PDA

View Full Version : what exactly is 6 bromo



martel04
07-04-2006, 11:23 AM
ive searched and nothing comes up. just wondering if anyone has any studies on this compound. what exactly it is and what it does. thanks

Regular_Ryan
07-04-2006, 11:29 AM
http://anabolicx.com/store/hyperdrol.html

Regular_Ryan
07-04-2006, 11:33 AM
6-Bromodione: There are two types of estrogen aromatase inhibitors and application of only one leaves the other pathway open for feminizing potential.

1.

6 alpha-Bromodione is a competitive inhibitor of aromatase enzymes. Basically this means it works by way of binding to the active binding site of the aromatase enzyme resulting in prevention of interaction with other steroids that aromatize like testosterone and the rest of our favorite male androgens. This is great for rapid binding and short term aromatase control, but unfortunately a competitive inhibitor will eventually let go of the enzyme and allow it to do feminizing things to manly hormones. So, only half of the job is done, but it has its important role as well.

2.

6 beta-Bromodione is a mechanism-based irreversible inhibitor of the aromatase enzyme. An irreversible aromatase inhibitor is also referred to as a suicide inhibitor. Itís pretty cool in that it acts similar to a competitive inhibitor in the way it binds, but like a pissed-off ex-girlfriend, it is both highly selective and it will not let go until death do they part.

Together the two analogs in 6-Bromodione make sure that estrogen is under control, and many would assume that less estrogen means the prolactin would be under control as well. Often, once prolactin increases are stimulated, shutting it back down takes some extra effort and a protracted period of time.

Viado
07-04-2006, 11:34 AM
ive searched and nothing comes up. just wondering if anyone has any studies on this compound. what exactly it is and what it does. thanks

A new revenue generating compound that is clinically unproven to do anything at this time.

Regular_Ryan
07-04-2006, 11:34 AM
6) Stereochemistry of the functional group determines the mechanism of aromatase inhibition by 6-bromoandrostenedione.
Endocrinology. 1987 Sep;121(3):1010-6.

Viado
07-04-2006, 11:41 AM
Has a randomized controlled study been done testing it's effects on humans? safety? efficay?

OMMID
07-04-2006, 12:11 PM
6-bromo-testosterone

ironLifeBG
07-04-2006, 12:24 PM
okay i'll translate that for those of you who don't speak endocrine.

compound #1 basically binds with estrogen to keep free testosterone and other male androgens from binding, but the binds aren't permanent and they will break ...this is a similar mechanism to DS ActivaTe, i believe except i believe activate targets SHGB (sex hormone binding globulin) directly.

compound #2 suicide inhibitor...similar mechanism to any ATD, AT product...ie it binds with the estrogen and the bond is permanent, however the compound is highly selective in its choice of mates and will probably float around for a couple days before binding (this is why it takes a couple days to notice body composition changes)


very interesting indeed


has anyone ever tried stacking activate and hyperdrol?

martel04
07-04-2006, 12:38 PM
yea ever hear of NHA stack from ds. RR and activate. RR is almost the same as HD

ironLifeBG
07-04-2006, 12:48 PM
yea ever hear of NHA stack from ds. RR and activate. RR is almost the same as HD

yes i ran and logged an NHA stack consisting of rebound XT and ActivaTe Beta about 10 months ago

i didn't realize that rebound reloaded was "almost the same" as hyperdrol and jungle warfare. i will however let you know how well it works.

uhockey
07-04-2006, 03:37 PM
Reloaded is not "almost the same" at all, as it is standardized for specific 6-bromo isomers and specific lignans from the white button mushroom.

And, although I can't be sure due to the proprietary blend of Hyperdrol, I believe ActivaTe's dosing of Divanil is significantly higher.

Viado
07-04-2006, 06:32 PM
It is interesting to get negative reps for simply saying the truth, ie where in the literature has this compound been tested for safety and efficacy in humans? Any randomized controlled trials? Any data?

Simply because an article shows up on pub med, (of which I have access to 75% of the article in simple text or pdf form, and also where publications I have authored can be found) does not make it gospel nor should it render credibility.

bigsexysd7
07-04-2006, 06:50 PM
Ohhhh viado, pubmed is all that matters on this board. If it ain't on pubmed, it ain't true. It is the only check too many on here use. I wouldn't be surprised if people on here had a link to pubmed on their myspace.

On a side note, I have yet to be disappointed with a DS product. I am using the RR now in PCT, and I must sa i like it more than the RXt.

uhockey
07-05-2006, 01:48 AM
Ohhhh viado, pubmed is all that matters on this board. If it ain't on pubmed, it ain't true. It is the only check too many on here use. I wouldn't be surprised if people on here had a link to pubmed on their myspace.

On a side note, I have yet to be disappointed with a DS product. I am using the RR now in PCT, and I must sa i like it more than the RXt.

It's funny because it's true. I prefer my literature from JAMA, but they don't talk much about supplements......then again they don't talk much about Rats either.

Suffice it to say, much of this industry is a cost/benefit analysis of relatively new compounds with unknown long term safety.

No one is forcing you to take anything.

Androgenic
07-06-2006, 09:14 AM
JAMA is on PUBMED.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=PubMed

"Suffice it to say, much of this industry is a cost/benefit analysis of relatively new compounds with unknown long term safety. "

Uhockey do you find this being at least partially in conflict with what the healthcare system is supposed to represent. The rolling the dice with one's health especially with hormones whether benign or not without more knowledge of the compound seems questionable. I expect that a bit more from the mavericks that throw health to the wind for the potential of one more pound of muscle, but I would expect at least a bit more caution from you, given your life's direction. My research has turned up some red flags on this compound that at least would make me less than quick to be a Guinea Pig. You are aware with most hormones, that there is a hormonal cascade and numerous effects throughout the body. This compound was discovered many, many years ago and it's interesting that there is so little real data available. Wouldn't you in your position as a Med Student recommend something with a bit more documented safety or data (that still has potential risk) such as AT/6-oxo or Formestane/4-hydroxyandrostenedione. Even if it is truly effective with little side effects, shutting down estrogen is not a desirable thing. Read Bill Llewellyn's thoughts in his Encyclopedia on AI's (that are not SERMs). It can have numerous health implications and strength implications...and this is from a steroid guru, not even a medical community member.

xGhostinGx
07-06-2006, 09:55 AM
Ohhhh viado, pubmed is all that matters on this board. If it ain't on pubmed, it ain't true. It is the only check too many on here use.


Good comment. Lets start using various articles that anyone writes. Screw the truth! Pubmed is a joke of a standard. :rolleyes:

xGhostinGx
07-06-2006, 10:02 AM
It is interesting to get negative reps for simply saying the truth, ie where in the literature has this compound been tested for safety and efficacy in humans? Any randomized controlled trials? Any data?




You got a neg rep for asking that question? LOL. Who? Exposure can be a good thing, so we can see whos being a little sensetive. :D

xGhostinGx
07-06-2006, 10:05 AM
It is interesting to get negative reps for simply saying the truth, ie where in the literature has this compound been tested for safety and efficacy in humans? Any randomized controlled trials? Any data?

Simply because an article shows up on pub med, (of which I have access to 75% of the article in simple text or pdf form, and also where publications I have authored can be found) does not make it gospel nor should it render credibility.


Ill pos rep you when im charged up tonight.:)

Bloute
07-06-2006, 10:44 AM
Reloaded is not "almost the same" at all, as it is standardized for specific 6-bromo isomers and specific lignans from the white button mushroom.

And, although I can't be sure due to the proprietary blend of Hyperdrol, I believe ActivaTe's dosing of Divanil is significantly higher.

Bump for the comment about Divanil. I haven'T finish my Hyperdrol log but I don't feel the pumps and the muscle hardness I had from Activate with Hyperdrol.

Viado
07-06-2006, 12:02 PM
JAMA is on PUBMED.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=PubMed

"Suffice it to say, much of this industry is a cost/benefit analysis of relatively new compounds with unknown long term safety. "

Uhockey do you find this being at least partially in conflict with what the healthcare system is supposed to represent. The rolling the dice with one's health especially with hormones whether benign or not without more knowledge of the compound seems questionable. I expect that a bit more from the mavericks that throw health to the wind for the potential of one more pound of muscle, but I would expect at least a bit more caution from you, given your life's direction. My research has turned up some red flags on this compound that at least would make me less than quick to be a Guinea Pig. You are aware with most hormones, that there is a hormonal cascade and numerous effects throughout the body. This compound was discovered many, many years ago and it's interesting that there is so little real data available. Wouldn't you in your position as a Med Student recommend something with a bit more documented safety or data (that still has potential risk) such as AT/6-oxo or Formestane/4-hydroxyandrostenedione. Even if it is truly effective with little side effects, shutting down estrogen is not a desirable thing. Read Bill Llewellyn's thoughts in his Encyclopedia on AI's (that are not SERMs). It can have numerous health implications and strength implications...and this is from a steroid guru, not even a medical community member.

I think that the saddest part is that when someone posts a log, for the most part is is treated as something along the lines of an individual study - where one person's gains could directly translate into one's personal gains on said product. Little do we know that there are many individuals on this board that are in fact posting these logs that may have a direct or indirect affiliation with the manufacturer. It owuld almost be appreciated if those testing the products disclose or deny their affiliation with manufacturer X. Clinicla trials for safety adn efficacy go through an expensive process that takes years until an agent makes it onto the market - even then, post approval some products are dicontinued (ie Vioxx as a recent example). The bottom line is that one should be weary about testing a new product witha new or novel compound. Compromising your health is truly not worth it. Do your research, have a doc sift through the literature or even prin out some of these COMPLETE articles on line. There are way too many abstact readers here that really don't see the details, ie if a compound doubled the incidence of something from 1% to 2% - it is still low, but can be spun via clever marketing as DOUBLING! I could go on and on. Just be on the lookout.

It's what I tell my patients.

weightsanyway
07-06-2006, 01:28 PM
I think that the saddest part is that when someone posts a log, for the most part is is treated as something along the lines of an individual study - where one person's gains could directly translate into one's personal gains on said product. Little do we know that there are many individuals on this board that are in fact posting these logs that may have a direct or indirect affiliation with the manufacturer. It owuld almost be appreciated if those testing the products disclose or deny their affiliation with manufacturer X. Clinicla trials for safety adn efficacy go through an expensive process that takes years until an agent makes it onto the market - even then, post approval some products are dicontinued (ie Vioxx as a recent example). The bottom line is that one should be weary about testing a new product witha new or novel compound. Compromising your health is truly not worth it. Do your research, have a doc sift through the literature or even prin out some of these COMPLETE articles on line. There are way too many abstact readers here that really don't see the details, ie if a compound doubled the incidence of something from 1% to 2% - it is still low, but can be spun via clever marketing as DOUBLING! I could go on and on. Just be on the lookout.

It's what I tell my patients.

Excellent post.

