So nobody has topical test??

Renew1

Renew1

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
did you ever run sarms without it?
I haven't ran SARMs with and without Dermacrine, because I'm not a big SARMs guy.
But I've ran some steroids with and without D, and there was a pretty big difference.
And... I always have a bottle.of oral DHEA on hand, in case of emergencies, and it is cheaper than Dermacrine, so if I had the slightest indication that it would work the same as Dermacrine, I would've just used it instead.
But I did not.
And do not.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
I haven't ran SARMs with and without Dermacrine, because I'm not a big SARMs guy.
But I've ran some steroids with and without D, and there was a pretty big difference.
And... I always have a bottle.of oral DHEA on hand, in case of emergencies, and it is cheaper than Dermacrine, so if I had the slightest indication that it would work the same as Dermacrine, I would've just used it instead.
But I did not.
And do not.
Dermacrine rocks...
 

johnny412

Active member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I haven't ran SARMs with and without Dermacrine, because I'm not a big SARMs guy.
But I've ran some steroids with and without D, and there was a pretty big difference.
And... I always have a bottle.of oral DHEA on hand, in case of emergencies, and it is cheaper than Dermacrine, so if I had the slightest indication that it would work the same as Dermacrine, I would've just used it instead.
But I did not.
And do not.
i was just wondering if the sarms even would benefit from the dermacrine...i know phs do...
 
Renew1

Renew1

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
i was just wondering if the sarms even would benefit from the dermacrine...i know phs do...
Ahhh... Understood.

Knowing that SARMs also shut you down, I'd certainly assume you'd see a benefit.
 
xR1pp3Rx

xR1pp3Rx

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I have never heard that there are more enzymes in specific areas of the skin that allow more conversion. I would honestly like to see a source on this,
your the one who likes to study.. iirc PA pointed this out yrs ago when they stated making cosmetics with PHs DSs. I am unaware of any papers or where to point you.. but yea, supposedly there ARE areas on the skin that can hold more of certain enzymes. that's why I brought it up for you to look into for those interested. go see what you can turn up.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
your the one who likes to study.. iirc PA pointed this out yrs ago when they stated making cosmetics with PHs DSs. I am unaware of any papers or where to point you.. but yea, supposedly there ARE areas on the skin that can hold more of certain enzymes. that's why I brought it up for you to look into for those interested. go see what you can turn up.
eric potratz posted up tons of info about areas of skin like neck and shoulders that are more anabolic areas to apply transdermal hormones to. see original dermacrine write up, whole lot of info.
 
xR1pp3Rx

xR1pp3Rx

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
thinking there isn't pools of certain enzymes in the body is just silly.. your body is full of areas that hold more fat than others as well as more muscle or bone ect ect…

you wouldnt contend that fat cells are full of androgen receptors would you?
 
StarScream66

StarScream66

Member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
your the one who likes to study.. iirc PA pointed this out yrs ago when they stated making cosmetics with PHs DSs. I am unaware of any papers or where to point you.. but yea, supposedly there ARE areas on the skin that can hold more of certain enzymes. that's why I brought it up for you to look into for those interested. go see what you can turn up.
That's true, but you're the one making the claim. Where did you hear this? I think you're confusing high enzyme areas for what are actually sites with lots of androgen receptors (AR) which I'll talk more about below.

eric potratz posted up tons of info about areas of skin like neck and shoulders that are more anabolic areas to apply transdermal hormones to. see original dermacrine write up, whole lot of info.
The shoulders have more ARs than most parts. So, if you do a transdermal hormone like tren that doesn't need conversion, it would be a good spot to apply it. However, if it's a prodrug that needs an enzyme to convert, this has to take place in the liver. So you can apply it wherever is comfortable. I'm not aware nor have ever heard certain areas have more enzymes. Since the conversion takes place in the liver, this theory really doesn't pan out.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
That's true, but you're the one making the claim. Where did you hear this? I think you're confusing high enzyme areas for what are actually sites with lots of androgen receptors (AR) which I'll talk more about below.



The shoulders have more ARs than most parts. So, if you do a transdermal hormone like tren that doesn't need conversion, it would be a good spot to apply it. However, if it's a prodrug that needs an enzyme to convert, this has to take place in the liver. So you can apply it wherever is comfortable. I'm not aware nor have ever heard certain areas have more enzymes. Since the conversion takes place in the liver, this theory really doesn't pan out.
I think you need to do more research.
 
