4-ad-ec: thoughts on gray area supplements

M

mikeynov

Super Moderator
Staff member
In approaching supplementation, I generally gauge a substance by its benefit to cost ratio, as well as the ethical question of using the substance itself. Ie, I think it's entirely possible/plausible to go on a legitimately safe cycle of aas, but I have an ethical problem doing so. On the other hand, I freely use creatine as I believe it's pretty uniformly beneficial.

Qualitatively, I'm not sure how 4-androstenediol really differs from any other androgen. I've heard it referred to as a class II steroid, II in that it doesn't primarily exert its effects by binding to the Androgen Receptor.

I'm curious how Bryan feels on this as well. I believe he tried an Androsol spray a while back...are there any real risks taking a substance like Biotest's 4-ad-ec? Exerting androgenic effects, I would think the risks might ultimately be the same. Unfavorable cholesterol ratios, benign(sp) heart/prostate enlargement and things along those lines, if my understanding is correct. They also make Mag10 and state that 4-ad-ec, due to its minimal side effects, can be taken for longer periods of time (8 weeks vs. the recommended 2 for Mag10). I was considering going on a cycle of this, but feel I'm crossing into a gray area between novel supplementation and true androgen usage. To me, it also can take away the focus on the nutrition/training aspect, and instead focus on an outside source to influence body composition. I always figured if I were smart enough, there'd be no reason to have to rely on supplementation of any sort to grow. However, i also realize if the side effects are truly minimal or even beneficial (ala creatine), there's really no compelling reason NOT to indulge.

Anybody's thoughts would be helpful :)
 
I'm probably not going to give you the answer you're looking for - that is I'm not going to make an arguement for or against andro products from an ethical viewpoint.  My opinion on andro's is that if you're going to bother with them at all you might as well just use steroids.  Cost wise they are about the same, benefits are much higher with steroids, and the risk associated with both (believe it or not) is similar - though the supplement companies would like you to think otherwise.  

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> I always figured if I were smart enough, there'd be no reason to have to rely on supplementation of any sort to grow.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Well, that's not entirely true because to not supplement would be unwise.  Smart training, smart nutrition, and smart supplementation is the key to making the best gains in the shortest possible time.
 
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Chris Johnson @ Aug. 20 2002,5:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm probably not going to give you the answer you're looking for - that is I'm not going to make an arguement for or against andro products from an ethical viewpoint.  My opinion on andro's is that if you're going to bother with them at all you might as well just use steroids.  Cost wise they are about the same, benefits are much higher with steroids, and the risk associated with both (believe it or not) is similar - though the supplement companies would like you to think otherwise.  [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Nevermind the possible legal ramifications!
 
'Cost wise they are about the same, benefits are much higher with steroids, and the risk associated with both (believe it or not) is similar - though the supplement companies would like you to think otherwise. '

I don't suppose you have any evidence aside from the anecdotal to show this is the case?

And how do you lump-sum 'andros' into one category? What's the chemical/structural difference, really, between androgens that are currently legal and those that are scheduled?
 
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In approaching supplementation, I generally gauge a substance by its benefit to cost ratio, as well as the ethical question of using the substance itself.  Ie, I think it's entirely possible/plausible to go on a legitimately safe cycle of aas, but I have an ethical problem doing so.  On the other hand, I freely use creatine as I believe it's pretty uniformly beneficial.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

These are all very good points. You are correct, it is possible to do a legitimately safe cycle of AAS. Here is an interesting story about this topic. http://phoenixnewtimes.com/issues/2002-08-15/nelson.html/1/index.html

Ethics comes in when you are in a competition and AAS use is banned.

Morality comes in when you are forced to break the law in order to obtain and use them.

Creatine can be unethical, if it is a banned substance in a competition you are participating in.

As of yet, creatine use is not immoral in the US, but I believe some countries don't allow it as a food supplement. But I get your point.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Qualitatively, I'm not sure how 4-androstenediol really differs from any other androgen.  I've heard it referred to as a class II steroid, II in that it doesn't primarily exert its effects by binding to the Androgen Receptor.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Well, you're right. Various prohormones require conversion into other androgens before they are actually anabolic and/or androgenic. In essence, until the pass through a enzymatic conversion, they are inert in the body.