You'll get the standard answer here about testing costing too much, etc. etc. But the ironic thing here is that as supplements evolve and become even more drug-like/effective, there's an even greater need for something like that. For the love of God, many of these steroidal AIs that the companies are digging up these days have been around for decades and, same as the new prohormones, have been passed over for development because of the risk of use, sides, etc.

There's dozens of AI's out there, reading a few studies from the 1950's and determining that their safe for use is a far cry from setting up a controlled study today and applying the medical knowledge and testing that we have available 50 years later...

Androgenic
07-06-2006, 02:23 PM
Excellent post.

You'll get the standard answer here about testing costing too much, etc. etc. But the ironic thing here is that as supplements evolve and become even more drug-like/effective, there's an even greater need for something like that. For the love of God, many of these steroidal AIs that the companies are digging up these days have been around for decades and, same as the new prohormones, have been passed over for development because of the risk of use, sides, etc.

There's dozens of AI's out there, reading a few studies from the 1950's and determining that their safe for use is a far cry from setting up a controlled study today and applying the medical knowledge and testing that we have available 50 years later...

Precisely. This is exactly the train of thought one should have. Why was it discovered so long ago and not used by pharmaceutical companies, why didn't the hardcore bodybuilding community cry out for it's development and have a black market for it, why is there NO real data and the few studies that sort of allude to it are from dates prior to electronic data recording (no abstract or online study). Then to top it off the name gets altered...bromodione (or could've done bromo-etiochol, but in this case it's more beneficial to play up the andro, being it's an AI with less legal loopholes necessary)...and how much in the product...unknown...proprietary (which means it could be altered for dosages whenever without scrutiny). I have not even got to why I think this compound may not be a good selection in terms of organic/biochemistry, much of it theoretical given what data is available on the compositional groups and molecules of comparable nature.

Androgenic
07-10-2006, 12:50 PM
I'd like to know where this information is legitimately referenced. I have found nothing regarding 6-bromoandrostenedione having an alpha and beta with these characteristics. Actually, I found some data pointing to them being anti-androgens. I did find one 1978 abstract on bromoandrostenedione with alpha and beta...but it is not 6-bromo (rather 16) and well, read on...
__________________________________________________ ______________
Steroids, 1978 Nov, 32(4), 519 - 27
Improved synthesis of 16alpha-hydroxylated androgens: intermediates of estriol formation in pregnancy; Numazawa M et al.; 16alpha-Hydroxyandrostenedione (16alpha-hydroxyandrost-4-ene-3,17-dione), 16alpha-hydroxytestosterone (16alpha,17beta-dihydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one) and 16alpha-hydroxydehydroepiandrosterone 3-sulfate (3beta, 16alpha-dihydroxyandrost-5-en-17-one 3-monosulfate) were synthesized by a new chemical approach with much improved yield . 16alpha-Bromoandrostendione was converted to the hydrazone of 16alpha-hydroxyandrostenedione which gave 16alpha-hydroxyandrostenedione on acid hydrolysis in total 63% yield . Oxidation of 16alpha-hydroxydehydroepiandrosterone with Jones' reagent also selectively afforded 16alpha-hydroxyandrostenedione . 16alpha-Hydroxytestosterone was observed by selective reduction of 16alpha-hydroxyandrostenedione with sodium borohydride . Reaction of 16alpha-hydroxydehydroepiandrosterone with chlorosulfonic acid in pyridine selectively gave the 3-monosulfate . The structure of the sulfate was deduced from its solvolysis to the starting material, and its acetylation and subsequent solvolysis to 16alpha-hydroxydehydroepiandrosterone 16-acetate . All procedures are suitable for large scale synthesis without the use of microorganisms.
__________________________________________________ _______________


6-Bromodione: There are two types of estrogen aromatase inhibitors and application of only one leaves the other pathway open for feminizing potential.

1.

6 alpha-Bromodione is a competitive inhibitor of aromatase enzymes. Basically this means it works by way of binding to the active binding site of the aromatase enzyme resulting in prevention of interaction with other steroids that aromatize like testosterone and the rest of our favorite male androgens. This is great for rapid binding and short term aromatase control, but unfortunately a competitive inhibitor will eventually let go of the enzyme and allow it to do feminizing things to manly hormones. So, only half of the job is done, but it has its important role as well.

2.

6 beta-Bromodione is a mechanism-based irreversible inhibitor of the aromatase enzyme. An irreversible aromatase inhibitor is also referred to as a suicide inhibitor. Itís pretty cool in that it acts similar to a competitive inhibitor in the way it binds, but like a pissed-off ex-girlfriend, it is both highly selective and it will not let go until death do they part.

Together the two analogs in 6-Bromodione make sure that estrogen is under control, and many would assume that less estrogen means the prolactin would be under control as well. Often, once prolactin increases are stimulated, shutting it back down takes some extra effort and a protracted period of time.

Viado
07-10-2006, 01:07 PM
In all honestly, does it make one really want to try this compound if this is all that is available on it? *sigh*

Great work!

jrkarp
07-10-2006, 02:06 PM
okay i'll translate that for those of you who don't speak endocrine.

compound #1 basically binds with estrogen to keep free testosterone and other male androgens from binding, but the binds aren't permanent and they will break ...this is a similar mechanism to DS ActivaTe, i believe except i believe activate targets SHGB (sex hormone binding globulin) directly.

compound #2 suicide inhibitor...similar mechanism to any ATD, AT product...ie it binds with the estrogen and the bond is permanent, however the compound is highly selective in its choice of mates and will probably float around for a couple days before binding (this is why it takes a couple days to notice body composition changes)



Actually completely inaccurate. They bind to the aromatase enzyme, which
converts androgens (like testosterone) to estrogens. They do not bind to estrogen.

ActivaTe binds to SHBG.

Androgenic
07-11-2006, 06:39 AM
Well, I found where this data is being drawn from. It does exert anti-aromatase activity, but in this case at the expense of, as a competitive inhibitor of, androstenedione...which as we all know by know is a few steps away in testosterone's production. This gets back to why one would do this unless its for a short period in a hyperestrogenic state, further, as stated previously it will be at the expense of testosterone, as anti-androgen as well if used for any notable period of time. This is from 1. 1987 2. Hardly, a strong credentialed, peer-referenced, stringently reviewed journal 3. Is with rabbits regarding placental aromatase. But taking it for a noteworthy place to start, it is that. There is another Japanese journal publication that uses the 1987 data and elaborates further on the rabbit data with the discussion on the activity of various groups in the molecule...which is a bit more conflicting then stated above in the typical muscle magazine marketing sort of way. But for anyone interested here's the elusive data that's being somewhat distorted and extrapolated.

Endocrinology, Vol 121, 1010-1016, Copyright © 1987 by Endocrine Society
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stereochemistry of the functional group determines the mechanism of aromatase inhibition by 6-bromoandrostenedione
Y Osawa, Y Osawa and MJ Coon


A selective inhibitor of aromatase (estrogen synthetase) would be a useful pharmacological tool with potential therapeutic application. We have found that 6 alpha-bromoandrostenedione (6 alpha-BrA) is a competitive inhibitor of human placental aromatase with respect to androstenedione, with an apparent Ki of 3.4 nM, while 6 beta-BrA is a mechanism-based irreversible inhibitor with an apparent Ki of 0.8 microM and a kinact of 0.025 min-1. Aromatase activity was measured by tritium release into water from the 1 beta position of [1(-3)H,4(- 14)C]androstenedione in reaction mixtures containing NADPH and the aromatase. Time-dependent inhibition was assessed by preincubation of inhibitors with either the 900 X g placental pellet or placental microsomes in the presence of NADPH. Aliquots were taken at intervals, diluted, and assayed for aromatase activity with androstenedione and additional NADPH. The time-dependent inhibition by 6 beta-BrA was dependent on the concentration of this compound and the presence of NADPH, while the addition of excess substrate in the preincubation mixture hindered the inactivation. Both epimers were ineffective in inhibiting rabbit liver microsomal drug-metabolizing activities in a competitive or time-dependent manner. This indicates a high selectivity of 6-BrA inhibition among P-450 cytochromes. These and other 6- substituted androgens may be useful probes into the nature of the active site and mechanism of action of aromatase.
__________________________________________________ ______________

Biol Pharm Bull. 2004 Nov;27(11):1878-82. Related Articles, Links


Synthesis and biochemical properties of 6-bromoandrostenedione derivatives with a 2,2-dimethyl or 2-methyl group as aromatase inhibitors.

Numazawa M, Handa W, Yamada K.

Tohoku Pharmaceutical University, Sendai, Japan. numazawa@tohoku-pharm.ac.jp

To gain insight into the mechanism for irreversible inactivation of aromatase by 6beta-bromoandrostenedione (1), one of the earliest discovered suicide substrates, in relation to the catalytic function of the enzyme, the 2,2-dimethyl derivative of compound 1, steroid 4, and its 6alpha-isomer 5, as well as 2-methyl-1,4-diene steroid 8 and its 6alpha-bromide 10, were synthesized. All of the steroids inhibited aromatase activity in human placental microsomes with apparent K(i)'s ranging between 10 and 81 nM. The 2,2-dimethyl-6beta- and 6alpha-bromo steroids 4 and 5 were extremely powerful inhibitors (K(i): 14 and 10 nM, respectively), but these two did not cause a time-dependent inactivation of aromatase in the presence of NADPH; in contrast, the 2-methyl-1,4-diene steroids 8 and 10 caused time-dependent inactivation with apparent k(inact) of 0.035 and 0.071 min(-1), respectively, in a suicide manner. These results indicate that the 2,2-dimethyl function of the 6beta-bromide 4 would prevent the inactivation of aromatase caused by inhibitor 1 in a suicide manner, probably through steric activity, whereas the 2-methyl group of steroid 8 did not significantly affect the suicidal inactivation by the parent 1,4-diene steroid, a typical suicide substrate.

jrkarp
07-11-2006, 07:30 AM
Well, I found where this data is being drawn from. It does exert anti-aromatase activity, but in this case at the expense of, as a competitive inhibitor of, androstenedione...which as we all know by know is a few steps away in testosterone's production. This gets back to why one would do this unless its for a short period in a hyperestrogenic state, further, as stated previously it will be at the expense of testosterone, as anti-androgen as well if used for any notable period of time. This is from 1. 1987 2. Hardly, a strong credentialed, peer-referenced, stringently reviewed journal 3. Is with rabbits regarding placental aromatase. But taking it for a noteworthy place to start, it is that. There is another Japanese journal publication that uses the 1987 data and elaborates further on the rabbit data with the discussion on the activity of various groups in the molecule...which is a bit more conflicting then stated above in the typical muscle magazine marketing sort of way. But for anyone interested here's the elusive data that's being somewhat distorted and extrapolated.

