Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
RESEARCHSARMSUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsRESEARCHSARMSUGFREAKeudomestic

Is this for real?

Flagirl27

New member
I read this in a supplement newsletter I receive. Could this be for real or just another way to sell his products?

(Kinda long read)


Creating Orally Active Prohormones
by Anabolics 2002 author, William Llewellyn
If you haven’t heard, there is a new technology in prohormones. Lipophilic ester and ethers have hit the market, and are being touted as the first truly effective solutions to the poor oral bioavailability of many such supplements. And indeed there is a tremendous amount of promise with this technology if properly applied. When I first realized supplement manufacturers, my company Molecular Nutrition included, would be able to market steroidal ethers and esters I became very excited. We in the industry have been looking for a solution to problems with oral dosing for some time, and I knew we had a true advance on our hands here. I became even more excited when I began suspecting that other companies would be dropping the ball, so to speak, by not making proper use of this technology. As they began releasing their products, I worked quietly in the background. I went through great lengths not to just drop powder into a capsule, but to develop a series of ether-modified, oil-solubilized, softgel-encapsulated prohormones. In light of the very unique design of my Ethergelsä series I thought it would be good to explain in greater detail my reasoning in creating such a line, and why they are not the same as many of my competitors’ products.

Traditional Oral Prohormones

When androstenedione capsules first hit the market in 1996, hopes were high that the first legal product for massively elevated testosterone levels (and similarly the first true replacement for illegal steroids) had been uncovered. It did not take long, however, for athletes to realize that we did not quite have what we thought we did. “Andro” caps just didn’t work the way we were expecting them to. Studies eventually showed us what was happening with this supplement, demonstrating that large doses would be needed for even the slightest elevations in blood testosterone levels. And even then our “legal testosterone elevator” turns out to increase estrogen levels better than the target hormone of our interest. Initial failings with androstenedione, at least as an increaser of serum testosterone, were repeated with its lauded successor androstenediol[ii]. Again, relatively high oral doses of this prohormone were shown to cause little or no elevations in blood testosterone.

We have come to understand, of course, that this is due to rapid metabolism of natural steroids during the harsh first-pass through the liver. During this, most of the prohormone compound is readied for excretion from the body long before it reaches the blood stream as an active steroid. We should have expected this problem though. Scientists realized as early as 1939, the same decade that testosterone was first synthesized, that this hormone was ineffective when taken orally[iii], precluding its use as an oral medication. Likewise no such “un-modified” testosterone product had ever been sold commercially. Drug developers found out early on that if they wanted to make an effective oral medication out of testosterone they must protect the steroid from metabolism by the liver. The same holds true, even more so perhaps, for our traditional prohormone compounds. They simply don’t work well as oral supplements because, and I must emphasize this, we have been relying on a practice ruled out as ineffective over 60 years ago!

17-Alpha Alkylation

During the peak years of steroid research several effective methods were devised to create steroids capable of passing through the liver intact, the most prominent of which centered around protecting the hormone with the addition of a methyl or ethyl group at the 17th carbon position (which inhibits a major path of metabolism). Methyltestosterone was the first such steroid to be developed, followed soon by a number of other oral steroids including ethylnandrolone (norethandrolone), fluoxymesterone, oxandrolone and methandrostenolone. Although all of these drugs are extremely effective oral steroids, they can also have an adverse effect on liver function[iv], and are therefore not ideal solutions. Today they are used very sparingly in medicine for this same reason. Additionally, for the purposes of making a natural and legal supplement we could not use this technology, as the compounds it creates would no longer be considered “naturally occurring”. This would leave us in the prohormone market where we started; with plain powder-filled capsules, most of which are unable to provide much of an anabolic effect.

Lymphatic Delivery

But as late as the 1960’s and 70’s the push was still on to develop effective oral steroids that were not 17-alpha alkylated and did not carry the same unwanted risks of liver toxicity. One concept that was successfully pursued was the notion of bypassing the liver altogether. To do this we need to change the way the steroid is absorbed by the body, so that it will enter circulation through the lymphatic system and not by its normal route. The lymphatic system is responsible for the absorption and distribution of dietary fats, and shuttles these nutrients from the intestines to the lymph nodes so that they can reach peripheral tissues without having to first pass through the liver. To effectively do this however we need to increase the fat solubility of the compound considerably, either by additioning a carboxylic acid ester (normally used to create injectable compounds) or an ether group. For our purposes we can look at esters and ethers as essentially the same thing. The key point with both structural additions is that they increase the lipid solubility of the steroid, and therefore the likelihood it will be absorbed by the lymphatic system with dietary fat, yet later break off in circulation (via esterase enzymes) to yield an intact active hormone.