4-androstenediol (4-AD) requires conversion but it also posses some anabolic/androgenic activity before conversion. Yes, it acts as a &quot;class II&quot; androgen, meaning it does not bind strongly to the androgen receptor, nor does it appear to stay bound. In contrast, DHT binds both strongly and does not easily separate from the receptor. Keep in mind however that both androgens act on the exact same receptor. The differences in their effects are caused by the strength and duration of their bond with the receptor.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> I'm curious how Bryan feels on this as well.  I believe he tried an Androsol spray a while back...are there any real risks taking a substance like Biotest's 4-ad-ec?  Exerting androgenic effects, I would think the risks might ultimately be the same.  Unfavorable cholesterol ratios, benign(sp) heart/prostate enlargement and things along those lines, if my understanding is correct.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

The risks of using any androgen are similar, differing only in their severity. It all depends on the dose. And yes, side effects include alterations in cholesterol ratios, reduction in testosterone production, hair thinning, oily skin, alterations in libido, etc.

The positive effects are increases muscle mass, increased bone mass, decreased fat mass, increased energy levels, increased libido, increased mental focus, and elevated mood, and a few others.

However, it is important to remember that all of these effects are dependant on how androgens are used. There are many thousands of men on testosterone replacement who experience nothing but positive effects.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They also make Mag10 and state that 4-ad-ec, due to its minimal side effects, can be taken for longer periods of time (8 weeks vs. the recommended 2 for Mag10).  I was considering going on a cycle of this, but feel I'm crossing into a gray area between novel supplementation and true androgen usage.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

When someone in the supplement industry talks about prohormones and side effects in the same sentence they are talking about either of 2 things, the conversion into estrogen, and the potency of the androgen itself. If an androgen doesn’t “aromatise” it doesn’t convert into estrogen, therefore it won’t produce any estrogen-related side effect like gyno. Keep in mind that estrogen levels also regulate testosterone production, the more estrogen you have floating around the less testosterone will be produced in the testes. The potency of an androgen is self explanatory and relates to side effects such as hair thinning as well as suppression of test production.

You are fooling yourself is you think that using a prohormone is “not” androgen use. Of course it is. In a general sense, it’s no different than using testosterone from a syringe. But you have to make up your mind about whether you feel male hormones are evil or good. If you feel they are evil, don’t use them and pray for the day when your own natural levels diminish. If you feel they are good, learn everything you can about them and the body’s endocrine system, and them use them as a tool to accomplish your physique augmentation goals.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">To me, it also can take away the focus on the nutrition/training aspect, and instead focus on an outside source to influence body composition.  I always figured if I were smart enough, there'd be no reason to have to rely on supplementation of any sort to grow.  However, i also realize if the side effects are truly minimal or even beneficial (ala creatine), there's really no compelling reason NOT to indulge.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

The notion that knowledge and lifting technique can “replace” androgen use and produce comparable gains in muscle mass is false. Once a person has maxed out his body’s ability to support more muscle tissue, he will not grow any larger until his hormones increase as well. Using androgens before your LBM is naturally maxed out will only get you their faster. Not only that, but a natural lifters physique will almost always show different proportions than an individual using androgens, even if their overall body mass is the same.

While we’re on the subject what would you guys want if HSN decided to produce a prohormone to accelerate gains in muscle mass?
 
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">While we’re on the subject what would you guys want if HSN decided to produce a prohormone to accelerate gains in muscle mass?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Absolutely!!

As long as it was easy on the hair and libido.  No good being huge, bald, and having no sex drive.  
butbut.gif


Are you thinking of puttting out HSN prohormones?   :)

Steve
 
Bryan, do you have any good resources to research information about androgens?

I am thinking about using prohormones, and would like to educate myself better on the subject. Any help/tips/links you could offer would be much appreciated :)
 
Bryan, in reference to the hair loss issue: what is more likley to happen when you end the cycle, that the hair loss stops or continues? Any chance that it will grow back? After all, test level goes back to normal once HTPA recovery is over, right? Are there any permanent side effects associated with prohormones?
 