StarScream66

StarScream66

Member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
i was just wondering if the sarms even would benefit from the dermacrine...i know phs do...
It depends on their molecular weight (MW). If the weight is below 300, then it will absorb through the skin. But if it's bigger than that, it won't. I don't know if you can look up the molecular weight of those compounds yet, since they're still in development.

But, I looked a few up in PubChem and I see that the MW of Ostarine is MW: 389.3g/mol. So, the molecule is too large to be absorbed through the epidermis.


YK11 is 430.5 g/mol, so it's WAY too big to fit through the epidermis.


You can look up your specific compound you were thinking of doing there and see what the MW is.
 
Renew1

Renew1

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
It depends on their molecular weight (MW). If the weight is below 300, then it will absorb through the skin. But if it's bigger than that, it won't. I don't know if you can look up the molecular weight of those compounds yet, since they're still in development.

But, I looked a few up in PubChem and I see that the MW of Ostarine is MW: 389.3g/mol. So, the molecule is too large to be absorbed through the epidermis.


YK11 is 430.5 g/mol, so it's WAY too big to fit through the epidermis.


You can look up your specific compound you were thinking of doing there and see what the MW is.
LOL.
@nostrum420, would you care to add some factual input here?
 
justhere4comm

justhere4comm

Banned
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Actually. I always thought it was the 500 Dalton rule for TD application.
 
StarScream66

StarScream66

Member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
Well, I could be wrong about the 300 MW. That's the number Par Deus gave me, and he used to make quite a few transdermals, but I'll try and find a source. This one says it can be around 500 MW.

Microneedles for drug delivery and monitoring
T.R.R. Singh, ... R.F. Donnelly, in Microfluidic Devices for Biomedical Applications, 2013

6.1 Introduction
Transdermal delivery is currently restricted to around 20 drug molecules that are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for delivery by transdermal patches; for example, fentanyl for pain management, and nicotine for smoking cessation (Prausnitz et al., 2004). These approved molecules are all of low molecular weight (< 500 Da) [Da stands for Dalton and is a unit of measurement that is very confusing to me.

Transdermal delivery is an attractive route of drug administration due to the skin's large surface area and ease of administration (1). Further advantages are that it avoids drug degradation due to the first pass effect of the liver, does not involve the use of needles, and does not cause pain. However, the skin serves as a barrier that protects the body from the external environment and prevents water loss. This barrier function also prevents most hydrophilic and large molecular weight drugs (>500 Da) from penetrating intact skin.

So, although these are being measured in Daltons, PubChem measures them in molar mass. But, they are apparently the same.

The mole was defined in such as way that the molar mass of a compound, in g/mol, is numerically equal (for all practical purposes) to the average mass of one molecule, in daltons.
Ok, so I was wrong. It appears to be 500 MW is the limit for the skin barrier penetration.

Human skin has unique properties of which functioning as a physicochemical barrier is one of the most apparent. The human integument is able to resist the penetration of many molecules. However, especially smaller molecules can surpass transcutaneously. They are able to go by the corneal layer, which is thought to form the main deterrent. We argue that the molecular weight (MW) of a compound must be under 500 Dalton to allow skin absorption. Larger molecules cannot pass the corneal layer. Arguments for this "500 Dalton rule" are; 1) virtually all common contact allergens are under 500 Dalton, larger molecules are not known as contact sensitizers. They cannot penetrate and thus cannot act as allergens in man; 2) the most commonly used pharmacological agents applied in topical dermatotherapy are all under 500 Dalton; 3) all known topical drugs used in transdermal drug-delivery systems are under 500 Dalton. In addition, clinical experience with topical agents such as cyclosporine, tacrolimus and ascomycins gives further arguments for the reality of the 500 Dalton rule. For pharmaceutical development purposes, it seems logical to restrict the development of new innovative compounds to a MW of under 500 Dalton, when topical dermatological therapy or percutaneous systemic therapy or vaccination is the objective.
 
justhere4comm

justhere4comm

Banned
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
If bigger than 500 one can use a micro needle array where the “medication” is comprised of the “needles” in the patch.

In fact it is one potential thumbnail sized option being considered to deliver a Covid 19 vaccine.
 
nostrum420

nostrum420

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
I don't know you, but I would love to hear your input on the matter if you know a lot about transdermals or what not.
I know a little. What you came up with above is accurate, 500 is the general rule of thumb. Some exceptions can be made for highly lipophilic compounds depending on the application. For instance there are fatty acids that are well over 500 that your skin will absorb pretty readily.

