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

N-methyl-D-aspartic acid (NMDA) Read before supplementing

Jordinator

Member
One of the key things I found most interesting was this:

"
When I first started researching NMDA, I was considering marketing it as a nutritional supplement. After delving in deeper however, a couple of things made me change my mind. First of all, I contacted the patent inventor to see if I could get some more information on NMDA. He regretfully told me that his later research failed to confirm his earlier findings, and that he had deemed the project not worthy of further pursuit. I also discovered that NMDA is potentially quite toxic and may destroy neurons in sensitive areas of the brain like the hippocampus and the basal ganglia. NMDA might also have the capacity to induce convulsions in susceptible individuals.
"


but the whole piece is worth reading. Let me know what you guys think!​
 
Me too! The benefits described in that article make it seem like a great supplement, then I read that and was like :(. Interested what others think or know about it.
 
D3Baseball said:
1st in spicy thread



I'm sure Vaughn has considered all of these things, so I'm interested in what he has to say.
Click to expand...

I've addresses the toxicity issues numerous times, as has PA since then actually. He agrees with me that there is no danger in an oral dose of NMDA.


As to the ingredient not working...I'll let other users speak on that :)
 
Cool. I'll take your word for it.

Jk but seriously I'm looking for studies or threads on the subject and not finding much as far as toxicity is concerned. Can I get a link or a name that might help me locate what you're referring to?
 
I could be wrong on this, but I believe the whole neurotoxin bit was 'when physically applied to brain tissue'... at least from my memory when this came up before
 
They're are quite specific on not dosing more than one dose per day. I did a little research on NMDA myself when beta testing and saw that, but couldn't find anything solid to prove or rebuke those statements, and in what doses those negative results were seen. For all we know, it could have been several grams or maybe more before anything was seen. In for the official response.
 
I'd be interested in giving this product a try in the future if I was a little more confident about it not being neurotoxic because it sounds like it has some great positive attributes.
 
Just did a little more reading, and it seems like if large doses are applied directly to brain matter, then yes it will destroy neural cells. However, if given a smaller dose, it allows individuals to respond to excitatory stimuli through the interrelated functioning of NMDA receptors, glutamate, and dopamine. IOW, high doses directly applied to neural cells will kill them while lower doses directly applied to neural cells will stimulate them. So assuming they were dosing higher than 50mg/~80-100 kg, again, directly to the neural cells, then between the recommended doses and the fact that we have this thing called a blood-brain barrier, I don't think we have too much to worry about. Just don't go mixing this stuff into solution and injecting into your brain or spinal column.
 
A link to a site might have been nice but I'll look for those studies at a later date. Does seem safe if that's accurate and I might give this a run in a few months if the user feedback is good! :)
 
The same DAA "scare" has been around for a long time as well. Now it's a thing of the past.
 
natandrb said:
They're are quite specific on not dosing more than one dose per day. I did a little research on NMDA myself when beta testing and saw that, but couldn't find anything solid to prove or rebuke those statements, and in what doses those negative results were seen. For all we know, it could have been several grams or maybe more before anything was seen. In for the official response.
Click to expand...

True. Interested in the dosage amount on what was posted.
 
The amount of legitimate scientific research and citation going on in this thread is staggering. It's really something when you come into a thread and it's full of people on all sides of an issue who thoroughly appreciate what constitutes proof and don't waste time with nonsense.
 
PuZo said:
The same DAA "scare" has been around for a long time as well. Now it's a thing of the past.
Click to expand...

^^^ This, I was going to say the same thing. They had a lot of sides/scares about this with DAA as well.
 
why stop using a proven product DAA for an unproven one (meaning there are NONE studies that have tested the toxicity and effectiveness in humans of NMDA)

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????

i cannot believe why people do that
 
Jordinator said:
One of the key things I found most interesting was this:

"
When I first started researching NMDA, I was considering marketing it as a nutritional supplement. After delving in deeper however, a couple of things made me change my mind. First of all, I contacted the patent inventor to see if I could get some more information on NMDA. He regretfully told me that his later research failed to confirm his earlier findings, and that he had deemed the project not worthy of further pursuit. I also discovered that NMDA is potentially quite toxic and may destroy neurons in sensitive areas of the brain like the hippocampus and the basal ganglia. NMDA might also have the capacity to induce convulsions in susceptible individuals.
"


but the whole piece is worth reading. Let me know what you guys think!​
Click to expand...

Is there a link to a larger article that I'm not seeing? Can you please provide this? Thank you.
 