Endocrinology, Vol 121, 1010-1016, Copyright © 1987 by Endocrine Society
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stereochemistry of the functional group determines the mechanism of aromatase inhibition by 6-bromoandrostenedione
Y Osawa, Y Osawa and MJ Coon


A selective inhibitor of aromatase (estrogen synthetase) would be a useful pharmacological tool with potential therapeutic application. We have found that 6 alpha-bromoandrostenedione (6 alpha-BrA) is a competitive inhibitor of human placental aromatase with respect to androstenedione, with an apparent Ki of 3.4 nM, while 6 beta-BrA is a mechanism-based irreversible inhibitor with an apparent Ki of 0.8 microM and a kinact of 0.025 min-1. Aromatase activity was measured by tritium release into water from the 1 beta position of [1(-3)H,4(- 14)C]androstenedione in reaction mixtures containing NADPH and the aromatase. Time-dependent inhibition was assessed by preincubation of inhibitors with either the 900 X g placental pellet or placental microsomes in the presence of NADPH. Aliquots were taken at intervals, diluted, and assayed for aromatase activity with androstenedione and additional NADPH. The time-dependent inhibition by 6 beta-BrA was dependent on the concentration of this compound and the presence of NADPH, while the addition of excess substrate in the preincubation mixture hindered the inactivation. Both epimers were ineffective in inhibiting rabbit liver microsomal drug-metabolizing activities in a competitive or time-dependent manner. This indicates a high selectivity of 6-BrA inhibition among P-450 cytochromes. These and other 6- substituted androgens may be useful probes into the nature of the active site and mechanism of action of aromatase.

Um, the way I read that, it says that 6-A-BrA competes with andro... at the aromatase enzyme. It doesn't say that it competes with andro at the 17B-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase, which is what converts andro to test.

This seems to say that this compound keeps androstenedione away from aromatase, which is a good thing. Androstenedione + Aromatase = Estrone

Androgenic
07-11-2006, 08:37 AM
Aromatase is an enzyme and its simply an additive chemical reaction like was stated. It is above the arrow (catalyzing in one direction, but there reversible portion of the reaction too, unlike with "suicide inhibition", metioned above, which apparently is what the beta is). Competitive inhibition, with the alpha form, can lead to feedback and ultimately raised levels of estrone with cessation and lower testosterone prior (in a cascade...not one direction, not even really two directions, but multiple loops in multiple direction with numerous impact on enzymatic production, tissues, etc.) to that...hence the chronic use I was discussing. It does work in the short term according to this data. But as discussed previously, this scenario is only desirable in a basic bodybuilding magazine sort of way and not fully understanding the hormonal cascade and enzymatic relationships. And if I was to go this route I would use a product that has been studied more such as 4-hydroxyandrostenedione that is just as obtainable. AI overuse of any kind could lead to osteoporosis, lower strength, lower libido and testosterone and ultimately less muscle. Estrogen is tied into strength and muscle and the most muscle and strength gained are often with the most aromatizable steroids. Not that hyperestrogenemia is a positive situation and these drugs can be used to normalize PCT...but the potent the brief this situation should be. I believe for this very reason people have better long term results with 6-oxo over ATD, related to potencty. Potency is not ultimately the best thing with regards to estrogen/aromatase. Again read Bill Llewelyn's thoughts on AI's being overused or misappropriately used, that aren't SERMs.

If you read my article on DGL, you might get a feel for may grasp on biochem./organic.

wild1poet2
07-11-2006, 08:40 AM
Reading this thread is blocking estrogen conversion...LOL but my head is going to explode.

It's a great thread. What my simple mind is taking away is that 6 bromo is of questionable efficacy. Even more disconcerting could cause adverse hormonal response. Are these fair conclusions?

jrkarp
07-11-2006, 08:50 AM
Aromatase is an enzyme and its simply an additive chemical reaction like was stated. It is above the arrow (catalyzing in one direction, but there reversible portion of the reaction too, unlike with "suicide inhibition", metioned above, which apparently is what the beta is). Competitive inhibition, with the alpha form, can lead to feedback and ultimately raised levels of estrone with cessation and lower testosterone prior (in a cascade...not one direction, not even really two directions, but multiple loops in multiple direction with numerous impact on enzymatic production, tissues, etc.) to that...hence the chronic use I was discussing. It does work in the short term according to this data. But as discussed previously, this scenario is only desirable in a basic bodybuilding magazine sort of way and not fully understanding the hormonal cascade and enzymatic relationships. And if I was to go this route I would use a product that has been studied more such as 4-hydroxyandrostenedione that is just as obtainable. AI overuse of any kind could lead to osteoporosis, lower strength, lower libido and testosterone and ultimately less muscle. Estrogen is tied into strength and muscle and the most muscle and strength gained are often with the most aromatizable steroids. Not that hyperestrogenemia is a positive situation and these drugs can be used to normalize PCT...but the potent the brief this situation should be. I believe for this very reason people have better long term results with 6-oxo over ATD, related to potencty. Potency is not ultimately the best thing with regards to estrogen/aromatase. Again read Bill Llewelyn's thoughts on AI's being overused or misappropriately used, that aren't SERMs.

If you read my article on DGL, you might get a feel for may grasp on biochem./organic.

I was not questioning your grasp of biochem/organic.

I was questioning an implication you were making.



It does exert anti-aromatase activity, but in this case at the expense of, as a competitive inhibitor of, androstenedione...which as we all know by know is a few steps away in testosterone's production.

Where in those studies does it say that 6-bromo inhibits androstenedione? It does not.

You were implying that 6-bromo will compete to reduce androstenedione levels, and in turn reduce testosterone. If there is an ultimate reduction in test levels, it is not a result of a direct influence of 6-bromo on androstenedione.

I agree with what you are saying about AI overuse.

Skigazzi
07-11-2006, 08:51 AM
Im offering no opinion on this subject (I havent read this with as much attention as needed), but to those who have some knowledge on this, what are your thoughts on the bloodwork that DS has posted for RR? the numbers are all quite good.

Are we possibly (possibly is the key word) running into another contaminated results from metabolites like we did regarding ATD and the T levels people reported?

Androgenic
07-11-2006, 09:01 AM
Where in those studies does it say that 6-bromo inhibits androstenedione? It does not.

You were implying that 6-bromo will compete to reduce androstenedione levels, and in turn reduce testosterone. If there is an ultimate reduction in test levels, it is not a result of a direct influence of 6-bromo on androstenedione.

I agree with what you are saying about AI overuse.

6-bromoandrostenedione and 4-hydroxyandrostenedione's use would ultimately lower androstenedione production, its molecularly inevitable. Initially it may "push" the reaction to increase testosterone and decrease estrone/estrodiol...but this is not the case for any notable length of time. Testosterone would decrease over time and estrone/estrodiol should surge after cessation.

It is good to question all of this though. You have a skeptical mind, which will always serve you well. Good to see your agreement on AI overuse. I'll rep you for the critical thought.

bobburn
07-11-2006, 09:01 AM
I don't think we're running into anything like that, but what worries me is that the only person who ran 6-bromo (RR) only had a DECREASE in free test...sure bound test and estrogen had improvements, but the decrease in the "already high" levels of free test is not something I look forward to...I'd like to see more people who took 6-bromo (rr) only and what their results were...not the combination of 6-bromo (RR) and activate.

Androgenic
07-11-2006, 09:09 AM
Here's some suppliers...I'd love to see someone do that.

Funny, enough they do list it both ways...Sell 6-bromoandrostenedione
and 6-bromo-3,17-dioxoetioallocholane. Funny enough also, they all list that same info. that was given from AX and that one Japanese study.

http://www.tradekey.com/selloffer_view/id/73942.htm
http://www.alibaba.com/manufacturer/13685038/Sell_6_Bromoandrostenedione.html
http://www.tejarinet.com/vuprod.aspx?prod_id=6429
http://www.theindiadirectory.com/offers/7942.htm
http://www.agronetwork.com/global/marketplace/showcase_info.html?hc=8&mc=&country=&s_str=&itemnum=194
http://xubqian.en.ec21.com/GC01193066/CA01326317/6-bromo-3,17-dioxoetioallocholane.html

atsmooth
07-11-2006, 10:24 AM
Very informative thread guys. It has been a little tough for me to follow with some of the terminology used, but I think I am getting some good info out of this. I am currently on day 14 of using the NHA with RR and Activate. I must say, I am more than a little concerned at the moment. So far the stack has been great for me. I can tell a big differnce in my total body composition and muscle hardness. Appetite, libido, sleep have all increased nicely. Notcied some ACNE in the beggining, but has since subsided. Now I am sort of concerned about the long term effects. Yeah, I feel great now, but am I messing things up for the long term?

Androgenic
07-11-2006, 11:32 AM
1 .) Estrogen for Men--It's Vital Role in Male Fertility
Estrogen is known as the "female hormone," but a study in tomorrow's issue of Nature suggests that it's not so fussy about gender. Researchers showed one way in which estrogen is critical to male reproduction in mice, and they suspect other roles for estrogen may soon be discovered.
For decades, scientists have known that estrogen and estrogen receptors are found in males, and over the last several years, clues to their function have emerged. A few male patients with estrogen and estrogen receptor deficiencies showed bone growth abnormalities, and last year male estrogen receptor knock-out (ERKO) mice, which lack the gene for the receptor, were found to be infertile.
Physiologist and toxicologist Rex Hess of the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana, already suspected estrogen was important in male reproduction, partly because of the extremely high concentration of estrogen receptors in the efferent ductules--microscopic tubes that lead young sperm from the testis to the epididymis, where they mature. The ductules act as more than just pipes: They absorb fluid, concentrating the sperm during their trip, which improves their survival and the animal's sperm count. In their Nature paper, Hess and his colleagues at Illinois, the University of Missouri, Columbia, and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, looked at the behavior of the ductules in ERKO mice.
Previous studies had shown that the ductules in these mice malfunction, but Hess and his colleagues provided a detailed description of what goes wrong. As the mice mature, the tube walls become swollen with fluid, eventually blocking the ductules and shutting down sperm production. When the team extracted ERKO ductules, filled them with fluid, and closed them off at each end, the ductules were unable to remove the fluid they contained and actually swelled by 46% in 24 hours. Controls shrunk in cross-sectional area by 82%. Normal ductules treated with an estrogen-blocking compound shrunk only 14%, suggesting that the disfunction of the ERKO ductules is caused at least in part by their inability to bind estrogen.
"It's the first demonstration of something that estrogens actually do in the male, in the reproductive system," says Richard Sharpe of the U.K. Medical Research Council's Reproductive Biology Unit in Edinburgh. He notes that there is evidence of estrogen action throughout the male reproductive system, and it is possible that environmental toxins that mimic estrogen could interfere with any of estrogen's sites of action. Hess's results "open a new door" onto such questions, he says.

Androgenic
07-11-2006, 11:33 AM
Estrogen is also used to treat metestatic prostate cancer:
From UptoDate:
"Estrogens exert their effect on prostate cancer growth primarily by
negative feedback on the hypothalamic-pituitary axis; high levels
reduce the release of LHRH from the hypothalamus, thereby suppressing
LH release from the anterior pituitary. As a result, the testicular
Leydig cells stop producing testosterone, although it may take one to
two weeks to achieve castrate levels. High dose estrogens also compete
with androgens for the androgen receptor, and may have a direct
cytotoxic effect on both androgen-sensitive and androgen-insensitive
prostate cancer cells." (2)

Johns Hopkins Arthiritis suggests in this study that estrogen plays a
role in prevention of osteoporosis in men:
"These data indicate that E clearly exerts a dominant regulatory
effect on bone resorption in normal elderly men. T may have small
effect, although not significant. Both E and T are important in
maintaining bone formation.