Then you have to consider if you want systemic delivery vs localized. I think most high mw APIs will be metabolized locally at least to some degree especially if they are highly lipophilic.

All of that being said. TD test wouldn't be too hard to make.
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
I switched to oral DHEA for a 7 week s4 run and felt fine. But s4 is one of the least suppressive things out there. A lot of people say the bioavailability of oral DHEA is so low that it’s pointless to use. I’m not sure if that’s fact or broscience myth. And you can pick that up at your local rite aid by the way.

I think if you were going to run a single sarm at the recommended dose for about 8 weeks then you’d probably be able to get away with no base. Maybe the last week or two you might start to feel some suppression.
How were the vision sides, though?
 

jrock645

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
How were the vision sides, though?

I know you weren't asking me, but I can chime in on this. The vision sides on S4 at 100mg per day was a little freaky. It was summertime and when I was at work, going outside in the sun and then back inside was almost painful. Took a couple of minutes to get readjusted. Night time was difficult too. I don't know if my experience was typical or not, but the vision sides are definitely significant, though I mean that in a pain in the ass sort of way and not as in dangerous. They go away pretty quick, though, within a few days. Would I ever run S4 again? Probably not, but not because of the vision stuff, but more because S4 is pretty weak sauce and why bother with that when I have no reservations against pinning real gear? Guess it's just a matter of where you're at in your PED use.
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
That sounds sketchy AF! I’ll probably be avoiding s4 , lol. Sad because I heard the results are amazing and I have a full bottle, but tbh , I’d rather not mess with my eyes. Thanks guys. Who knows the long term effects too? Very scary .
S4 seems to be mild in every other way than that, but vision is everything.

making gains but not being able to SEE THEM lol 😂😂😂😂😂

I’m considering 1Andro now
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
Maybe it’s not that s4 is mild , though. Maybe it’s just that no one can run it long enough or consistently / high enough to get other sides.
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
The fact that s4 is a sarm makes me want to avoid every other sarm.

I had a online friend who claimed ostarine messed with his vision . He thinks it was faked with s4 but who knows
 

jrock645

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
The fact that s4 is a sarm makes me want to avoid every other sarm.

I had a online friend who claimed ostarine messed with his vision . He thinks it was faked with s4 but who knows
live heard of LGD causing full pituitary shutdown in the medical trials, supposedly. I dunno, I’m not anti sarm, but it weirds me out a bit that the trials all got shelved. They either didn’t work well enough or they weren’t safe enough to replace steroids in medicine. Either way, there’s a lot more info on steroids both in anecdotal reports and in literature that I feel like they’re a lot more predictable.
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
live heard of LGD causing full pituitary shutdown in the medical trials, supposedly. I dunno, I’m not anti sarm, but it weirds me out a bit that the trials all got shelved. They either didn’t work well enough or they weren’t safe enough to replace steroids in medicine. Either way, there’s a lot more info on steroids both in anecdotal reports and in literature that I feel like they’re a lot more predictable.
yeah , exactly. why risk these unknown effects when we have the tried and true which works like a million times better it seems like lol
 
YoungThor

YoungThor

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
The fact that s4 is a sarm makes me want to avoid every other sarm.

I had a online friend who claimed ostarine messed with his vision . He thinks it was faked with s4 but who knows
Yeah I’m done with sarms personally. The reward is not worth the risk. I didn’t even mention that s4 gave me heart palpitations. That was actually the sketchiest part. I’ve heard other people report this side too.
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
Yeah I’m done with sarms personally. The reward is not worth the risk. I didn’t even mention that s4 gave me heart palpitations. That was actually the sketchiest part. I’ve heard other people report this side too.
yup , definitely AVOID lol
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
I’m waiting on bloods from a Clinic as I have secondary hypogonadism, but if I only get a serm, anti e and hcg therapy, or nothing. I’m considering 1Andro/epiandro/Kronos cycle.

1 andro from black stone and epiandro from sns stano plexx . 11oxo from @nostrum420

if not, may just return to Ep1logue and laxo lol . Idk if my body is just sensitive to hormones .

hopefully TRT ir a reboot of my pituitary
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
That actually may be TOO dry now that I think about it. Guess I’d need to add a lil dermacrine 🤔
 
Rad83

Rad83

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
I started off 6 years with Cyanostane....and then I bumped it up to the Vitamin X stack from big Dan's Fitness...its a 2 month quad stack and I cant lie.. that was the roughest thing I've ever ran in terms of lethargy and sides....bit that was my fault for not fully doing my homework first. However, I put on a ton of size and strength during that run. I've also run DMZ and Rad-140 as well.
I think we should bring this back around to the mans inquiry! ...I had a look at big dans, (I’ve seen his site before) Vitamin X stack is some strong ish! ...You’re looking to narrow it down to a more streamlined and manageable cycle, yeah?