NMDA-induced neurotoxicity in a human model is very poorly understood, and you probably won't be seeing a safety study any time in the near future due to variation in human experience and the invasiveness of such an experiment. The in vitro data leads me to believe that toxicity won't be an issue at the doses being supplemented, but as a "safety net," you could always consider supplementing low-dosed Huperzine A or Agmatine.
 
Jordinator said:
I'd be interested in giving this product a try in the future if I was a little more confident about it not being neurotoxic because it sounds like it has some great positive attributes.
Click to expand...


I understand your concerns. Gains are not worth it when they come at the cost of our health!


We tested this compound in dozens of people before bringing it to the market to ensure its safety. Just about every person who reads the science sees how this is non-toxic when taken orally, however I think this study may help people relax a bit(if they still believe it may be toxic):

[h=1]Neuroprotective effects of creatine administration against NMDA and malonate toxicity.[/h]Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed.
[h=3]Source[/h]Neurochemistry Laboratory, Neurology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

[h=3]Abstract[/h]We examined whether creatine administration could exert neuroprotective effects against excitotoxicity mediated by N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA), alpha-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...


Ok...so do any of you take Creatine? Yes, I know you all do.

Do any of you take Niacin? The vast majority of you do...and if not, you can get a great dose in MANY products out there, or even on its own.



Basically here are the facts:

#1 - NMDA can not cause excitotoxicity when given orally.
#2 - NMDA excitotoxicity was proven to be basically non-existant in vivo by simply adding in creatine(at a 1% solution nontheless!) and niacin.


so...Intimidate is 100% safe/healthy. If you're at ALL concerned about it, just make sure you're taking 1-5g of creatine, and a small dose of niacin each day and...BOOM!
 
magick69 said:
why stop using a proven product DAA for an unproven one (meaning there are NONE studies that have tested the toxicity and effectiveness in humans of NMDA)

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????

i cannot believe why people do that
Click to expand...

D-Aspartate (what forums refer to as DAA) and N-methyl-D-Aspartate (NMDA) both interact with NMDA receptors. These receptors are relatively highly permeable to calcium, hence the potential for neurotoxicity (intracellular calcium will activate numerous cellular pathways, among them apopotosis, i.e. cell death). The real question is, what is the safe oral dosage for either compound? Good luck funding a study looking into this... Unfortunately, anecdotal evidence may be all we have to rely on for a while.
 
we already know what is the safe dose for DAA what we don't know is

1) NMDA toxicity in humans
2) effectiviness
3) dose

at the moment we have DAA studies and NONE FOR NMDA ; so it is safe to buy studied products

this is logic cannot be argued
 
magick69 said:
we already know what is the safe dose for DAA what we don't know is

1) NMDA toxicity in humans
2) effectiviness
3) dose

at the moment we have DAA studies and NONE FOR NMDA ; so it is safe to buy studied products

this is logic cannot be argued
Click to expand...

so I take it you've done absolutely no research on the matter, nor have you read any of my posts?
 
magick69 said:
we already know what is the safe dose for DAA what we don't know is

1) NMDA toxicity in humans
2) effectiviness
3) dose

at the moment we have DAA studies and NONE FOR NMDA ; so it is safe to buy studied products

this is logic cannot be argued
Click to expand...

Please point me to a study that establishes what the safe dosage of D-aspartate is. People use 3 g because that's approximately what was used in the RB&E study. To my knowledge, they did not take any sort of metics looking at toxicity, so there is no way to know if that is a 'safe dose'. Point being, with either of those compounds, and most supplements for that matter, there will be a certain level of risk involved.
 
magick69 said:
we already know what is the safe dose for DAA what we don't know is

1) NMDA toxicity in humans
2) effectiviness
3) dose

at the moment we have DAA studies and NONE FOR NMDA ; so it is safe to buy studied products

this is logic cannot be argued
Click to expand...

Don't worry. Just take it. Vaughn say it's allllll good. I think you are only born with one brain anyway. Well there's two but the little guy ain't so smart in some cases. Good luck.
 
Scuba Steveo said:
Please point me to a study that establishes what the safe dosage of D-aspartate is. People use 3 g because that's approximately what was used in the RB&E study.
Click to expand...

I take 6 grams a day - 3 in the mo-nin' and 3 at night. Been doing that for a year now. Cycled off maybe one or two months otherwise just continuous. DAA is a staple for me.

Oddly, this is the first I've ever heard of NMDA being available for use.

I like what Vaughn is saying on this - and the studies he's provided - so I'll be trying this stuff in the future.
 
VaughnTrue said:
so I take it you've done absolutely no research on the matter, nor have you read any of my posts?
Click to expand...