The American Society for Bone and Mineral Research links osteoporosis
with low estrogen levels in men:
"In studies begun in 1992 of 400 men with low bone mineral density,
many suffering from tumors or drug-induced (gluco-steroids)
osteoporosis, findings of estrogen depletion were about as frequent as
among postmenopausal women. A combined lack of testosterone and
estrogen was found at least as often as a deficiency in testosterone
alone."
http://www.asbmr.org/98%20Press%20Releases/newsrel9.htm

Estrogen may have beneficial effects in men with heart disease:
"Although many studies have found that estrogen treatment can reduce
or control heart disease in women, few studies have established
similar benefits in men. One of the few was reported today in CHEST,
the peer-reviewed journal of the American College of Chest Physicians
(ACCP).

Researchers at the University of Pittsburgh reported that conjugated
estrogen (estrogen and progesterone) improves myocardial ischemia that
is caused by exposure to the cold. Environmental exposure to cold is a
common trigger of myocardial ischemia-an insufficient supply of blood
to the heart-particularly in people with existing coronary artery
disease. In these patients, they noted, cold exposure may decrease the
myocardial oxygen supply by constricting the arteries while increasing
the demand for such oxygen which is carried in the blood."
http://www.newswise.com/articles/1998/12/ESTROGEN.CCP.html

jrkarp
07-11-2006, 11:58 AM
All well and good, but nobody is suggesting use of this product on a consistent basis for months at a time. There are times to suppress estrogen and times not to.

Its use is indicated in the NHA stack, where it works with ActivaTe to dramatically increase free test.

It can of course also be used to control estrogenic effects on cycle, and for PCT (I don't always like AI use during PCT myself).

whitedevil74
07-11-2006, 12:30 PM
Honestly all of these hormone manipulators are slightly disconcerting. The human body has taken hundreds of millions of years to evolve and males have estrogen for a reason, even if we are not exactly sure of what that reason is. Our bodies are pretty finely tuned and blindly toying with them for the benefit of satisfying our vanity seems rather foolish. I feel that it is slightly imprudent to tinker around with one's hormonal level with products that have no scientific studies or clinical trials as to either their efficacy or safety. Honestly steroids seem to be a safer bet at this point. It least they have been studied and tested.

jrkarp
07-11-2006, 01:10 PM
Honestly all of these hormone manipulators are slightly disconcerting. The human body has taken hundreds of millions of years to evolve and males have estrogen for a reason, even if we are not exactly sure of what that reason is. Our bodies are pretty finely tuned and blindly toying with them for the benefit of satisfying our vanity seems rather foolish. I feel that it is slightly imprudent to tinker around with one's hormonal level with products that have no scientific studies or clinical trials as to either their efficacy or safety. Honestly steroids seem to be a safer bet at this point. It least they have been studied and tested.

These anti-estrogen compounds are designed to be used alongside steroids to control the excess estrogen that they tend to cause in men.

Males do have estrogen for a reason, and nobody has suggested using these things on a permanant basis to suppress it.

BTW, humans have only been around 2-4 million years.

whitedevil74
07-11-2006, 01:25 PM
These anti-estrogen compounds are designed to be used alongside steroids to control the excess estrogen that they tend to cause in men.

Males do have estrogen for a reason, and nobody has suggested using these things on a permanant basis to suppress it.

BTW, humans have only been around 2-4 million years.


From what I have seen these susbtances are not being marketed as part of a steroid cycle or for controlling excess estrogen. They are marketed just as suppressing estrogen and boosting free testosterone for increased muscle gains.

BTW that the last part was a bit of hyperbole. Our oldest hominid relative is Sahelanthropus tchadensis which dates to about 7 million years ago. Homo Erectus is only about 2 million years old with Homo Spaiens being only about 500,000 years old. Still a pretty finely tuned machine. Just an example check out barefoot running on treadmills instead of wearing shoes. Less injuries and you can run forever. I recently started and my knees don't hurt anymore.

Androgenic
07-11-2006, 01:26 PM
I feel that it is slightly imprudent to tinker around with one's hormonal level with products that have no scientific studies or clinical trials as to either their efficacy or safety. Honestly steroids seem to be a safer bet at this point. It least they have been studied and tested.

Great point. I concur.

Androgenic
07-11-2006, 01:36 PM
From what I have seen these susbtances are not being marketed as part of a steroid cycle or for controlling excess estrogen. They are marketed just as suppressing estrogen and boosting free testosterone for increased muscle gains.

Yet again a very valid differentiation from their intended use. Unless one has hyperestrogenemia chronically, this is not a great course of action that as you said many are using chronically and ultimately have the reverse impact even after an initial increase of test and decrease in estrogen levels.

I am sure there is a long list of those here that had blood pressure, lipid changes, acne, sore lower back, increased injuries (again a scenario which Llewellyn addresses in the steroid encyclopedia), loss of libido, water retention or even gyno...from using some of these "estrogen eliminator" type products that are marketed not for brief PCT, but for chronic use at relatively high levels. They are not started high and tapered down as would be logical with hormone use and problems post-cessation...not following these methods is why many may end up looking for PCT in the first place from their prohormones.

jrkarp
07-11-2006, 02:08 PM
From what I have seen these susbtances are not being marketed as part of a steroid cycle or for controlling excess estrogen. They are marketed just as suppressing estrogen and boosting free testosterone for increased muscle gains.


With the ban of prohormones, the eventual ban of the current generation of legal steroids, and especially the huge negative press surrounding steroids, no mainstream company is going to actively promote a product for use with/after steroid cycles.

And even those formulations designed expressly for muscle building (such as Jungle Warfare) are for temporary use, not long term use.

jrkarp
07-11-2006, 02:09 PM
I am sure there is a long list of those here that had blood pressure, lipid changes, acne, sore lower back, increased injuries (again a scenario which Llewellyn addresses in the steroid encyclopedia), loss of libido, water retention or even gyno...from using some of these "estrogen eliminator" type products that are marketed not for brief PCT, but for chronic use at relatively high levels. They are not started high and tapered down as would be logical with hormone use and problems post-cessation...not following these methods is why many may end up looking for PCT in the first place from their prohormones.

Can you show me an example of one of these products being marketed for "chronic" long term use?

weightsanyway
07-11-2006, 02:24 PM
Can you show me an example of one of these products being marketed for "chronic" long term use?


I take that as a relative statement, the initial hormonal effects that are being discussed here take place in the first few days to a week-2, relative to a 6-8 week cycle that many companies recommend. Even with necessary breaks in between to cycle on and off supplements like these I would think you're still be looking at one heck of a hormonal roller coster ride...and then what? You've gained maybe 10-20 lbs of muscle after a few years and its off to the endo's office where you're stuck trying different types of HRT to try to normalize what you've done during your "bulking and cutting" cycles...

jrkarp
07-11-2006, 04:39 PM
You've gained maybe 10-20 lbs of muscle after a few years and its off to the endo's office where you're stuck trying different types of HRT to try to normalize what you've done during your "bulking and cutting" cycles...

Quite a bold statement. Do you have any data to back that up?

Proper cycling at reasonable dosages generally does not cause long term damage.

Phat Daddy
07-11-2006, 05:18 PM
... Even if it is truly effective with little side effects, shutting down estrogen is not a desirable thing. Read Bill Llewellyn's thoughts in his Encyclopedia on AI's (that are not SERMs). It can have numerous health implications and strength implications...and this is from a steroid guru, not even a medical community member.

You guys are so silly around here. If you need an AI, use one. If you don't need to suppress estrogen, don't use one! Duh. I've been doing this kind of thing for a long time and I can tell you, the risk is not that bad with this compound. I did the alpha testing with 6-Bromo. I gave DS the thumbs up to proceed with it. I did several trials, from 1-6 wks in length. They all looked the same. My estrogen started at about 47, hit 3 by 2wks, and recovered to 32 by wk 3 (on a 2wk cycle). Other parameters (liver, lipids, etc..) looked uncharacteristically good. If you want something with lots of FDA recognized studies, get a doc and he can script you some Teslac or Exemestane or whatever. Otherwise, stop whining and be thankful that there are such good OTC compounds available which are relatively safe and effective. If you don't like the risks or implications of using 6-Br, then just don't.

Phat Daddy
07-11-2006, 05:21 PM
Bump for the comment about Divanil. I haven'T finish my Hyperdrol log but I don't feel the pumps and the muscle hardness I had from Activate with Hyperdrol.

Nothing comes close to ActivaTe (Divanil). I tested batch after batch of this stuff for over a year before we found a raw material strong enough to be acceptable! It's the best you can get.

whitedevil74
07-11-2006, 08:05 PM
You guys are so silly around here. If you need an AI, use one. If you don't need to suppress estrogen, don't use one! Duh. If you don't like the risks or implications of using 6-Br, then just don't.

I agree with you as long as person is made aware what a product is and what the risk of such a product are. This forum is an excellent education tool, but most readers of muscle mags are not aware that this forum exist. Because I visit this board I am aware of the risk of certain products and their mechanisms of action. However, the marketing of these products is not to control estrogen or suppress estrogen. Look through any of the magazines and all of these AI are being promoted as being incredible test boosters with corresponding benefits in muscle growth. Even RR is not marketed as being only for people that need to suppress estrogen, it is marketed as a product to increase testosterone and build muscle mass. It is the advertsing that is the problem, not the product.

Phat Daddy
07-11-2006, 08:19 PM
... It is the advertsing that is the problem, not the product.

OK, I'll give you that much. I think mankind is becoming feminized in general and don't see a big prob with some estrogen suppression, but I will agree that the marketing should be practical, basic and responsible. I honestly don't have much say in that area and haven't seen the labels yet. I guess I just tend to assume people kind of know what they're doing. I think people like Viado really do, so his argument seems truly directionless and his motives questionable. If you wanna live in fearful speculation, just stay inside, lock your door and hide under the bed. Otherwise, speak the truth and don't pretend to make a real argument if you just have some personal issue against some company or product. It's a bit transparent in this case, don't you think?

weightsanyway
07-11-2006, 08:41 PM
Quite a bold statement. Do you have any data to back that up?

Proper cycling at reasonable dosages generally does not cause long term damage.

About as much data as DS has when it comes to claiming the effectiveness and safety of 6-bromo in humans... :)

Carmen0857
07-11-2006, 08:59 PM
Honestly all of these hormone manipulators are slightly disconcerting. The human body has taken hundreds of millions of years to evolve and males have estrogen for a reason, even if we are not exactly sure of what that reason is. Our bodies are pretty finely tuned and blindly toying with them for the benefit of satisfying our vanity seems rather foolish. I feel that it is slightly imprudent to tinker around with one's hormonal level with products that have no scientific studies or clinical trials as to either their efficacy or safety. Honestly steroids seem to be a safer bet at this point. It least they have been studied and tested.