Two lymph-delivered anabolic/androgenic steroids were ultimately developed and marketed by pharmaceutical companies. The first was Anabolicum Vister, which contains boldenone modified with enol ether (quinbolone), and the second Andriol, which uses the undecanoate ester of testosterone. Data is difficult to find on quinbolone, as it was an Italian steroid, however Andriol has been well studied and documented in English text medical journals. The studies are consistent, with Andriol proving to be the only orally effective testosterone product ever developed and commercially sold. Those who question the validity of this technology need only look at a study published in Acta Endocrinologica in 1975[v]. Here investigators compared the testosterone response from 100mg of orally administered testosterone undecanoate, dissolved in oil, with the effects of an equivalent dose (63mg) of free testosterone. The free testosterone had no noticeable effect on serum levels of testosterone at all, while there was a 2.3 fold increase reported with the single dose of testosterone undecanoate.

Making it work with Prohormones

Now in the eyes of the FDA, prohormones modified with ethers and esters are just as legal to sell as the original compounds. They consider such modifications as technologies to enhance the delivery of the nutrient, and not the equivalent of creating a new synthetic hormone. We finally have the technology, and legal freedom, to create orally active prohormones. But we can’t just jump the gun applying this to prohormones without fully understanding the technology at hand. The two lymphatically delivered steroids mentioned above have one very important thing in common aside from their increased oil-solubility. Both are made in soft gelatin capsules and use oil as carrier for the steroid. It was realized early on that dissolving the steroid directly into oil, which will be taken up by the lymph system, is the best way to ensure maximum absorption and oral bioavailability. In fact, it is absolutely essential to this type of product.

To see roughly how much of a difference it makes we can look at studies comparing the effects of different carriers on the absorption of the ether modified anti-estrogen mepitiostane[vi]. Here we note that lymphatic absorption was about 5 ½ times greater (41.2% as opposed to 7.5%) when the compound was dissolved in sesame oil instead of a plain water-based solution. In fact, the tremendously poor absorption of mepitiostane without oil makes us question whether or not ether modification offers any real benefits at all without the use of such a carrier. One thing is certain, ether-modified and ester-modified prohormones in plain capsules and tablets are not made in the true design of lymphatically-delivered steroids, which likewise makes them far less effective oral supplements than they could be otherwise.

In Closing

As you can see, the great time and expense I put into Molecular Nutrition's Ethergels™ line of softgels, which includes ether-modified forms of 1-testosterone, 4-androstenediol, and 19-norandrostenediol, was not to create a gimmicky packaging to market, but to take full advantage of the technology at hand (although I must admit those little amber caps do look pretty neat). I wanted to do it right, which meant adhering to the true design of lymphatically delivered steroid, or I wasn’t going to do it at all. Let there be no argument that I have accomplished this goal, with the creation of the most orally active line of prohormones, by far, ever to be introduced to the sports supplement market.

— William Llewellyn (Author Anabolics 2002 & Molecular Nutrition CEO)

Click here for article references.
 
Flagirl27 said:
I read this in a supplement newsletter I receive. Could this be for real or just another way to sell his products?

(Kinda long read)



Here is another perspective, with research results that were more independent

-------------

Lipophilic steroid derivatives

After ingestion, most steroids make their way to the intestines where they are absorbed into the portal circulation. The portal circulation carries the steroid directly to the liver, which is the workhouse of destructive metabolism and inactivation of drugs. As a result, if the steroid is not protected in some way, very little will make it through the liver and into the rest of the body where it can do its magic.

In addition to the portal route, there is another route through which substances can be absorbed into the body from the intestine. If a substance is lipophilic (fat like) enough it will be absorbed in the same manner that dietary fat is. Dietary fat is incorportated into chylomicra, which are small fat globules composed of protein and fat. These chylomicra are absorbed into the lymphatic circulation, which by passes the liver. If you make a steroid lipophilic enough by altering its structure, then it too will incorportate into chylomicra and absorb into the lymphatic system. Once in the lymphatic system it can cross over into the general blood circulation, making it there without being subjected to the massive metabolic breakdown in the liver.