Vaughn, since everyone wants to second guess the stuff, just send it all to me. I can cut big POs too pal....
 
Jordinator said:
One of the key things I found most interesting was this:

"
When I first started researching NMDA, I was considering marketing it as a nutritional supplement. After delving in deeper however, a couple of things made me change my mind. First of all, I contacted the patent inventor to see if I could get some more information on NMDA. He regretfully told me that his later research failed to confirm his earlier findings, and that he had deemed the project not worthy of further pursuit. I also discovered that NMDA is potentially quite toxic and may destroy neurons in sensitive areas of the brain like the hippocampus and the basal ganglia. NMDA might also have the capacity to induce convulsions in susceptible individuals.
"


but the whole piece is worth reading. Let me know what you guys think!​
Click to expand...

Thank you for posting the link. I thought that perhaps by "started researching NMDA" that the person had performed experiments. I didn't realize it was literature research. With respect to PA, this is his opinion on what he has read which is why he is correct to say "potentially" and "might". Also, just because one researcher who was trying to patent NMDA had no luck in their experiments and gave up, does not mean that it does not work.
 
Mission1 said:
Don't worry. Just take it. Vaughn say it's allllll good. I think you are only born with one brain anyway. Well there's two but the little guy ain't so smart in some cases. Good luck.
Click to expand...

The little guy. Lmao most off the dumb **** I've done was cause of the little guy!!
 
VaughnTrue said:
I understand your concerns. Gains are not worth it when they come at the cost of our health!


We tested this compound in dozens of people before bringing it to the market to ensure its safety. Just about every person who reads the science sees how this is non-toxic when taken orally, however I think this study may help people relax a bit(if they still believe it may be toxic):




Ok...so do any of you take Creatine? Yes, I know you all do.

Do any of you take Niacin? The vast majority of you do...and if not, you can get a great dose in MANY products out there, or even on its own.



Basically here are the facts:

#1 - NMDA can not cause excitotoxicity when given orally.
#2 - NMDA excitotoxicity was proven to be basically non-existant in vivo by simply adding in creatine(at a 1% solution nontheless!) and niacin.


so...Intimidate is 100% safe/healthy. If you're at ALL concerned about it, just make sure you're taking 1-5g of creatine, and a small dose of niacin each day and...BOOM!
Click to expand...


Dude, I really don't even wanna give you a hard time right now but I have to call out bad science when I see it. That's not what this board is about, go run that kinda game to the 14 year olds on bodybuilding.com

First off, you're saying that NMDA isn't excitotoxic at all and you back that up with a study which measures the effect of creatine on NMDA INDUCED EXCITOTOXICTY. How ironic can you get? Unless you have documentation on their methodology showing that they directly injected the NMDA, this abstract is making a case against your argument, if anything.

Second, you said excitotoxicity was "basically non-existant" with the coadministration of creatine and niacin. Here's the actual graph from your study showing the effects of creatine and niacin against the control on NMDA induced excitotoxicity Invalid Link Removed


What does that reduction work out to? maybe 20-30% reduction vs control? Is that really your definition of "basically non-existant" bro?


Listen kids, not everyone on these boards has the time to decipher medical journals, that's why they come here for advice. It ruins the whole principle of these boards when someone tries to throw studies around and totally twist them around because the lay-person cant understand them. Let me take all of the science mumbo jumbo out of the equation here and simplify the argument vaughn is trying to make right now...


In a nutshell, his post is saying..."Our product isnt poisionous to your brain because there's a study that shows when you take creatine and niacin, it makes it less 30 percent less poisionous to your brain. My product is meant to be injested orally, while the abstract I provided doesn't specificy how it was given to the test subjects which makes it completely irrelevant, if not contrary to my argument altogether."
 
magick69 said:
why stop using a proven product DAA for an unproven one (meaning there are NONE studies that have tested the toxicity and effectiveness in humans of NMDA)

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????

i cannot believe why people do that
Click to expand...


Because a supplement company tells them they have a new form that is "better". Happens all the time. Look at creatine. Mono is fine and people still take the newer crap because they are fooled by the supplement company "gurus".
 
J19891 said:
Dude, I really don't even wanna give you a hard time right now but I have to call out bad science when I see it. That's not what this board is about, go run that kinda game to the 14 year olds on bodybuilding.com

First off, you're saying that NMDA isn't excitotoxic at all and you back that up with a study which measures the effect of creatine on NMDA INDUCED EXCITOTOXICTY. How ironic can you get? Unless you have documentation on their methodology showing that they directly injected the NMDA, this abstract is making a case against your argument, if anything.