Some people have excess estrogen and a cycle of ATD or RR every now and then can provide a nice boost in T. I beleive that if such products are used responsibly then there shouldn't be a problem.

Viado
07-11-2006, 11:10 PM
OK, I'll give you that much. I think mankind is becoming feminized in general and don't see a big prob with some estrogen suppression, but I will agree that the marketing should be practical, basic and responsible. I honestly don't have much say in that area and haven't seen the labels yet. I guess I just tend to assume people kind of know what they're doing. I think people like Viado really do, so his argument seems truly directionless and his motives questionable. If you wanna live in fearful speculation, just stay inside, lock your door and hide under the bed. Otherwise, speak the truth and don't pretend to make a real argument if you just have some personal issue against some company or product. It's a bit transparent in this case, don't you think?

Interesting how my argument is stated as directioneless given the limited data available for a compound that is so heavily touted as such a a "great antiaromatase" with such a "global effect". If you regard the idea of researching a product and one of its central componenets and being very wary of it until further research is available as directionless, then SURE! I am totally directionless and cautious. I am NOT going to take the risk. I don't think anyone should. Give me the info, give me the data, substantiate the compound's worthiness of being ingested for several weeks on end.

It is amazing how an educated argument agains a particular compound brings forth thoughts of personal issues - no company has been mentioned and no I have never had an issue against a company that markets and includes this compound in their product. So simply use the thought of "being targeted" as an argument for it's defense should be regarded as directionless and transparent. What has the comment I quoted in this reply brought to the table? Nothing.

Living in fear and speculation is not what I bring to the table, rather an added dimension of cautiousness that should be taken into consideration when NEW compunds with little to no data are available and marketed so aggressivley. Do not question my motives becuase as a medical porfessional I would not be doing my job if I allowed a pateint of mine to ingest a compound whose effects are not documented or studied ina controlled manner in any way, shape or form. Arguing its worthiness as a bodybuilding/weightlifting is useless - I did the research and franly, no one here can tell me exactly what it will do in vivo after it has been taken orally, all of its activities are simply speculation.

Thanks!

Viado
07-11-2006, 11:17 PM
You guys are so silly around here. If you need an AI, use one. If you don't need to suppress estrogen, don't use one! Duh. I've been doing this kind of thing for a long time and I can tell you, the risk is not that bad with this compound. I did the alpha testing with 6-Bromo. I gave DS the thumbs up to proceed with it. I did several trials, from 1-6 wks in length. They all looked the same. My estrogen started at about 47, hit 3 by 2wks, and recovered to 32 by wk 3 (on a 2wk cycle). Other parameters (liver, lipids, etc..) looked uncharacteristically good. If you want something with lots of FDA recognized studies, get a doc and he can script you some Teslac or Exemestane or whatever. Otherwise, stop whining and be thankful that there are such good OTC compounds available which are relatively safe and effective. If you don't like the risks or implications of using 6-Br, then just don't.

Again - you were one person who did the testing. That statement: "stop whining and be thankful that there are such good OTC compounds available which are relatively safe and effective. If you don't like the risks or implications of using 6-Br, then just don't" seems actually irresponsible from a company standpoint especially given that fact that you are assuming there are risks involved and cannot state much about its safety (relatively safe)?!! Honestly, there are plenty of compound we take that have only had a few studies, nto even recognized by the fda - it is because they are tested in vivo, in humans. Look at all the milk thistle work, n-acetyl cystein studies? Red Yeast Rice, etc etc. One can EASILY draw comclusions and feel somewhat comfortable in injesting these products. As for 6 bromo, i need more info. Give me the data beyond personal experience ( which is never enough) and you have my support, otherwise, prove something to us.

JLT
07-12-2006, 12:37 AM
So i'm reading this thread and I think I have grasped most of what has been said in this thread. From what I gather is that 6-bromo can potentialy be dangerious? I have a bottle sitting here which contains 6-bromo, which I was planning on running. After reading most of the recent threads i'm becoming rather dissapointed and i'm not sure if I should use this product anymore.

Viado
07-12-2006, 02:53 AM
JLT - I am not saying to take it or not, but suggesting you use your own judgement in deciding what you put into your body. Give it time to decide what might be right for you. Take all fo the information - form unbiased users, from the vendors and those who have done research. Always give the vendor the benefit of the doubt and use this forum as a stage for the discussion if you have questions.

Androgenic
07-12-2006, 09:52 AM
Give me the info, give me the data, substantiate the compound's worthiness of being ingested for several weeks on end.

It is amazing how an educated argument agains a particular compound brings forth thoughts of personal issues - no company has been mentioned and no I have never had an issue against a company that markets and includes this compound in their product.

Living in fear and speculation is not what I bring to the table, rather an added dimension of cautiousness that should be taken into consideration when NEW compunds with little to no data are available and marketed so aggressivley. Do not question my motives becuase as a medical porfessional I would not be doing my job if I allowed a patient of mine to ingest a compound whose effects are not documented or studied in a controlled manner in any way, shape or form.


I think these points are all very valid, intelligent and shows a level of conciousness that one should take with their own body and most definitely with someone else's.

jrkarp
07-12-2006, 10:23 AM
About as much data as DS has when it comes to claiming the effectiveness and safety of 6-bromo in humans... :)

Don't change the subject. That wasn't what I asked you.

weightsanyway
07-12-2006, 02:56 PM
Don't change the subject. That wasn't what I asked you.

lol, sorry that was more of a generalization, and for the record I'm with PhatDaddy that males in general run the risk on becoming more feminized, a lot of you guys would be shocked at the amount of estrogen mimickers in the environment that we're exposed too on a daily basis. Heck, even your Aquafina bottle starts leaching chemicals into the water that can have estrogenic effects after it sits in the sun too long. I can't point to any studies on this, but they are out there and I actually have family members that are doing their PhD research on these very topics.

Anyway, my thoughts are that even short-term, transient manipulations of hormones, (estrogen) can cause negative effects in the long run. We automatically assume the body bounces back after manipulating it in this way, but ironically much smaller amounts of these AI's would probably be very useful if there was one out there that could stably be used long term (5mg or less of ATD to throw one out there, I would love to see something like this studied over 6 months to a year)

Phat Daddy
07-12-2006, 05:30 PM
... Give me the data beyond personal experience ( which is never enough) and you have my support, otherwise, prove something to us.

Don't be so confident in an FDA endorsement. Just because a company has taken the years required to pay off the FDA and get a product to market, does not make it "safe and effective". Many products are recalled later or pulled from the market years later. 6-Bromo is basically just an improved version of it's crappy predecessor 6-Oxo. It is only one atom away from the natural human substrate for aromatase. It does not get much more "natural" than that! It is quite safe to say that 6-Bromo can be reasonably expected to be safe, effective and non-toxic in humans, and yes personal experience is the bottom line here. It tells you far more than any studies can because you don't ever really know for sure until you try it for yourself. I did. I took the initial risk, so that's as responsible as I can be about all of this to you guys. If you do not like the small risk it may carry, then just don't use it. In fact, by your line of reasoning, don't use much of anything out there!

Viado
07-12-2006, 06:15 PM
Don't be so confident in an FDA endorsement. Just because a company has taken the years required to pay off the FDA and get a product to market, does not make it "safe and effective". Many products are recalled later or pulled from the market years later. 6-Bromo is basically just an improved version of it's crappy predecessor 6-Oxo. It is only one atom away from the natural human substrate for aromatase. It does not get much more "natural" than that! It is quite safe to say that 6-Bromo can be reasonably expected to be safe, effective and non-toxic in humans, and yes personal experience is the bottom line here. It tells you far more than any studies can because you don't ever really know for sure until you try it for yourself. I did. I took the initial risk, so that's as responsible as I can be about all of this to you guys. If you do not like the small risk it may carry, then just don't use it. In fact, by your line of reasoning, don't use much of anything out there!

Woah there. You know something - all the testing that is done on an FDA proven agent while STILL having some squeak by actually REENFORCE my argument! That means that even though a number of compounds are subject to such rigorous testing, there are a very small percentage that make it through. So you want to tell us that a product, never tested, solely on personal experiences merits the consumer's blessing and is worthy of being deemd as "SAFE"?

One atom differences can confer tremendous changes in the biological activities of a compound. Do you knwo its metabolites? How do you know that the aromatase that is inhibited is not permanently bound and get's stuck in a lysosome in a precipitate a al asbestos, malignancy follows...? Can you tell us its metabolites? What is to stop the body from upregulating the presence of aromatase in the cells? How about it's activity after it is ingested orally and subject to a slew of enzymatic reactions prior to reaching its destination? Can it survive in the acidic pH of the stomach WITHOUT losing it's NEW covalently bound atom (which is it, the Br?).

Personal experience means crap here, especially if it comes from someone who is affiliated with a company that sells it. Got bias? Data can be spun in ways to suit your marketing needs. How can you say:"It is quite safe to say that 6-Bromo can be reasonably expected to be safe, effective and non-toxic in humans, and yes personal experience is the bottom line here." - you are simply asking the consumer to "trust you", what reasoning are you using, data cannot even be provided, studies cannot even be referenced directly yet our trust and safety is granted. You must be kidding. Company bosses, if witnessing this must be wondering why such a meager argument posed and little given to substantaite the "claims" which is JUST what they are...nothing more, nothing less.

Phat Daddy
07-13-2006, 02:40 AM
... you are simply asking the consumer to "trust you"

No, I'm not asking for anybody's trust and I didn't tell anyone to use it! I really don't care regardless of my affiliations. However, you will be hard pressed to find many people with a negative opinion of the products I've formulated or protocols I recommend. I already told you, I only got involved now because you clearly made it personal. What I did say was use it, or not. The choice is yours. Your points still have no direction. You have not offered anything that people didn't already realize. There aren't many studies and the data is scarce right now. So what's you point again? It's a personal choice. You've decided you won't try it. I understand that's your personal choice and respect that. Do not use it is my suggestion to you. It can just be your loss when it turns out to be fine and you missed out on it, or your gain when the rest of us all suddenly die (then you can make an argument). Until then, your contribution is pointless as only time will tell. No guts, no glory I say. I'm statistically satisfied with the risk myself, but then again I'm far more experienced and familiar with this than you it seems. People know all of this and have still elected to use the product with excellent results and no overt or latent problems so far. It's been in testing going on 2 years now. Just rave reviews is all I see, and yes, many endos are endorsing it according to our beta testers and their blookwork values. Their docs wanted some too! The metabolites are those that would be expected (if you've really studied I don't have to tell you) plus it should be excreted unchanged to an extent, and it can't upregulate aromatase. If you had really studied this class of compound you would already know these things, that's why I say you're just one of those "fearies" with a personal agenda. Also, please don't put words in my mouth any more. I'm saying make your own choice with your own life. Everyone else will decide the choice they make for their life and that's how it goes my friend.