Scientists have found that by adding lipophilic side chains to steroids, they will to some extent be absorbed into the lymphatic system. If the side chain is linked on in such a way that it can hydrolyze (break apart) easily after being absorbed, the steroid is essentially rendered orally active. Two side chains that have been utilized to increase the oral bioavailability of steroids through increased lymphatic absorption are long chain alkyl ester groups, such as is seen with testosterone undecanoate (andriol), and enyl ether groups, such as is seen with quinbolone (anabolicum vaster).



The term “orally active” is of course a relative term. Lipophilically modified steroids are more orally active than the free parent steroids, however, they are no where near as active as the 17alpha-alkylated steroids. Testosterone undecanoate (TU) is probably the most commonly known lipophilically modified androgen, and it is not considered a very potent compound (its recommended daily dosage is about 240mg). In fact, one study found the oral administration of testosterone undecanoate led only to an absolute testosterone bioavailability of 6.83 +/- 3.32%. That is very slight, especially considering the fact that in the same study they found the bioavailability of straight testosterone to be 3.56 +/- 2.45% (Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 1986 Apr-Jun;11(2):145-9). That means TU is just a little less than twice as orally active as free testosterone, which is unimpressive to say the least.

The other problem with lipophilic steroid preparations is the high variability in absorption from one person to another. In other words, one guy might absorb the stuff very well while the other guy might absorb very little. There is also high variation within individuals themselves, depending on their gastrointestinal condition when they take the stuff. In another study, ten post-menopausal women were given 40 mg of TU and their peak blood values were recorded. The values varied widely - more than ten fold (range: 5.8-64.0 nmol/L) - amongst the subjects (J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1998 Nov;83(11): 3920-4).

There is no specific data I can find on the bioavailabilty of enyl ether compounds, but since their mode of action is identical to long chain alkyl ester compounds like TU, it is a fair assumption that they too are not outstandingly high in oral bioavailability, or in consistency of absorption. What I do know is that the one and only enyl ether oral steroid on the market today (quinbolone) is generally regarded by european bodybuilders / athletes as too weak to even bother taking.
 
So in other words, it's just a bunch of hype on a product that really doesn't work anyway? They are just trying to find new inventive ways of selling the stuff?
 
The "diols" work pretty well. It is the "diones" that were not so good. The "diones" made quick spikes of T and then some aromatization to E. No very good for really buiding muscle. It is a long steady increase of T that is anabolic. Cant say about how good is this product, but i know one prohormone that does work, Mag 10.
 
Flagirl27 said:
So in other words, it's just a bunch of hype on a product that really doesn't work anyway? They are just trying to find new inventive ways of selling the stuff?


I am not going to offer any subjective opinions on the subject.
 
Re: Re: Is this for real?

pa1ad said:
There is no specific data I can find on the bioavailabilty of enyl ether compounds, but since their mode of action is identical to long chain alkyl ester compounds like TU, it is a fair assumption that they too are not outstandingly high in oral bioavailability, or in consistency of absorption. What I do know is that the one and only enyl ether oral steroid on the market today (quinbolone) is generally regarded by european bodybuilders / athletes as too weak to even bother taking.

The cited references show only that 1) there is a clear improvement in oral bioavailability, approximitely DOUBLE in the worst study you can find on TU, which Pat kindly referenced, and 2) there are individual differences in the oral bioavailability between different subjects with a lympatically delivered drugs like TU.

You are also neglecting to make note of other studies with TU showing much higher oral efficacy. It is, after all, the only effective oral testosterone product ever to be developed, and remains a popular drug world-wide. Numerous studies back up its usefulness, and nobody makes plain powdered testosterone capsules. And I don't consider your study with female subjects to be an issue besides, as I don't consider a doubling of oral bioavailability to be "unimpressive to say the least". If you could make a 100mg 1-AD cap give the effect of 200mg, wouldn’t that be pretty good? That is a notable improvement in my book. I believe, however, that it is much better than your doubling anyway though, given the spectacular feedback coming in on the product on doses of only around 200mg. Nobody makes these kinds of gains on 200mg of 1-AD (I am preparing a feedback section on the site at the moment).

