood brain barrier and increases testosterone, which means it comes into direct contact with the brain OR it does not cross the blood brain barrier and won't do anything for test production. Could somebody please clarify this? Thank you.
Click to expand...
yes you seem to think testosterone production is in the brain lol.
its inbewteen your legs mostly.
hens shrunkin balls when using steroids that shut down your test production.
 
Blergs said:
yes you seem to think testosterone production is in the brain lol.
its inbewteen your legs mostly.
hens shrunkin balls when using steroids that shut down your test production.
Click to expand...

You seem to not understand how DAA works
 
NMDA is not going to do anything to the leydig cells "inbetween your legs". NMDA is going stimulate a pathway that goes through the pituitary gland (in the brain...lol) which will send out signals (LH) to the leydig cells. Test production is in the leydig cells but that is not how NMDA or DAA is going to work.

Blergs said:
yes you seem to think testosterone production is in the brain lol.
its inbewteen your legs mostly.
hens shrunkin balls when using steroids that shut down your test production.
Click to expand...
 
Aleksandar37 said:
NMDA is not going to do anything to the leydig cells "inbetween your legs". NMDA is going stimulate a pathway that goes through the pituitary gland (in the brain...lol) which will send out signals (LH) to the leydig cells. Test production is in the leydig cells but that is not how NMDA or DAA is going to work.
Click to expand...

so ideally it would be better to take a product that is going to stimulate the testes to produce more testosterone , as any production of test by glands comes as secondary .?
 
NMDA has been shown to be bad when applied directly to brain tissue. It has NOT been found to be dangerous orally.


It crossing the BBB has no bearing on its safety in our brain. Take ANY compound that can cross the BBB, apply it DIRECTLY to brain matter, and the brain matter isn't going to like it.



Were suggesting everyone take this stuff orally, and leave the brain surgery to doctors ;)



Any more questions on NMDA? Would love to get further into it AM :)
 
No...just different pathways.


Intimidate(99% NMDA) works by activating NMDA receptors in your brain which then activate your HPTA.
 
why has gaining muscle got so technical . Bring back the days of Arnie , when supplements were basic or illegal At least the illegal stuff had been documented and tested and you knew what you were getting and could expect.

Half the ingredients in supplements i suspect the majority of us have never heard of , yet we put ourselves into the hands of " supplement scientists"who provide very little information on an ingredient to allow the consumer to make up their own mind on whether to buy.What we do read tends to be in the advertising which accompanies the supplement.

i suspect most of us buy because it-the supplement , any supplement not just this -will provide the final piece of the jigsaw to obtaining the muscle we require.

This is my own observation of the supplement industry .
 
So when they tested this stuff, they put it on people brains to asses side effects

Sounds ridiculous, but how or why would you put something directly on brain tissue to test it, oh look here is someone's brain let's sprinkle this supplement in it to see what happens lol
 
jaydollars said:
So when they tested this stuff, they put it on people brains to asses side effects

Sounds ridiculous, but how or why would you put something directly on brain tissue to test it, oh look here is someone's brain let's sprinkle this supplement in it to see what happens lol
Click to expand...

I meant "assess"
 
It was to understand NMDA's role in the brain. If you just Wikipedia it, it does make sense. Weird sense, but sense lol.
 
The entire point of us having a BBB is to protect the brain and not everything passes through it which creates an issue when we're researching new drugs. NMDA can be used in slice studies as a lesion yes. Is that what you are referring to?

Listen, you and I have gone back and forth on other issues, but I'm trying to do you a favor here. NMDA taken orally and passing through the BBB is no different than applying it directly to the brain. It is still NMDA reaching the brain. The brain doesn't care how it got there. The difference is concentrations.

You can sell your product however you want, but I don't think it is helping you guys out by saying that applying it to the brain is dangerous when the pathway you are selling has it coming in contact with the brain. It crossing the BBB is about safety, but the safety issue is being brought up by you guys and you're going to get enough of that from people that think DAA is dangerous.

VaughnTrue said:
NMDA has been shown to be bad when applied directly to brain tissue. It has NOT been found to be dangerous orally.


It crossing the BBB has no bearing on its safety in our brain. Take ANY compound that can cross the BBB, apply it DIRECTLY to brain matter, and the brain matter isn't going to like it.



Were suggesting everyone take this stuff orally, and leave the brain surgery to doctors ;)



Any more questions on NMDA? Would love to get further into it AM :)
Click to expand...
 
