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

the goal with DAA

Dr D, did you try the monosodium d-aspartate? Happens i have a rather large quantity of that coming my way.
 
EasyEJL said:
Dr D, did you try the monosodium d-aspartate? Happens i have a rather large quantity of that coming my way.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it worked just fine. I took 3g/d of Potassium Gluconate with it (to balance the additional Sodium) and didn't have any complaints.

Whatever dose you decide, just multiply it by 1.17 (or 1.33 for the Disodium salt) and you have the pure DAA dose equivalence for Sodium d-Aspartate.
 
Thanks again DR.D. It seems the half-dosed DAA in Magnum could be what I'm looking for, at least for the first time trying DAA. I like experimenting with natural test supps for many reasons, one being the (mostly) non-existent side effects. So I'm more than happy to pass on the potential excitotoxic sides....

It should arrive today actually, and I'll take your advice and load up at the front (6 caps ED) then try tapering off. Unfortunately I only bought one bottle, so this is going to be one super short 3.5-wk cycle. (Hopefully I'll be impressed enough to quickly order a 2nd bottle.)

Cheers.
 
DR.D said:
Yeah, it worked just fine. I took 3g/d of Potassium Gluconate with it (to balance the additional Sodium) and didn't have any complaints.

Whatever dose you decide, just multiply it by 1.17 (or 1.33 for the Disodium salt) and you have the pure DAA dose equivalence for Sodium d-Aspartate.
Click to expand...

luckily I generally eat low sodium, so i'm a little less worried. I had figured i'd end up with 500-700 extra mg of sodium, which still would have me below average US citizen in daily intake :)
 
gamer2be08 said:
Here is a new read I found, might wanna check it out and have an open mind:
Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

That is an issue that was brought up, I believe a couple of pages ago. I think if you have had issues in the past with elevated estrogen or gyno, then definitely something to keep an eye.

Like other supplements out and around, there is not a whole lot known about DAA. And like many other things, we are the test bunnies. As soon as something shows potential - word spreads like wildfire. Everyone's got to try it.
 
Has anyone else gotten either with DAA or the Propadrol with NMDA a sort of dry mouth feeling and a little bit of lockjaw/clenched teeth? its not exactly anxiety, but similar.
 
EasyEJL said:
Has anyone else gotten either with DAA or the Propadrol with NMDA a sort of dry mouth feeling and a little bit of lockjaw/clenched teeth? its not exactly anxiety, but similar.
Click to expand...

ran propadrol ep, didnt get this. i actually had no side effects except raging libido
 
lonewolf0420 said:
What do you consider a high dose of D is? What are your vitamin D recommendations?
Click to expand...

Check out this site:

Invalid Link Removed

It is only recommend that an adult obtain 200-400 iu of Vitamin D per day, with an upper limit of 2000 iu. I have heard rumors that the the new standard may be increased to 600 iu per day in light of new research though.

I take 2000-4000 iu per day, but if I was getting a bunch of extra Calcium in my diet, I'd be taking less than that (maybe 1000 iu.) Once again, balance is the key, because high doses of Calcium combined with higher doses of Vitamin D can promote atypical ossification in soft tissue, like the kidneys, or at the site of muscle bruises (damaged soft tissues.)
 
DR.D said:
Check out this site:

Invalid Link Removed

It is only recommend that an adult obtain 200-400 iu of Vitamin D per day, with an upper limit of 2000 iu. I have heard rumors that the the new standard may be increased to 600 iu per day in light of new research though.

I take 2000-4000 iu per day, but if I was getting a bunch of extra Calcium in my diet, I'd be taking less than that (maybe 1000 iu.) Once again, balance is the key, because high doses of Calcium combined with higher doses of Vitamin D can promote atypical ossification in soft tissue, like the kidneys, or at the site of muscle bruises (damaged soft tissues.)
Click to expand...