Comparing it to methylation is also a little unfair, because the only thing you should rightly compare my product to is the capsules of dry powdered prohormones that everyone else makes. Nobody makes methyl-1-testosterone, now.

But even if I only doubled or tripled the oral bioavailability of 1-testosterone, than I've accomplished my goal. All I wanted to do was create the most orally active 1-Testosterone product on the market, and I’ve clearly done that.

The bottom line is that we can throw around studies all we want, but the consumers will, and are already, judging the product. And I am, without a doubt, very happy with what I’ve done here given what I’ve seen and heard already.

-Bill
 
Re: Re: Re: Is this for real?

w_llewellyn said:


And I don't consider your study with female subjects to be an issue besides, as I don't consider a doubling of oral bioavailability to be "unimpressive to say the least". If you could make a 100mg 1-AD cap give the effect of 200mg, wouldn’t that be pretty good? That is a notable improvement in my book. I believe, howeve

-Bill


Females have similar gastrointestinal systems as males. And I still consider a bioavailablity of 6.83 +/- 3.32% to be less than impressive.

Besides, the steroid in question is 1-testosterone THP ether, not l testosterone undecanoate. And I don't know of a single study on the bioavailablity of 1-test THP ether. Everyone that selling it is completely guessing that its bioavailablity is better.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Is this for real?

pa1ad said:
Females have similar gastrointestinal systems as males. And I still consider a bioavailablity of 6.83 +/- 3.32% to be less than impressive.


Actually, that is not entirely true Pat. Women metabolize testosterone less actively, and get much better oral bioavailability from free testosterone than men do. This is because there is an androgen responsive element involved in the activity of metabolizing enzymes. It is posssible that the 6.83% would have correlated to men, but not the 3.32%, which is likely significantly lower.

There are several other studies, with men, that show TU to be far superior to oral free test. Perhaps it has more to do with men metabolzing test better than women. Not sure, but TU sure works where oral T doesn't, period.

Besides, the steroid in question is 1-testosterone THP ether, not testosterone undecanoate. And I don't know of a single study on the bioavailablity of 1-test THP ether. Everyone that selling it is completely guessing that its bioavailablity is better.

Well the ether markedly increases its fat solubility, this we know. And THP has been used with other compounds before. How much of a leap of faith are we making here Pat? That's like saying testosterone propionate works, but not testosterone laurate, because that particular compound has never been used.. C'mon Pat, you can do better than that. The mechanics of lymphatic delivery are pretty well understood.



- Bill
 
Last edited:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is this for real?

w_llewellyn said:





Well the ether markedly increases its fat solubility, this we know. And THP has been used with other compounds before. How much of a leap of faith are we making here Pat? That's like saying testosterone propionate works, but not testosterone laurate, because that particular compound has never been used.. C'mon Pat, you can do better than that. The mechanics of lymphatic delivery are pretty well understood.



- Bill [/B]


Well you said that the 1-test ether has a solubility of about 50mg/mL. That does not seem to me to be nearly lipophilic enough to enable it to be absorbed lymphatically. If that is all it took, then testosterone propionate would have good oral bioavailablity since it has a solubility in excess of 100mg/cc.

WE can go back and forth on this but the fact is we just don't know. I think what people have to do is orally try the ether, try free 1-test, and try 1-AD - and then make an honest assessment of which gives them the best "gains per dollar spent". That is the bottom line
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is this for real?

pa1ad said:
Well you said that the 1-test ether has a solubility of about 50mg/mL. That does not seem to me to be nearly lipophilic enough to enable it to be absorbed lymphatically. If that is all it took, then testosterone propionate would have good oral bioavailablity since it has a solubility in excess of 100mg/cc.


Anabolicum Vister is no doubt similar in solubility. This works lymphatically. ANd if you dissolved TP in oil and made a softgel out of it, it would work much better than straight powdered testosterone. But why bother with the higher cost over injecting it, as well as the fact that Organon makes Andriol. The steroid market has better products, the supplement market doesn't.

WE can go back and forth on this but the fact is we just don't know. I think what people have to do is orally try the ether, try free 1-test, and try 1-AD - and then make an honest assessment of which gives them the best "gains per dollar spent". That is the bottom line

I am anxious to hear honest comparisons, and agree whole-heartedy the consumer will ultimately be the judge of what works better and more cost effectively. I am also similarly confident my product will be recognized for superior product that it is.
 
Top Bottom