No. If you are doing research on animals and want to destroy a specific brain region to see what effect occurs, you take a slice of a region and NMDA is one of many compounds that you can use to produce a lesion. You are of course using a higher than physiologically normal dose though.

jaydollars said:
So when they tested this stuff, they put it on people brains to asses side effects

Sounds ridiculous, but how or why would you put something directly on brain tissue to test it, oh look here is someone's brain let's sprinkle this supplement in it to see what happens lol
Click to expand...
 
Aleksandar37 said:
The entire point of us having a BBB is to protect the brain and not everything passes through it which creates an issue when we're researching new drugs. NMDA can be used in slice studies as a lesion yes. Is that what you are referring to?

Listen, you and I have gone back and forth on other issues, but I'm trying to do you a favor here. NMDA taken orally and passing through the BBB is no different than applying it directly to the brain. It is still NMDA reaching the brain. The brain doesn't care how it got there. The difference is concentrations.

You can sell your product however you want, but I don't think it is helping you guys out by saying that applying it to the brain is dangerous when the pathway you are selling has it coming in contact with the brain. It crossing the BBB is about safety, but the safety issue is being brought up by you guys and you're going to get enough of that from people that think DAA is dangerous.
Click to expand...

This is where it gets interesting for me. On one hand, people who attack NMDA claim it has less chance to cross the BBB than DAA, however it is somehow more dangerous. I don't understand how those match up. Now, as you said, I have no desire to fight with you nor anyone else on this website...simply present data from either side, and we can discuss it. You may not believe it, but I do find you to be an incredibly intelligent poster. While I may disagree with your opinions on certain topics, I do find that your train of thought is logical/well thought out...so no complaints from me here.

Check out some info I pulled up...

Invalid Link Removed

We examined whether creatine administration could exert neuroprotective effects against excitotoxicity mediated by N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA), α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) and kainic acid. Oral administration of 1% creatine significantly attenuated striatal excitotoxic lesions produced by NMDA, but had no effect on lesions produced by AMPA or kainic acid. Both creatine and nicotinamide can exert significant protective effects against malonate-induced striatal lesions. We, therefore, examined whether nicotinamide could exert additive neuroprotective effects with creatine against malonate-induced lesions. Nicotinamide with creatine produced significantly better neuroprotection than creatine alone against malonate-induced lesions. Creatine can, therefore, produce significant neuroprotective effects against NMDA mediated excitotoxic lesions in vivo and the combination of nicotinamide with creatine exerts additive neuroprotective effects.
Click to expand...

Pretty cool study, no? It shows that an oral 1% solution of creatine exhibits some pretty strong neuroprotective properties. Based on this study, it would appear that anyone concerned about NMDA can simply take a very small amount of creatine each day(who doesn't take at least SOME creatine each day?) to protect themselves(note it includes in vivo here, not just vitro) from any potential issues.


Also...check out this patent app

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

This stuff has a patent on it to make animals "grow"...pretty cool LOL
 
Aleksandar37 said:
The entire point of us having a BBB is to protect the brain and not everything passes through it which creates an issue when we're researching new drugs. NMDA can be used in slice studies as a lesion yes. Is that what you are referring to?

Listen, you and I have gone back and forth on other issues, but I'm trying to do you a favor here. NMDA taken orally and passing through the BBB is no different than applying it directly to the brain. It is still NMDA reaching the brain. The brain doesn't care how it got there. The difference is concentrations.

You can sell your product however you want, but I don't think it is helping you guys out by saying that applying it to the brain is dangerous when the pathway you are selling has it coming in contact with the brain. It crossing the BBB is about safety, but the safety issue is being brought up by you guys and you're going to get enough of that from people that think DAA is dangerous.
Click to expand...



Makes sense Alexander. It is the same thing as someone applying a supplement trans-dermal as opposed to someone taking that same supplement orally. The only difference is the concentration but it will still reach the same place regardless.
 
Blergs said:
yes you seem to think testosterone production is in the brain lol.
its inbewteen your legs mostly.
hens shrunkin balls when using steroids that shut down your test production.
Click to expand...