Androgenic
07-13-2006, 11:22 AM
No one here has any specific vendetta or ill will towards one company or another. As far as I know, there is multiple companies that carry this compound and I am sure since this company already has established a relationship with DS, AX, and Custom Nutr. Ware. that the latter will be soon to pick it up in it's isolated form.

http://www.made-in-china.com/trade-offers/offerviewXeMmNSQoCEWz/Sell-Protodioscin-95-.html

I thought Viado was making a good point with:

"You know something - all the testing that is done on an FDA proven agent while STILL having some squeak by actually REINFORCE my argument! That means that even though a number of compounds are subject to such rigorous testing, there are a very small percentage that make it through. So you want to tell us that a product, never tested, solely on personal experiences merits the consumer's blessing and is worthy of being deemed as "SAFE"?"

That said I never had any differences with your work, the company's accomplishments or even the reps. I made a point with Uhockey earlier in this thread, but it was not intended to be inflammatory, he's a good guy and I like his reviews often...I just found difference with a statement and I have reservations with this compound and the overuse of AI's in general. Consumers need more sides...we often get one side which is so slanted towards marketing (which you have nothing to do with and you admit there is some distortion of truth or what's best in). I truly enjoy Robboe, he's a funny guy who is quite creative and contributes often on the MAN board. Let's not turn something in to something personal because there is a personal stake in it. You've brought up valid points Dr. D and they are worth consideration...I am glad you posted your thoughts and gave people your side. This all ultimately benefits the consumer...which is really all of us.

whitedevil74
07-13-2006, 11:33 AM
No one here has any specific vendetta or ill will towards one company or another. As far as I know, there is multiple companies that carry this compound and I am sure since this company already has established a relationship with DS, AX, and Custom Nutr. Ware. that the latter will be soon to pick it up in it's isolated form.

http://www.made-in-china.com/trade-offers/offerviewXeMmNSQoCEWz/Sell-Protodioscin-95-.html

I thought Viado was making a good point with:

"You know something - all the testing that is done on an FDA proven agent while STILL having some squeak by actually REINFORCE my argument! That means that even though a number of compounds are subject to such rigorous testing, there are a very small percentage that make it through. So you want to tell us that a product, never tested, solely on personal experiences merits the consumer's blessing and is worthy of being deemed as "SAFE"?"

That said I never had any differences with your work, the company's accomplishments or even the reps. I made a point with Uhockey earlier in this thread, but it was not intended to be inflammatory, he's a good guy and I like his reviews often...I just found difference with a statement and I have reservations with this compound and the overuse of AI's in general. Consumers need more sides...we often get one side which is so slanted towards marketing (which you have nothing to do with and you admit there is some distortion of truth or what's best in). I truly enjoy Robboe, he's a funny guy who is quite creative and contributes often on the MAN board. Let's not turn something in to something personal because there is a personal stake in it. You've brought up valid points Dr. D and they are worth consideration...I am glad you posted your thoughts and gave people your side. This all ultimately benefits the consumer...which is really all of us.


Great post. Discussing safety of a product benefits all of us and only increases our knowledge. What is the problem with a potential cusotmer challenging the safety of a product. To me that is a responsible consumer. If your product is safe, tell us why, provide what information you have, and then let us the consumer make an informed decision. Everyone is better off this way. I was very wary of X-FActor initially but the guys from Molecular Nutrition convinced me of its safety. That is what a good company does.

Androgenic
07-14-2006, 06:56 AM
Great post. Discussing safety of a product benefits all of us and only increases our knowledge. What is the problem with a potential cusotmer challenging the safety of a product. To me that is a responsible consumer. If your product is safe, tell us why, provide what information you have, and then let us the consumer make an informed decision. Everyone is better off this way. I was very wary of X-FActor initially but the guys from Molecular Nutrition convinced me of its safety. That is what a good company does.

I too had my reservations, and still do to some degree about x-factor. I debated some points with Bill, maybe even some would construe as...heated. I enjoyed learning and probing his mind. We both ended up repping each other. I met him at the Arnold and he signed a copy of the Encyclopedia, which I referenced in this thread. I use it often, it's a great resource. I respect Bill and his company, and he has some very intelligent, good-spirited reps that have some of the best posts on the board (often not about MN's product (s)). So I find that example as a very poignant one for me. We threw studies back and forth to each other and we both probably gained insight and all reading probably did as well. This is the nature of science, theory, research and learning.

PieEyedPiper
07-23-2006, 01:06 PM
I've read through this thread, and maybe I'm blind..

But could someone please outline for me what the risk of using 6-Bromo, 6-BrAd or whatever else you want to call it, is?

pu12en12g
07-23-2006, 01:13 PM
6-Bromo is basically just an improved version of it's crappy predecessor 6-Oxo.

:eek:

::::grabs popcorn::::

JLT
07-23-2006, 01:26 PM
I've read through this thread, and maybe I'm blind..

But could someone please outline for me what the risk of using 6-Bromo, 6-BrAd or whatever else you want to call it, is?
Well that is what this whole thread is about, nobody knows the risks. There aren't really and studies pointing one way or another so for right now there could be risks or there maybe none at all. Nobody knows, at least no one has posted decent sources one way or another. That is just what I have gathered, I could be wrong.

Viado
07-23-2006, 01:56 PM
Well that is what this whole thread is about, nobody knows the risks. There aren't really and studies pointing one way or another so for right now there could be risks or there maybe none at all. Nobody knows, at least no one has posted decent sources one way or another. That is just what I have gathered, I could be wrong.

You are absolutely correct. It would be nice if a simple piece of evidence were presented, even if it were in vitro tox studies, even feeding the stuff to mice for 4-12 weeks and letting us know what happens would be sweet. Shoot, if it kills a mouse, i wouldn't touch it. if the mouse turns into a rat, I may however consider it ;-)

Phat Daddy
07-24-2006, 02:53 AM
:eek:

::::grabs popcorn::::

Haha... let's not start any drama here my man! Though I have never used 6-Oxo personally, I have usually heard great feedback from others about it's PCT applications. Of course, I also hear it takes about 600mg/d to do the job, and 6-Br would do the same job in, well, let's just say single digit doses. I just meant it was much superior as far as intrinsic potency. It also seems to have the greatest positive effect on libido based on the current feedback and raises test levels a notch higher than other AI's normally report to in many of our testers. Plus lipids are favorably affected at the same time. I can only vouch for the bloodwork that SS and I did on lipids, though I have not seen all the numbers from our beta testers besides test levels, but it looked really good. I do get nervous trying something new, but after all the trials and nice bloodwork results, I was totally comfortable using 6-Br and it is actually my new AI of choice now. SS did LH and FSH values too and they were actually raised by a factor of 8x and 12x respectfully or something insane like that. Of course they were somewhat low on his baseline from years of juicing and bad PCTs, but he was amazed (I can still hear him on the phone telling me his numbers) because nothing else had been able to boost them in 2 years he said. No SERM or other AI he had tried.

pu12en12g
07-24-2006, 02:57 AM
I can only vouch for the bloodwork that SS and I did on lipids, though I have not seen all the numbers from our beta testers besides test levels, but it looked really good.

SS as in SuperSoldier ? :cool:

Joel
07-24-2006, 03:35 AM
Grow up Martel

Phat Daddy
07-24-2006, 08:31 PM
SS as in SuperSoldier ? :cool:

Yep. God bless him. He's always willing to try what I send him and run labs! Besides me, he is the guy that has guinea pigged all this recent new stuff so that I could feel confident enough to move 6-Br into beta testing and then ultimately made available to you guys with at least some (~6 months) clinical track record to justify it's safety and effectiveness. We did many months of testing (like Nov-Feb) to ensure there would be no funky surprise lab results. That's why I am defending it so hard. I have a good "feel" for it and it's potential toxicity at this point and I'm rarely wrong about this kinda stuff (or I'd probably be dead by now, lol). I've got research, months of labs and results enough to feel OK about 6-Br. If you like 6-Br, you owe SS some gratitude for helping me characterize it's effects so quickly, and it had to be quick because AX had already cloned a cheap version of this before we had even released it!

Kohen_Gadol
07-25-2006, 08:13 AM
Haha... let's not start any drama here my man! Though I have never used 6-Oxo personally, I have usually heard great feedback from others about it's PCT applications. Of course, I also hear it takes about 600mg/d to do the job, and 6-Br would do the same job in, well, let's just say single digit doses..

No offense but assuming we believe you, and there is published data
regarding 6-OXO's effects, how would this make 6-brom superior to
say...the exemestane analog found in LG's product or even Novedex.

Whether there is 5mg or 50mg or 500mg in a capsule - you still have to
take that one cap. I do not "get" it. I bet 1mg of anastrazole is more
potent than "single digit" amounts of 6-brom but again, a pill is a pill is
a pill...




I just meant it was much superior as far as intrinsic potency.

Irrelevant - maybe makes a nice marketing pitch though :)


It also seems to have the greatest positive effect on libido based on the current feedback and raises test levels a notch higher than other AI's normally report to in many of our testers.

Heresay. Anecdotally, Novedex XT seems to cause a 1/2"-1" increase
in cock length and a 1/4" increase in cock diameter after a month's use.
That is what "our testers" report anyhow. You believe me right? It's
not like I work for the company and would never embellish or demonstrate
a bias in a direction to sell more product, right?



Plus lipids are favorably affected at the same time. I can only vouch for the bloodwork that SS and I did on lipids, though I have not seen all the numbers from our beta testers besides test levels, but it looked really good..

The infamous "escape clause - fine print" - offer expires at midnight and
only valid while supplies last, right? No more than 3 per customer?



I do get nervous trying something new, but after all the trials and nice bloodwork results, I was totally comfortable using 6-Br and it is actually my new AI of choice now..

I do not see how it could be anything BUT your AI of choice. You sell it! It
would look really bad if you came out here and said 6-OXO, Formadrol or
Novedex XT was your AI of choice since DS does not sell the ingredients
in any of those. How could RR be *ANYTHING* but your AI of choice
in a public forum?



but he was amazed (I can still hear him on the phone telling me his numbers) because nothing else had been able to boost them in 2 years he said. No SERM or other AI he had tried.

I know you are smarter than this last line and I know you're banking on other
people NOT being smart enough to pick this up.

How many other SERMs/AIs did he try? Zero?

You're a very smart guy - a little but of a maverick - but I dig it.

Most of your posts that incorporate science are spot on and pretty solid.

Leave the marketing to TP and Robboe though. Know your role, brother!


BK

Androgenic
07-25-2006, 08:26 AM
I find the comparison to SERMs irrelevant, it's apples and oranges. Tissue specific, without the hormonal cascade and a number of the downside that chronic or even short-term use may cause in the body elsewhere. SERMs are much further "evolved" than AIs and would quite obviously not produce the same "numbers" endogenously at the blood level as an AI, that's the point really. A tissue assay that the SERM is targeted for vs. an AI's use at the same tissue (e.g. breast tissue), would show markedly different results. This is the reason SERMs were developed...there are side effects to AIs. The more potent the AI, the more potential side effects. Period.