I appreciate that info. I've been taking much, much, higher doses. I DROP my doses.
 
lonewolf0420 said:
I appreciate that info. I've been taking much, much, higher doses. I DROP my doses.
Click to expand...

I have too. That's one of the reasons I don't supplement Calcium, it allows for greater flexibility with several other things (like Vitamin D.) In the winter I usually up to 6,000 iu per day, but I've never gone higher than that. How much were you using?
 
DR.D said:
I have too. That's one of the reasons I don't supplement Calcium, it allows for greater flexibility with several other things (like Vitamin D.) In the winter I usually up to 6,000 iu per day, but I've never gone higher than that. How much were you using?
Click to expand...

I was dosing 6000 for a while, then upped to 8000. While taking DAA with Ca. I recently picked up D in 5000ui tabs, so I've been dosing that twice a day. I figure I'll just drop to 5000ui.

I started Magnesium as well, 800mg.
 
alvin1 said:
Did you get strengh gain ? Muscle hardening or recomp effect ?
Click to expand...

i took a 3 week layoff post surgery where i was literally laying in bed the whole time eating garbage and soft drinks. started taking it when i was able to walk around again and i noticed some epic libido boosts and i was able to regain my strength pretty quick but i cant say much for recomp because i gained some fat being lazy but was able to burn most of it off
 
Yea i think PP started recommending that becuase the study was only done over a 12 day peroid, however the product they ran the study on(Daviadt or soemthign) is recommended to run for 90 days at a time. So i definitly wouldnt do 12 on 12 off.
 
adawg4929 said:
Yea i think PP started recommending that becuase the study was only done over a 12 day peroid, however the product they ran the study on(Daviadt or soemthign) is recommended to run for 90 days at a time. So i definitly wouldnt do 12 on 12 off.
Click to expand...

DADAVIT
www .rbej.com/content/7/1/120
 
Id be afraid that doing it for 90 days would just end with your body finding a way to return to equilibrium, but that's just me.
 
kingdong said:
Id be afraid that doing it for 90 days would just end with your body finding a way to return to equilibrium, but that's just me.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm thinking 60 days is a good target, and anything beyond that should respond with a greatly lowered dose. Or just take a break after 60 and recycle.
 
Yea 60 days prolly seems to be your best bet, running it for a whole three months im sure your body will find a way to adapt to bring testosterone back to normal levels.
 
adawg4929 said:
Yea 60 days prolly seems to be your best bet, running it for a whole three months im sure your body will find a way to adapt to bring testosterone back to normal levels.
Click to expand...

Id be less worried about the test drop, and more worried about what your body dose to drop it.
 
has anyone lost libido while on DAA? my muscles fill out and I get stronger and leaner but my libido goes to zero at 3 grams of DAA a day
 
adawg4929 said:
Yea i think PP started recommending that becuase the study was only done over a 12 day peroid, however the product they ran the study on(Daviadt or soemthign) is recommended to run for 90 days at a time. So i definitly wouldnt do 12 on 12 off.
Click to expand...

You have to remember this: recommendations will be made based on the clinical evidence/findings that are shown to be "clinically and statistically significant." That does NOT mean these recommendations are safe or more therapeutic in nature; it's basically an educated guess. Until further long-term duration studies are completed, there is no way to say anything for sure.

This is not to say that I don't agree here with the recommendation, just food for thought. Many people assume that the recommendations made in these studies are safe and effective; that is simply NOT true by any means. I could show you plenty of studies that started out like this only to find those recommendations to be completely refuted with no documented support.

We based our recommendations on what was shown to be effective and relatively safe in the clinical study. This can/will be revised in the future if an alternate dosing regime is found to be superior; and safe. I've just completed 24 days with our TCF-1 as an experiment with myself. I've been very pleased with the results.


-John
 
adawg4929 said:
thats very weird, maybe D will have an explanation for us...
Click to expand...

Seems just like one of the cases where everyone responds differently. He found a product that wasn't for him unfortunetly.