Second, you said excitotoxicity was "basically non-existant" with the coadministration of creatine and niacin. Here's the actual graph from your study showing the effects of creatine and niacin against the control on NMDA induced excitotoxicity Invalid Link Removed

What does that reduction work out to? maybe 20-30% reduction vs control? Is that really your definition of "basically non-existant" bro?

Listen kids, not everyone on these boards has the time to decipher medical journals, that's why they come here for advice. It ruins the whole principle of these boards when someone tries to throw studies around and totally twist them around because the lay-person cant understand them. Let me take all of the science mumbo jumbo out of the equation here and simply the argument vaughn is trying to make right now...

In a nutshell, his post is saying..."Our product isnt poisionous to your brain because there's a study that shows when you take creatine and niacin, it makes it less 30 percent less poisionous to your brain. My product is meant to be injested orally, while the abstract I provided doesn't specificy how it was given to the test subjects which makes it completely irrelevant, if not contrary to my argument altogether."
Click to expand...

What degree does Vaughn have in nutritional science? I know... Nmda for dummies. He'll do anything to sell a bottles of intimidate or is called placebodate. Hey free bottles of air to first 50!!!!!! Sell sell sell.
 
mr.cooper69 said:
NMDA-induced neurotoxicity in a human model is very poorly understood, and you probably won't be seeing a safety study any time in the near future due to variation in human experience and the invasiveness of such an experiment. The in vitro data leads me to believe that toxicity won't be an issue at the doses being supplemented, but as a "safety net," you could always consider supplementing low-dosed Huperzine A or Agmatine.
Click to expand...
i love how people always skip over your posts, when you make a solid point ;)
J19891 said:
Dude, I really don't even wanna give you a hard time right now but I have to call out bad science when I see it. That's not what this board is about, go run that kinda game to the 14 year olds on bodybuilding.com
Click to expand...
lulz.....you're kidding right? out of all the boards i post on, this has got to be one of the WORST as far as "broscientists" and stuff like that goes.....some of the arguments that STILL take place on here about ingredients like arginine and glutamine prove this point over and over. yes, there are some pretty smart guys on this board, but they are outnumbered by broscience followers
 
baldwanus said:
out of all the boards i post on, this has got to be one of the WORST as far as "broscientists" and stuff like that goes.....some of the arguments that STILL take place on here about ingredients like arginine and glutamine prove this point over and over. yes, there are some pretty smart guys on this board, but they are outnumbered by broscience followers
Click to expand...

*counts to 10* I will not post, I will not post, I will not post *counts to 10 again*
 
baldwanus said:
i love how people always skip over your posts, when you make a solid point ;) lulz.....you're kidding right? out of all the boards i post on, this has got to be one of the WORST as far as "broscientists" and stuff like that goes.....some of the arguments that STILL take place on here about ingredients like arginine and glutamine prove this point over and over. yes, there are some pretty smart guys on this board, but they are outnumbered by broscience followers
Click to expand...

lol idk about all that. Sure there are morons, but the world is full of those. Anyone who's spent a day in rush hour traffic or walked from one end of a wal-mart to another knows that. In my experience though, the posters on this board are more knowledgeable than average. I'll see stuff on bb.com sometimes like "Is creatine steroids?" that makes me drop face first into my keyboard. I just don't find that level of stupid 'round these here parts.
 
J19891 said:
lol idk about all that. Sure there are morons, but the world is full of those. Anyone who's spent a day in rush hour traffic or walked from one end of a wal-mart to another knows that. In my experience though, the posters on this board are more knowledgeable than average. I'll see stuff on bb.com sometimes like "Is creatine steroids?" that makes me drop face first into my keyboard. I just don't find that level of stupid 'round these here parts.
Click to expand...

That's because some of these supplement company reps not gonna mention any names...... Vaughn......oops........feed on the innocent barely 18 and try to shrink their testicles to meet their criteria as a potential customer and try to suck them. We don't sell steroids anymore but try this it's a 100% better I guarantee it. Ugh I did read that it was better...... Maybe PA said so. Anyway ugh take this and then if you can't sleep take zma and then take it earlier in the day.... Ugh maybe now you can stack it with test v2. I promise.
 
baldwanus said:
i love how people always skip over your posts, when you make a solid point ;) lulz.....you're kidding right? out of all the boards i post on, this has got to be one of the WORST as far as "broscientists" and stuff like that goes.....some of the arguments that STILL take place on here about ingredients like arginine and glutamine prove this point over and over. yes, there are some pretty smart guys on this board, but they are outnumbered by broscience followers
Click to expand...