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">While we’re on the subject what would you guys want if HSN decided to produce a prohormone to accelerate gains in muscle mass?
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
You would have some stiff competiton with Ergopharm,Avant Labs and molecularnutrition around.
 
I agree with the above statement that there is a lot of competition, but currently very little competition with transdermals, other than Avant Labs, or making your own. A line in this direction with 1-t, 4-ad, maybe 5aa might make a good direction that competition is still lean on. Also, I think it's becoming a better way to use the PH's and offers less potential kidney damage.
 
you know, this whole area is starting to become a little fuzzy. there is a pretty good review in this months paper edition of t-mag. The only thing that bothers me is the article refers to 1-ad and to 1 test and says they can be great, but then glosses over any further mention of them as if they are trying deliberately to minimize the impact of these agents. Then i see that avant labs and ergo pharm offer these substances, however; the problem is that avant and ergo don't list wether the products actually contain the desired agents or wether they contain the less desirable and ineffectual prohormones that are one step further down the biochemical pathway AWAY from test. So basically I am now becoming suspicious of all three companies being less than upfront. I would like to know if anyone has a better grasp on EXACTLY what compound is in the avant 1-test and ergo farms 1-ad. Because the other compunds are a waste of time and money. 5 Compounds?...I don't think they are worth trying from the literature I have been reading. I hope that honest discussions like these will enlighten everyone as to what we are all REALY getting and if they REALLY DO WORK . We can only arm ourselves against potential misinformation and unsavory practices of false advertising and omissions of important information. I will no longer willingly support B-S products. Let's keep each other informed and make he companies work for us by providingf real supplements that work. I would trust something from Bryan as he probably has researched it all and has an idea of what works,also he currently has no financial stake in supporting one prohormone over the other.
 
First, a financial interest is born when a company (or person) believes that a given compound in question is either efficacious and thus marketable, or when then simply wish to make money regardless of that fact. Therein lies the line of demarcation that separates the honest from the base.

Putting it to say that 'a company has a vested interest' does not discount a product or a person's intention.

Secondly, Ergopharm is the guiding light behind this aspect of industry. And from where does this doubt come? 1-Test came from Pat's industry spawn of 1AD. 1AD has been proven efficacious in nature (whether solely due to 1-Test conversion or perhaps that along with inherent activity [as thought with 4AD]).

On their label, stated is the chemical as 1AD. Where from does the confusion come? Avant Labs states their compound as 1-Test (1AD's target of conversion). Again, from where does the confusion stem.

And, all other compounds are not a waste of time. Which ones do you make reference to as there are many more.
 
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (morded @ Sep. 08 2002,10:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Then i see that avant labs and ergo pharm offer these substances, however; the problem is that avant and ergo don't list wether the products actually contain the desired agents or  wether they contain the less desirable and ineffectual prohormones that are one step further down the biochemical pathway AWAY  from test.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Where, exactly, did you &quot;see&quot; this?? I am curious, because unless someone hacked our website and has been putting alternate labels on our products, this is quite false.
 
I appreciate the genuine responses to my post. I saw the references to ingredients somewhere after clicking on a link in a thread somewhere here. Not trying to be obtuse. Also from the article in t-mag, it appears as if the writers are referring to the available 1-test and 1-ad products available as not having the actual needed prohormone(1-test) but a less effectual precursor. From what I have read (I did earn top marks in a masters level biochem course) but I admit I am no expert...just someone learning as much as he can...but from what I have read the 5 products and pentyl ethers are not 'supposed' to be near as effective. I personally have nothing against any of these companies and have ordered the avant labs one and ergopharms 1-ad. I decided i was the only one who decide for myself wether I felt something was justified for my personal use. I wouldn't have tried them if i didn't feel encouraged by the web site info. Also I was determined not to allow the other competetive company to sway my opinion based soley on there info. After all I was to expect to feel as if I had been 'on steroids' after trying one of their products. I sucked down eight weeks worth of this ....ec compound without any discernable change in size or strength. So at this point I became...less ready to believe everything they wrote. Just trying to be an informed consumer. i am hopeful the 1-ad and 1-test will change my mind about prohormones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top