You're right though, Dr. D might have a little Invalid Link Removed (science)
 
Trauma1 said:
You have to remember this: recommendations will be made based on the clinical evidence/findings that are shown to be "clinically and statistically significant." That does NOT mean these recommendations are safe or more therapeutic in nature; it's basically an educated guess. Until further long-term duration studies are completed, there is no way to say anything for sure.

This is not to say that I don't agree here with the recommendation, just food for thought. Many people assume that the recommendations made in these studies are safe and effective; that is simply NOT true by any means. I could show you plenty of studies that started out like this only to find those recommendations to be completely refuted with no documented support.

We based our recommendations on what was shown to be effective and relatively safe in the clinical study. This can/will be revised in the future if an alternate dosing regime is found to be superior; and safe. I've just completed 24 days with our TCF-1 as an experiment with myself. I've been very pleased with the results.


-John
Click to expand...

bloodwork done after 24 days?
i am wondering if, after 24 days, Estrogen becomes an issue...
 
Hi guys I'm looking into DAA, can anyone comment on my stack/doseage??

DAA - 3g - Morning pre workout
EGCG - 250mg - Morning pre workout


P-5-P/ZMA nutraplanet.com/product/now-foods/adam-90-vcaps.html - Would that be enough b6 and zma?
GABA - 2-5g?? - 30mins before bed
L-Dopa - ???g - 30mins before bed IUN is out of this :/



any input on this?nutraplanet.com/product/millennium-sport-technologies/athlytes-atp-100-caps.html
 
Killerkanadia said:
Seems just like one of the cases where everyone responds differently. He found a product that wasn't for him unfortunetly.

You're right though, Dr. D might have a little Invalid Link Removed (science)
Click to expand...

Everyone is different like you said, but moderate doses seem to support libido while higher doses can discourage it slightly. The response curve reminds me of yohimbine. I've noticed this phenomena myself, but it's very subtle. Performance is not affected, just libido/drive itself.

NMDA agonists and partial agonists can demonstrate the property of enhanced fear extinction. I suspect this means that long-term, you might lose many fear driven behaviors. It's not like sex is a scary thing (unless you're married, j/k :p) but there is a CNS excitation component no less. I think that DAA might recalibrate your mind in subtle ways like this over time, to reduce compulsive reward/punishment anticipations. Things like the drive for sex, drugs, etc.. might slowly relinquish their obsessional components. That's just a theory of mine at this point, there could be more overt endocrine effects that explain the loss of libido though.
 
Since this thread has finally started to die down after 7 pages, I, the OP, would like to give it some conclusion. Although DAA fans showed up to stick up for their product in the seconed half of this thread, their were some horror stories of this stuff causing anxiety in the beginning. The idea of taking 3 grams per day of something that may pass the blood brain barrier and increase brain toxins still has me scared. Supposedly you can take another supp to fight this effect, but how often dose a supplement really make a health problem completely go away?

One guy said he lost libido. I suspect that he already had pretty high test, so for him the boost probably caused some etrogen, or maby he had high body fat or who knows.

As Trauma1 said, the only REAL RESEARCH is on the twelve day cycle, and any thing somebody suggest is just an educated guess. For something that might make your body respond to two weeks of training more like two and a half weeks of training, I think Ill still have to take some time before I give it a yay or a nay.
 
kingdong said:
As Trauma1 said, the only REAL RESEARCH is on the twelve day cycle, and any thing somebody suggest is just an educated guess. For something that might make your body respond to two weeks of training more like two and a half weeks of training, I think Ill still have to take some time before I give it a yay or a nay.
Click to expand...

The product used in that twelve day study is recommended by the manufacturers to be used for 90 days straight, and is widely used that way in Italy.
 
henryv said:
The product used in that twelve day study is recommended by the manufacturers to be used for 90 days straight, and is widely used that way in Italy.
Click to expand...