So true.
 
baldwanus said:
lulz.....you're kidding right? out of all the boards i post on, this has got to be one of the WORST as far as "broscientists" and stuff like that goes.....some of the arguments that STILL take place on here about ingredients like arginine and glutamine prove this point over and over. yes, there are some pretty smart guys on this board, but they are outnumbered by broscience followers
Click to expand...

Sorry... what did you say?

I couldn't read past the stupid ass usage of the term lulz.
 
baldwanus said:
i love how people always skip over your posts, when you make a solid point ;) lulz.....you're kidding right? out of all the boards i post on, this has got to be one of the WORST as far as "broscientists" and stuff like that goes.....some of the arguments that STILL take place on here about ingredients like arginine and glutamine prove this point over and over. yes, there are some pretty smart guys on this board, but they are outnumbered by broscience followers
Click to expand...

True. And this board a lot of times calls out those who are pushing the science with "I don't care what the science says" type responses. At the same time some of the most popular supplements on these boards have little to no scientific backing behind them (maybe a mouse study or something).

Broscience is sadly kind on the vast majority of health and fitness boards.
 
I hope I don't sound ignorant but oh well. Broscience is what I go by. Majority of the "supplements" we take is not going to have real scientific studies to back it up. Scientific studies don't mean much to me anyway, I'm not a scientist so I don't understand half the crap their talking about. Plus people can make a study say what they want it to based on agenda so what good are they? I want real life people "bros" telling me what they experienced taking a product. How it affected them, what sides, if it worked. Broscience is the tried and true method, thats real life scientific studies boys.
 
rsnake21 said:
I hope I don't sound ignorant but oh well. Broscience is what I go by. Majority of the "supplements" we take is not going to have real scientific studies to back it up. Scientific studies don't mean much to me anyway, I'm not a scientist so I don't understand half the crap their talking about. Plus people can make a study say what they want it to based on agenda so what good are they? I want real life people "bros" telling me what they experienced taking a product. How it affected them, what sides, if it worked. Broscience is the tried and true method, thats real life scientific studies boys.
Click to expand...

I think you're referring to anecdotal evidence as broscience. Anecdotal evidence is the bottom line. If there are 50 studies outlining how a substance has x effect, but 100% of people say it doesn't, it's worthless.

Broscience, on the other hand, is where people attempt to use science or scientific terms to make a statement, good or bad, about a product or substance but aren't applying the scientific method correctly.

If everyone on these boards told you that d-alpha supplement of the week had no research to back it up, but I told you that it took my bench press up 20 lbs, that's anecdotal evidence, not broscience.

If I tell you that creatine works by bumping up your testoserone levels with ammonia, quarks and quantum muscle fiber enhancers, that's bro science.
 
The anecdotal stuff means little to me. Lots of people claiming to love things that did not produce a different result than could be explained by proper training/dieting. Not to mention a lot of people are straight up dishonest. I keep seeing bloods posted about a test booster from someone secretly on TRT -- wtf?
 
it is a rather safe supplement, William Llewellyn and I have been looking into it for quite some time.
 
J19891 said:
I think you're referring to anecdotal evidence as broscience. Anecdotal evidence is the bottom line. If there are 50 studies outlining how a substance has x effect, but 100% of people say it doesn't, it's worthless.

Broscience, on the other hand, is where people attempt to use science or scientific terms to make a statement, good or bad, about a product or substance but aren't applying the scientific method correctly.

If everyone on these boards told you that d-alpha supplement of the week had no research to back it up, but I told you that it took my bench press up 20 lbs, that's anecdotal evidence, not broscience.

If I tell you that creatine works by bumping up your testoserone levels with ammonia, quarks and quantum muscle fiber enhancers, that's bro science.
Click to expand...

well then "broscience" is a word being misused in 90% of the cases on here if what you say is true.....these guys use "broscience" to bash any anecdotal evidence OR misuse of science, so people need to start using the word appropriately if what you posted is to be valid. and trust me, they will continue to use broscience as an answer every time you try to challenge their new super duper scientific study with your anecdotal evidence. I'm with rsnake, I'll take "broscience" aka anecdotal evidence every time.....well depending on if the person is trying to sell me something versus just giving me random advice :D
 
ok new to this forum but I've taken DAA for 30 days and now pretty close to completing first bottle of NMDA. So i read this thread and am still confused. is it safe, not safe, toxic, not toxic? am i just better off taking DAA ? I'll tell you where Im leaning after reading all this; back to DAA.
 
This should be good. Something akin to a group of 9 year olds discussing the intricacies of quantum physics while hopped up on candy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top