Thank you so much for this post I really needed it...it's been a long day :)
 
interesting reads here, I do believe that both sides are covered well and debated even better, with logs from numerous users and no side effects at all I think there may be a missing link between the studies that topically placed a larger dose of NMDA directly on brain matter, and that the body metabolizes the NMDA in a safe manner
 
lol what about liver damage?...it is methylated after all. :p lol jk
 
the NMDA receptor is a voltage-gated channel which requires previous activation of the AMPA receptor for membrane depolarization

since the compound "NMDA" cannot agonize the AMPA receptor, its ability to activate the NMDA receptor would be limited, and so a direct neurotoxic effect will not likely occur from oral supplementation

if you take a neuron in a vacuum (en vitro), its normal electrical homeostasis is disrupted, and the NMDA receptor no longer is voltage gated. if you bath this neuron in NMDA, excitotoxicity will occur, whereas en vivo it can't
 
madchemist said:
the NMDA receptor is a voltage-gated channel which requires previous activation of the AMPA receptor for membrane depolarization

since the compound "NMDA" cannot agonize the AMPA receptor, its ability to activate the NMDA receptor would be limited, and so a direct neurotoxic effect will not likely occur from oral supplementation

if you take a neuron in a vacuum (en vitro), its normal electrical homeostasis is disrupted, and the NMDA receptor no longer is voltage gated. if you bath this neuron in NMDA, excitotoxicity will occur, whereas en vivo it can't
Click to expand...

great post, thanks!
 
VaughnTrue said:
see the post 2 above yours, as well as all the studies I've already posted.
Click to expand...

the patent you sourced says 25-37.5mg NMA/Kg body weight will probably be an optimal dose for humans regarding body composition

i think NMA is a racemic mixture of d and l isomers... so 12.5-18.75mg NMDA/Kg body weight will be a good dose for humans according to what you sourced. that seems too high to me tho

i'm not worried at all about neuro toxic effects after reading that.

where do you suggest buying it from for the best price? i cant really find it anywhere lol
 
chocolatemilk said:
the patent you sourced says 25-37.5mg NMA/Kg body weight will probably be an optimal dose for humans regarding body composition

i think NMA is a racemic mixture of d and l isomers... so 12.5-18.75mg NMDA/Kg body weight will be a good dose for humans according to what you sourced. that seems too high to me tho

i'm not worried at all about neuro toxic effects after reading that.

where do you suggest buying it from for the best price? i cant really find it anywhere lol
Click to expand...

That dose is HUGE and unnecessary.

We tested 10-60mg/day. 30mg was the sweet spot.



Intimidate will be available shortly and is the ONLY 99% pure compound.
 
and no liver issues right Vaughn...:)

if everything that was methylated caused liver damage you all better check out your forms of B12 in your formulas you are already ingesting :)

If im not mistaken it has a LOT more to do with the location of the methyl correct??
 
Yeah, I don't know who started that argument, but methyl does not always equal liver damage. In fact, some dietary methyl donors have been found to prevent liver damage from alcohol.

JN230 said:
and no liver issues right Vaughn...:)

if everything that was methylated caused liver damage you all better check out your forms of B12 in your formulas you are already ingesting :)

If im not mistaken it has a LOT more to do with the location of the methyl correct??
Click to expand...
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Yeah, I don't know who started that argument, but methyl does not always equal liver damage. In fact, some dietary methyl donors have been found to prevent liver damage from alcohol.
Click to expand...

a methyl group on the 17th carbon of a steroid prevents the liver from forming a ketone, thereby preventing deactivation. this causes an increase in oxygen radicals which damage the hepatocytes.

the methyl substituent itself is not toxic to the liver or anywhere else in the body.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Yeah, I don't know who started that argument, but methyl does not always equal liver damage. In fact, some dietary methyl donors have been found to prevent liver damage from alcohol.
Click to expand...

YES SIR :)
oh btw loved the first 4 weeks of anabeta, felt like I was on h-drol in fullness and strength aspects, well to a lesser degree but damn good stuff!
Id LOVE to run anabeta and intimidate and see what comes of it :)
madchemist said:
a methyl group on the 17th carbon of a steroid prevents the liver from forming a ketone, thereby preventing deactivation. this causes an increase in oxygen radicals which damage the hepatocytes.

the methyl substituent itself is not toxic to the liver or anywhere else in the body.
Click to expand...

Now that is a post I can read over and over
 
JN230 said:
YES SIR :)
oh btw loved the first 4 weeks of anabeta, felt like I was on h-drol in fullness and strength aspects, well to a lesser degree but damn good stuff!
Id LOVE to run anabeta and intimidate and see what comes of it :)
Click to expand...

Great to hear! Those two might work really well together.
 
i would assume so... anabolic from different pathways, Ill have to save it for run 2 of intimidate as I am running testobolan V2 with intimidate and res v2

then closer to summer
anabeta
intimidate
testobolan
and maybe erase pro as "pct"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top