1ad why not 4ad

[rancid]

I know that this 1ad is currently the rage right now in the supplement prohormone world, but from everything i've heard 4-androstenediol is supposed to potentially be even more powerful in theory, so is it possible to create an esterized ( if there is such a word) 4-androstenediol product? if so how much more effective would this product be, and how far down the road will it be before we see this product out soon?

 

[Jeremy Carriere]

Mag-10

I believe Biotest's new Mag-10 pro-hormone combines 1-AD with 4-AD or a new form of 1-AD, the actual substance with an esterized form of 4-AD or something like that. Not too sure but thats the closest thing to it right now.

 

[mustangracer27]

1ad is supposed to be 7 times more powerful than 4ad. This board proves that this shit works.

 

[Par Deus]

The conversion product of 1-AD (1-testosterone) is supposed to be 7 times more potent than that of 4-AD (testosterone) -- however, it is extremely likely that 4-AD has intrinsic activity, which would make enzyme limitation a non-issue -- thus its ceiling is reached with higher dosage, so they end up being pretty close. At this point, I would say 1-AD probably leads to slightly better true muscle gains, but 4-AD causes a bit of water retention, thus it might cause more overall weight gain. BTW, this is in reference to topical or intransal 4-AD -- there is no doubt that 1-AD is vastly superior to oral 4-AD.

 

[Par Deus]

Mag-10 is an esterfied version of 1-testosterone not 1-AD (1-test is the conversion product of 1-AD). Thus, enzyme limitation would become a non-issue, possibly making it a whole different animal.

1-testosterone is a bad mf'r -- the question is whether the ethylcarbonate ester will significantly improve oral bioavailability-- I cannot find references to any data in this regard on their site. We do know that a undecanopate ester does not work worth shit.

 

[pa1ad]

The conversion product of 1-AD (1-testosterone) is supposed to be 7 times more potent than that of 4-AD (testosterone) -- however, it is extremely likely that 4-AD has intrinsic activity, which would make enzyme limitation a non-issue -- thus its ceiling is reached with higher dosage, so they end up being pretty close. At this point, I would say 1-AD probably leads to slightly better true muscle gains, but 4-AD causes a bit of water retention, thus it might cause more overall weight gain. BTW, this is in reference to topical or intransal 4-AD -- there is no doubt that 1-AD is vastly superior to oral 4-AD.

Hey ParDeus,

What I cannot figure out is why Bill and Brock insist that 4-AD has intrinsic activity yet 1-AD does not.

How did they come to that conclusion? Cuz it fits their marketing mythologies?

 

[Par Deus]

4-AD definitely seems to cause less water retention per unit anabolic activity than testosterone, which would suggest either intrinsic activity or anti-estrogenic activity. That is a reason for thinking it a possibility. Obviously, it is far from sufficient evidence to make a remotely credible scientific claim.

I will not speculate on their motivations