Kohen_Gadol
07-25-2006, 09:27 AM
No one here has any specific vendetta or ill will towards one company or another. As far as I know, there is multiple companies that carry this compound and I am sure since this company already has established a relationship with DS, AX, and Custom Nutr. Ware. that the latter will be soon to pick it up in it's isolated form.

http://www.made-in-china.com/trade-offers/offerviewXeMmNSQoCEWz/Sell-Protodioscin-95-.html

I thought Viado was making a good point with:

"You know something - all the testing that is done on an FDA proven agent while STILL having some squeak by actually REINFORCE my argument! That means that even though a number of compounds are subject to such rigorous testing, there are a very small percentage that make it through. So you want to tell us that a product, never tested, solely on personal experiences merits the consumer's blessing and is worthy of being deemed as "SAFE"?"

That said I never had any differences with your work, the company's accomplishments or even the reps. I made a point with Uhockey earlier in this thread, but it was not intended to be inflammatory, he's a good guy and I like his reviews often...I just found difference with a statement and I have reservations with this compound and the overuse of AI's in general. Consumers need more sides...we often get one side which is so slanted towards marketing (which you have nothing to do with and you admit there is some distortion of truth or what's best in). I truly enjoy Robboe, he's a funny guy who is quite creative and contributes often on the MAN board. Let's not turn something in to something personal because there is a personal stake in it. You've brought up valid points Dr. D and they are worth consideration...I am glad you posted your thoughts and gave people your side. This all ultimately benefits the consumer...which is really all of us.


Reps to you. Good post.

BK

Kohen_Gadol
07-25-2006, 09:32 AM
The more potent the AI, the more potential side effects. Period.

Of course you meant to factor in dosing. I know what you mean but others
might not "get it" here. I agree with that.

But lets say AI1 is 5X more potent than AI2.

If I ingest 10X AI2 because that is how it is packaged or the manufacturer
suggests it, it is probably going to cause me more "issues" than if I ingested
1X AI1.

Not being picky - just trying to make it clear to everyone.

Potency is not the "end all - be all" as to whether something works or does not.

BK

Kohen_Gadol
07-25-2006, 09:37 AM
I find the comparison to SERMs irrelevant, it's apples and oranges. Tissue specific, without the hormonal cascade and a number of the downside that chronic or even short-term use may cause in the body elsewhere. SERMs are much further "evolved" than AIs and would quite obviously not produce the same "numbers" endogenously at the blood level as an AI, that's the point really. A tissue assay that the SERM is targeted for vs. an AI's use at the same tissue (e.g. breast tissue), would show markedly different results. This is the reason SERMs were developed...there are side effects to AIs. The more potent the AI, the more potential side effects. Period.


A good SERM has a much more limited role therapeutically (outside this
industry) than an AI. A good SERM might not be enough to save a
woman's breast or life. Whereas a good AI or even an "OK" AI might be.

Ideally, they are used together.

There is a lot more data on long term SERM use (raloxifene and tamoxifene)
than AI use, that is for sure. But there is a lot of long term data on AI use
still that we should not abandon or ignore.

AI's can be perfectly safe if used for short periods of time - I would
not want to use one for more than 30-42 days without a good break
to get back to baseline.

You can't "live on an AI" for a year (or you should not unless you have
breast cancer that is E2 dependant and a oncologist told you to).

I'm not sure I'd want to do a SERM for a year either but if I had to pick
one or the other...I'd prefer something like clomiphene over exemestane.

BK

Androgenic
07-25-2006, 09:37 AM
That's exactly what I meant and good clarification.

Kohen_Gadol
07-25-2006, 09:41 AM
No one here has any specific vendetta or ill will towards one company or another. As far as I know, there is multiple companies that carry this compound and I am sure since this company already has established a relationship with DS, AX, and Custom Nutr. Ware. that the latter will be soon to pick it up in it's isolated form.

http://www.made-in-china.com/trade-offers/offerviewXeMmNSQoCEWz/Sell-Protodioscin-95-.html

/


6-bromo is now on just about every Chinese and Indian raw material
suppliers list I get.

This one company (Peony) repped by some dude named 'Spring Chen' sends me an e-mail everyday asking if I want to buy it.

I agree it will be commoditized soon, much to DS's chagrin (and perhaps
rightfully so).

BK

Androgenic
07-25-2006, 09:46 AM
That's all true at present, and illustrated below, but I do see SERM research that shows a level of efficacy that will continue to evolve and is hotly researched with much, much promise. Further, it will yield a whole new way for bodybuilders (wealthy pros that is) to yield more specific results.

J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2001 Dec;79(1-5):227-37. Related Articles, Links


Where do selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) and aromatase inhibitors (AIs) now fit into breast cancer treatment algorithms?

Howell A, Howell SJ, Clarke R, Anderson E.

CRC Department of Medical Oncology, Christie Hospital NHS Trust, M20 4BX, Manchester, UK. maria.parker@christie-tr.nwest.nhs.uk

The agents used for endocrine therapy in patients with breast cancer have changed markedly over the past decade. Tamoxifen remains the anti-oestrogen of choice, but could be replaced by the oestrogen receptor down-regulator ICI 182780 or by the fixed ring triphenylethylene arzoxifene (previously SERM III) soon. Whilst aminoglutethimide and 4-OH androstenedione were the aromatase inhibitors of choice, they have been replaced by non-steroidal (anastrozole and letrozole) and steroidal (exemestane) inhibitors of high potency and low side effect profile. Previously, often used treatments such as progestogens (megestrol acetate and medroxyprogesterone acetate) and androgens are now rarely used or confined to fourth or fifth line treatments. The LHRH agonist, goserelin, remains the treatment of choice for pre-menopausal patients with advanced breast cancer although recent randomised trials indicate a response, time to progression and survival advantage for the combination of goserelin and tamoxifen compared with goserelin alone.The newer treatments have led to questions concerning the optimum sequence of agents to use in advanced breast cancer and as neo-adjuvant and adjuvant therapy in relation to surgery. Two trials of anastrozole compared with tamoxifen and one trial of letrozole compared with tamoxifen indicate that the new triazole aromatase inhibitors have a significant advantage over the anti-oestrogen with respect to time to progression and survival. Similarly, triazole aromatase inhibitors give faster and more complete responses compared with tamoxifen when used in post-menopausal women before surgery.Major research questions remain with respect to the aromatase inhibitors used as adjuvant therapy. Anastrozole is being tested alone or in combination with tamoxifen compared with tamoxifen in the 'so-called' ATAC trial. Over 9000 patients have been randomised to this important study: the results will be available late-2001. A similar study comparing letrozole and tamoxifen started recently under the auspices of the Breast International Group. Importantly, this trial is also comparing the sequence of tamoxifen followed by letrozole (or vice versa). A similar trial of exemestane given after 2-3 years of tamoxifen compared with 5 years of tamoxifen is recruiting well as is a study comparing letrozole (or placebo) for 5 years after 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen. These studies may show that aromatase inhibitors are superior to tamoxifen or that a sequence is preferable.ICI 182780 causes complete oestrogen receptor down-regulation leading to a the lack of agonist activity of the drug. Two trials of ICI 182780 compared with anastrozole for advanced disease will report later this year and a comparison with tamoxifen next year. Arzoxifene (SERM III) is being tested against tamoxifen. These studies are likely to result in new anti-oestrogens being introduced into the clinic.Most of our endocrine treatments deprived the tumour cell of oestradiol. In vitro experiments with MCF-7 cells indicate that tumour cells can adapt and then grow in response to low oestrogen concentrations in the tissue--culture medium. Importantly, the cells were shown to apoptose in response to high oestrogen concentrations. A recent clinical trial has demonstrated a high response rate to stilboestrol given after a median of four previous oestrogen depriving endocrine therapies. These data and the newer treatments available indicate a need to re-think our general approach to endocrine therapy and endocrine prevention.

Phat Daddy
07-25-2006, 03:28 PM
No offense but assuming we believe you, and there is published data
regarding 6-OXO's effects, how would this make 6-brom superior to
say...the exemestane analog found in LG's product or even Novedex.

Whether there is 5mg or 50mg or 500mg in a capsule - you still have to
take that one cap. I do not "get" it. I bet 1mg of anastrazole is more
potent than "single digit" amounts of 6-brom but again, a pill is a pill is
a pill...

B, you need to know your role and be more careful with me. I may not have much info to offer in this case, but I have admitted that and told you what I do know. No spin, no pitch. Hell, I'm not even employed by DS, I just do independent contracting for them. I'm not going to starve if 6-Br doesn't sell and have developed a rep from offering the true and being right on. Why risk that to sell a new product? I'm not a pitcher anyway and everyone knows it. I have spoken the truth in every word above whether you choose to believe me or not. Also, a pill is not a pill and you know it. From now on, keep it real B.

Kohen_Gadol
07-25-2006, 08:03 PM
B, you need to know your role and be more careful with me. I may not have much info to offer in this case, but I have admitted that and told you what I do know. No spin, no pitch. Hell, I'm not even employed by DS, I just do independent contracting for them. I'm not going to starve if 6-Br doesn't sell and have developed a rep from offering the true and being right on. Why risk that to sell a new product? I'm not a pitcher anyway and everyone knows it. I have spoken the truth in every word above whether you choose to believe me or not. Also, a pill is not a pill and you know it. From now on, keep it real B.


Uhm..I am "keeping it real" buddy. Pat and I do not get along (this is not
news) but I think your reference to the "crappy 6-OXO product" was
not cool (keepin' it real) and you're the one who needs to check himself.

You "pitched' the idea of 6-Br to DS? It's not a money thing, it could be
an ego thing too. I'm not employed by Gaspari or anyone - I am a
1099'er too. But I do like it when something I designed for someone does
well even I am not making money from it - it's a rep thing, like you correctly
wrote.

And yes, for all intents and purposes here - a pill is a pill is a pill.

Yeah, we can discuss size, shape, compression, dissolution and al that
but since it is NOT universal between encapsulators/pill pressers and
not even uniform batch to batch between most of these people,
it's not a practical issue to discuss and YOU know it!

You do NOT want to go down the pharmacology/pharmacotherapeutics
road with me on this one, Dr. D because while technically you might
win an argument - you're going to lose the war on this topic.

Was that "real" enough for you Phat Daddy (and the people, rollin' up
in Caddies)?


I have no doubt 6-Br "works" but I'm thinking you think you are too fly
and too pimp and you're relying way too much on rep and not science.

aw-ight?

:)


BK

Phat Daddy
07-25-2006, 09:42 PM
And yes, for all intents and purposes here - a pill is a pill is a pill.