AGAIN, that's an educated guess based on the clinical findings. Who cares what the Italians' are doing? If they jumped off a bridge, would you because they "recommended it?" Keep in mind, there is ZERO support for this recommendation in the current. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing either way here, but I'm certainly being realistic with the science involved.


- John
 
kingdong said:
As Trauma1 said, the only REAL RESEARCH is on the twelve day cycle, and any thing somebody suggest is just an educated guess. For something that might make your body respond to two weeks of training more like two and a half weeks of training, I think Ill still have to take some time before I give it a yay or a nay.
Click to expand...

Trauma1 said:
AGAIN, that's an educated guess based on the clinical findings. Who cares what the Italians' are doing? If they jumped off a bridge, would you because they "recommended it?" Keep in mind, there is ZERO support for this recommendation in the current. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing either way here, but I'm certainly being realistic on the science involved.


- John
Click to expand...

Do we have to TALK IN CAPS around here to get our points across? In the current what? My point was that it depends on what you consider "REAL RESEARCH". If hundreds of people have done it with no ill-effects - I don't care what country they are from - it demonstrates at least some degree of safety, despite the fear-mongering around here.
 
henryv said:
Do we have to TALK IN CAPS around here to get our points across? In the current what? My point was that it depends on what you consider "REAL RESEARCH". If hundreds of people have done it with no ill-effects - I don't care what country they are from - it demonstrates at least some degree of safety, despite the fear-mongering around here.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's because you don't talk or even think "REAL RESEARCH" and bring your typical bullsh*t to yet another board. Keep telling yourself henry that anecdotal info displayed on the internet is proof in science. The interwebz is serious bizniz, though, right? Guess what, it isn't. It demonstrates jack ****. Shall we go over the numerous unknowns that can exist in an environment that isn't controlled?

I love your apparent flawed rationale here, though. It must be safe because random people with an unfathomable amount of unknowns said it's safe...:rolleyes: If you're going to make that recommendation you probably should state "at your own risk" since nothing supports it scientifically.

You're a fish out of water in science, and one day you'll eventually realize that one fail after another...

Here's the difference between you and me: I'm realistic; you'll gladly take any blind leap of faith apparently because someone said so. Take another shot in the dark while you're at it...



-John
 
Trauma1 said:
Maybe it's because you don't talk or even think "REAL RESEARCH" and bring your typical bullsh*t to yet another board. Keep telling yourself henry that anecdotal info displayed on the internet is proof in science. The interwebz is serious bizniz, though, right? Guess what, it isn't. It demonstrates jack ****. Shall we go over the numerous unknowns that can exist in an environment that isn't controlled?

I love your apparent flawed rationale here, though. It must be safe because random people with an unfathomable amount of unknowns said it's safe...:rolleyes: If you're going to make that recommendation you probably should state "at your own risk" since nothing supports it scientifically.

You're a fish out of water in science, and one day you'll eventually realize that one fail after another...

Here's the difference between you and me: I'm realistic; you'll gladly take any blind leap of faith apparently because someone said so. Take another shot in the dark while you're at it...



-John
Click to expand...

My typical bull****? **** you.
 
henryv said:
So not only do we have to use caps around here to make a point, we have to insult each other to win an argument? I thought you were better than that.
Click to expand...

I am, henry. I'm tired of you subtly attacking either a comment I make or Primordial Performance in general across the boards. I'm not an argumentative person, but I can't stand arrogance. Anyone that knows me in general will attest to the fact that I'm not typically someone who's on the attack to prove anything. I speak from my own knowledge and experience within science, and hopefully that can help someone on these boards.

I can just as easily admit when I'm wrong as to when I'm right. I appreciate and enjoy a good discussion; however, I don't like when things that aren't fact are presented as such.

This is not about winning any argument. Hopefully we can either agree, or agree to disagree at this point.


AM has a good group of guys. The intelligent discourse that is displayed here is why this place is my home.



-John
 
And Trauma is right, the italian group says to use for 90 days, but doesn't appear to have clinical studies showing that it safe for that, its just their labeling that says it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top