Seeing your experience level you could stack Vicious Labs’ dmz and msten....Best deal going right now...You already got my vote for the ‘DC base’ ...Tudca and NAC on cycle are highly recommended and definitely serms post...(10mg cardarine pre workout would be a nice addition if your budget allows)
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
Why not give the azinol another shot? ...1 andro needs to be dosed high!
I didn’t like it and the estro rebound was REALLY bad. Maybe I should actually try the og triumphalis. It was definitely not a dry compound for me either. Lots of fullness and weight gain but yet this doesn’t pair with actual mdiaz experiences .
As @ValiantThor08 said, I probably got a bad ph
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
I’m considering just staying half Natty if this clinic reboots me with hcg clomid and an AI

Ep1logue/laxo/virtus and experiment with a high dose of arimistane, maybe like 120-150mg

throw in a lil epichaos too
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
I’d try mdiaz again but this time I’d go with the ot triumphalis. What do you guys think?

restart the log
 
Rad83

Rad83

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
I’d try mdiaz again but this time I’d go with the ot triumphalis. What do you guys think?

restart the log
That OG gonna be damn near impossible to find I think ? ....Work with the clinic, natural products, I would forgo the mega dose arimistane!
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
That OG gonna be damn near impossible to find I think ? ....Work with the clinic, natural products, I would forgo the mega dose arimistane!
I found it recently But yeah I’m waiting on my recent blood work before anything else

you think arimistane at 130 is a megadose? I think 75-100 is a good sweet spot
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
Yeah it was.

*My vote is just do what the clinic is prescribing and see if they can get you where ya need to be...Dont throw any other supplements in the mix
Yeah, that's what I am doing. Hopefully getting my bloods tomorrow

It's weird how some companies stopped arimistane as it's not banned hence why I asked
 
brofessorx

brofessorx

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I have never heard that there are more enzymes in specific areas of the skin that allow more conversion. I would honestly like to see a source on this, because from my understand - as I stated above - it doesn't matter the route of administration. Yes, you use less in a transdermal because it absorbs better than orally, as with all steroid compounds who's molecular weight is under around 300. But regardless, if you injected it, there is no special injection sites with more enzymes that make a compound convert better. All of that happens in the liver (and sometimes kidneys) and does not happen at the site of administration. This is true for prohormones/prodrugs only. They make their conversion to the parent steroid in the liver, whereas things like testosterone simply slowly release from their depot injection site and go directly to bind to the androgen receptors and do all the other things test does. After that, it passes into 2nd pass metabolism and is processed by the liver.

If you took DHEA, bound an ester to it, suspended it in oil and took it, it would work much better than plain jane DHEA. But that isn't to say oral DHEA or pregnenolone isn't orally bioavailable. Because these compounds are very simple in structure, they can be orally absorbed just fine and pass into the liver where they are converted to their downstream hormones. As a matter of fact, pregnenolone is now being looked at as a cure for depression and is being given to mothers who have post partum depression as an injectable form and is working great. This is because pregnenolone is also a neurosteroid.

But, that's a whole other subject.
This is entirely incorrect.
 
brofessorx

brofessorx

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
To answer the op’s question, I’m sure you can find topical 4-androstenediol in the UK, pretty sure I’ve seen it for sale on the UK sites. Which ones? Idk. I inject. But I’ve seen it.

you don’t see topical test because testosterone is a controlled substance available technically by rx only.

various places in the body will have more or less enzymes. The skin is high in 3-hsd, this is responsible for a number of conversions, one of the top of my head, it converts Dht into an inactive metabolite.
Areas with more fat will contain more amounts of aromatase enzyme, which converts a 2 hormones in the body into estrogen.

keep in mind the body body is full of enzymes and conversion isn’t a one way street.
bergamotten (sp) is used for inhibitin enzymes (Edit: Googled it, cyp-p450 & others) in order to aid pro hormones in making it to this targeted hormone.
Back when I was a researcher for Olympus, I briefly began researching compounds that would inhibit Enzymes ave enhance the life of dhea isomers, but once Olympus released the dhea isomers without anything, despite my objections, I quit.
 

Similar threads


Top