Haha.. don't get all G thang on me B! You seem to have misunderstood. You are trying to correlate AI's that aren't even in the same class my man. That's what I meant. Not to mention kinetics, metabolites, mechanisms, etc. 6-oxo works from what I hear, but if I wanted to take 600-900mg of something, I'd rather use Teslac. I know it's gonna work in that dose range for sure. So when I say keep it real, I mean don't make any more bad comparisons or paint me as a spinner. A pill is simply not a pill in your example and 6-Br not only has a much lower Ki, it likely possesses a safety advantage as well just because you can get the job done with a much lower dose. I find no evidence at all of a safety concern or specific toxicity linked to any other corticoid, progestin or modified androgen due to the same or similar subs on the 6, nor did my bloodwork values warrant these concerns. Plus, the qualitative effects are superior according to the feedback so far, and that's just impossible to duplicate with any dose of the compound being compared. I wasn't trying to disrespect PA in anyway, but why can't we just be honest about it?

Kohen_Gadol
07-25-2006, 10:07 PM
Haha.. don't get all G thang on me B! You seem to have misunderstood. You are trying to correlate AI's that aren't even in the same class my man. That's what I meant. Not to mention kinetics, metabolites, mechanisms, etc. 6-oxo works from what I hear, but if I wanted to take 600-900mg of something, I'd rather use Teslac. I know it's gonna work in that dose range for sure. So when I say keep it real, I mean don't make any more bad comparisons or paint me as a spinner. A pill is simply not a pill in your example and 6-Br not only has a much lower Ki, it likely possesses a safety advantage as well just because you can get the job done with a much lower dose. I find no evidence at all of a safety concern or specific toxicity linked to any other corticoid, progestin or modified androgen due to the same or similar subs on the 6, nor did my bloodwork values warrant these concerns. Plus, the qualitative effects are superior according to the feedback so far, and that's just impossible to duplicate with any dose of the compound being compared. I wasn't trying to disrespect PA in anyway, but why can't we just be honest about it?


*Sigh!* I really do not want to get into a beef with you - I like you and think
you have talent. But you are starting to become as arrogant, maybe more so
than Pat and myself. This will only hurt you in the future. Do not make the
errors Pat and I made, friend. This is just honest advice - you will not
always be right and if you are wrong and people get hurt - DS and you might
be liable.

The more "potent" the AI, the lower the Therapeutic Index, the more likely
there will be an adverse event or long term sequalae. You do not need to
admit this - Both the MAN dude and I agree on it and I think anyone with
common sense can see this.

So your "6-Br is likely to be safer because it can get the job done at a lower
dosage" is probably false. The side effects are partially due to the effect
the compound causes, not the dose (which is irrelevant other than the
elicitation of the effects desired). It's also a lot more likely some idiot
will ingest too much 6-Br than ATD or 6-OXO and really damage themselves.

Look at your audience :) I know you're smart enough to know better but
assuming a 24 year old mason who lifts weights knows better is irresponsible
and foolhearty.

"The qualitative effects are superior based on feedback so far" - this is
reliable as valid data in your book? If so, this is scary. I do not believe for
a moment you actually buy into this theory. You are too smart to know the
inherent bias that occurs in open label, unapproved board studies where
people are biting at the chomp to be a beta tester or board rep.

That is a huge bias and you're not going to spin your way out of that.
Even if you refuse to admit it, I know you are smart enough to recognize it
when you look in the mirror.

Do not infer that I do not think 6-Br is an effective chemical AI.

But please understand you're asking people to take A LOT on faith here.

6-OXO and Novedex XT have independant clinical trials done on them.

When one is done on 6-Br, I'll be the first to stand up and sing its accolades.

Cool?


BK

Phat Daddy
07-25-2006, 10:44 PM
Very well BK. Nevertheless, unwarranted speculations abound and if there is in deed sparse clinical support, there is equally little reason for concern. We shall just let this story tell itself because only time will tell, but the benefit of the doubt is necessary while the scales are even. That's fair.

Kohen_Gadol
07-28-2006, 12:14 PM
Very well BK. Nevertheless, unwarranted speculations abound and if there is in deed sparse clinical support, there is equally little reason for concern. We shall just let this story tell itself because only time will tell, but the benefit of the doubt is necessary while the scales are even. That's fair.


Hey, Phatty, can you address the issues in my "pimp my AI" post?

ahhhhh...thank you very much!

GuyverX
07-17-2007, 10:55 AM
lol, sorry that was more of a generalization, and for the record I'm with PhatDaddy that males in general run the risk on becoming more feminized, a lot of you guys would be shocked at the amount of estrogen mimickers in the environment that we're exposed too on a daily basis. Heck, even your Aquafina bottle starts leaching chemicals into the water that can have estrogenic effects after it sits in the sun too long. I can't point to any studies on this, but they are out there and I actually have family members that are doing their PhD research on these very topics.

Anyway, my thoughts are that even short-term, transient manipulations of hormones, (estrogen) can cause negative effects in the long run. We automatically assume the body bounces back after manipulating it in this way, but ironically much smaller amounts of these AI's would probably be very useful if there was one out there that could stably be used long term (5mg or less of ATD to throw one out there, I would love to see something like this studied over 6 months to a year)

I will say I have seen quite a few guys at work with really wide hips and narrow shoulders. Not old ones
but young ones. Its weird looking, like they are upside down or something. I dunno if it has to do with them having to much estrogen or not. There is a book concerning this that I am going to buy (The Anti-Estrogenic Diet: How Estrogenic Foods and Chemicals Are Making You Fat and Sick (Paperback)
by Ori Hofmekler) he has other books like the warriors diet and similar.

GuyverX
07-17-2007, 11:00 AM
Don't be so confident in an FDA endorsement. Just because a company has taken the years required to pay off the FDA and get a product to market, does not make it "safe and effective". Many products are recalled later or pulled from the market years later. 6-Bromo is basically just an improved version of it's crappy predecessor 6-Oxo. It is only one atom away from the natural human substrate for aromatase. It does not get much more "natural" than that! It is quite safe to say that 6-Bromo can be reasonably expected to be safe, effective and non-toxic in humans, and yes personal experience is the bottom line here. It tells you far more than any studies can because you don't ever really know for sure until you try it for yourself. I did. I took the initial risk, so that's as responsible as I can be about all of this to you guys. If you do not like the small risk it may carry, then just don't use it. In fact, by your line of reasoning, don't use much of anything out there!

Good point about the FDA. They have not banned cigarettes and they are an OBVIOUS risk. Not to mention Vioxx and a lot of those other pharma-drugs which ins some cases caused the symptom it was supposed to trreat.
The thing is most businesses are about money; and sad to say only personal trials will prove the efficacy of many supplements. I am in agreement with a poster who said lets test the supps on death row inmates. In exchange for them not being executed they can test supps.

Skigazzi
07-17-2007, 11:06 AM
Good point about the FDA.

Wow, strong year late response!! :)

tolowo
08-22-2007, 07:28 PM
Well Im commin in a bit late on this, but I used T-drive extreme which is 6Bromo, for a PCT for a SD cycle 20/30/30. I gaind about 12lbs. After the cycle I was leaner, dropped fat, strength stayed up some. weight dropped after pct. Overall I think it worked well, and no gyno. I dont thiink orals are to bad if you use them properly, theres too much much of " I know a guy whos friend got gyno" Most people dont take this stuff serious and dont use PCT or Liver support, and just abuse the dosage.. IMO

krogtaar
08-22-2007, 08:05 PM
wow strong bump indeed, i read half the thread before i saw the 2006.

I saw someone post blood test results from 6bromo on anabolicminds showing good results...cant find it now though

Lager1
08-22-2007, 08:33 PM
ive searched and nothing comes up. just wondering if anyone has any studies on this compound. what exactly it is and what it does. thanks

It's a steroidal AI that can actually suppress your natural testosterone production.

SEEGS
08-22-2007, 08:36 PM
It's a steroidal AI that can actually suppress your natural testosterone production.

ummm no

six sigma
08-22-2007, 10:27 PM
ummm no


ummmm yes it is....

go sniff around some post by patrick arnold on AM or avantlabs, I figured it was as much, but I could never prove it until Pat came out and spoke the truth.

143 Patrick!

Viperspit
08-23-2007, 04:15 AM
looks like I missed this interesting topic. thanks for bumping it. I wonder what everyone's thoughts are today on 6-bromo now that's it's been out for awhile. I know I've used both Retain and Restore and loved both products.

SEEGS
08-23-2007, 07:31 AM
ummmm yes it is....

go sniff around some post by patrick arnold on AM or avantlabs, I figured it was as much, but I could never prove it until Pat came out and spoke the truth.

143 Patrick!

its speculation, its not a fact.

Patrick Arnold
08-23-2007, 05:16 PM
ive searched and nothing comes up. just wondering if anyone has any studies on this compound. what exactly it is and what it does. thanks

i wish androstenedione were still legal. cuz if it was i would make this crap and flood the market with it just to f*ck everyone. cuz its extremely easy and inexpensive to manufacture. just adione plus bromine and the reaction is clean and easy to work up

Patrick Arnold
08-23-2007, 05:25 PM
It does not get much more "natural" than that! It is quite safe to say that 6-Bromo can be reasonably expected to be safe, effective and non-toxic in humans, and yes personal experience is the bottom line here.

you have got to be kidding me. your argument for safety is the fact that this stuff is one atom away from androstenedione?

you are either woefully ignorant as a chemist or you are a con man. which is it?

Patrick Arnold
08-23-2007, 05:27 PM
It is only one atom away from the natural human substrate for aromatase. It does not get much more "natural" than that!

how about being present in the food supply? or anywhere in nature for that matter?

there is nothing natural about this compound at all, despite the fact that you somehow have convinced yourself that it is. when the FDA comes what will you show them?

Elliptical Envy
08-23-2007, 05:27 PM
you have got to be kidding me. your argument for safety is the fact that this stuff is one atom away from androstenedione?

you are either woefully ignorant as a chemist or you are a con man. which is it?

PA for mayor!

Patrick Arnold
08-23-2007, 05:31 PM
Yep. God bless him. He's always willing to try what I send him and run labs! Besides me, he is the guy that has guinea pigged all this recent new stuff so that I could feel confident enough to move 6-Br into beta testing and then ultimately made available to you guys with at least some (~6 months) clinical track record to justify it's safety and effectiveness. We did many months of testing (like Nov-Feb) to ensure there would be no funky surprise lab results. That's why I am defending it so hard. I have a good "feel" for it and it's potential toxicity at this point and I'm rarely wrong about this kinda stuff (or I'd probably be dead by now, lol). I've got research, months of labs and results enough to feel OK about 6-Br. If you like 6-Br, you owe SS some gratitude for helping me characterize it's effects so quickly, and it had to be quick because AX had already cloned a cheap version of this before we had even released it!


why did i fund two clinical studies on 6-oxo when i could have just given it to super soldier?

what an IDIOT i am!!

Patrick Arnold
08-23-2007, 05:32 PM
No offense but assuming we believe you, and there is published data
regarding 6-OXO's effects,

holy batman i practically freaked out seeing BK on the board

and then i realized i was responding to posts from over a year ago

now i really feel like an idiot

Estopell
08-23-2007, 08:07 PM
holy batman i practically freaked out seeing BK on the board

and then i realized i was responding to posts from over a year ago

now i really feel like an idiot

Now?