sytenhance

  • Thread starter imported_foozballking
  • Start date
I

imported_foozballking

Guest
have any of you guys heard of this thing, i stayed away from prohormones in the past cause of the side effects but the delivery method in this transdermal is supposed to be mostly localized.

i actually bought a bottle of this stuff but stopped using it after i felt lethargic. i dont know if this was all in my head, but i didnt wanna risk the side effects if this thing turns out to be systemic. i think i'll give it another shot when i get into the 10s, perhaps i overdosed initially.
 
Despite their claims, I don't see how they avoid systemic delivery. I've read the explanation offered for why it supposedly works, and I don't buy it. Also, there was justification by a member of that board regarding the same delivery system with yohimbine, and the member mentioned he did not experience systemic effects from yohimbine with that same delivery system. Well, then, how does he know a signficant amount was actually absorbed at all?

I hate to use an ad hominem fallacy, but how come none of those guys appear to have gotten significant growth from this product? I speak of the inventor, specifically. His development is...not what I'd expect for one you would imagine could apply a great deal of knowledge- both in regards to eating, training, and his products. I like him, but he's become more "heady" in the last year or so, from what I have observed.

That's just my opinion, though. I do believe he's an innovator, all the same, and a bright individual.
 
Read the posts and it seems the guy introduced too many variables at the same time to claim the effectiveness of the product, i.e. new arm routine after a lay off, hypocaloric diet, etc... I am going to read more about this stuff to see how they propose it has a localized effect and no systemic effect. :confused:
 
Local delivery has a basis in science. If you compare the Sytenhance formula you'll see the similarities with the trans-phase delivery system described below.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez....bstract

Transdermal delivery and accumulation of indomethacin in subcutaneous tissues in rats.

Mikulak SA, Vangsness CT, Nimni ME.

Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles 90033, USA.

Oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are effective pharmacotherapy for a wide variety of painful, inflammatory disorders. Development of an efficient means of topical administration of NSAIDs could increase local soft-tissue and joint concentrations while reducing systemic distribution of the drug, thereby reducing side-effects. With this in mind we studied the effects of a novel topical penetration enhancer for lipophilic compounds, a trans-phase delivery system (TPDS), a solution of benzyl alcohol, isopropanol and acetone, on the distribution of indomethacin in various tissues locally and remote from the site of application. We compared the TPDS with a 50:50 (v/v) mixture of propylene glycol and ethanol, a commonly used penetration enhancer, and with oral administration. We found that the TPDS was significantly superior to the other approaches at achieving high local-tissue concentrations in the vicinity of the site of application. In addition, comparison of these two carrier systems seems to clarify the different aqueous and hydrophobic pathways of drug penetration which emerge from various experimental findings and theoretical considerations. Our results suggest that this non-aqueous solvent system, and benzyl alcohol in particular, because of its unique physicochemical and solvating characteristics, might be able to deliver therapeutic levels of indomethacin to tissues close to the site of application in a safer and more effective manner than presently accepted forms of delivery.
 
1) I find nothing about that T-magger to be impressive. Not saying anyone should feel the same as I, but he's nothing special, even in a small gym. Also, his account has too much interference.

2) The first study didn't say it avoided systemic distribution.

3) I guess nobody read this part of the second study:

"Penetration was very effective and the erythromycin was detected in significant amounts in the underlying muscle, various organs and later in the urine."

Various organs.

Urine.

Not systemic? Rethinking, this claim needs.
 
Baoh, i dont think the inventor's physique is a good indicator of how effective the product is. Par Deus is the same guy who came out with Super One, and that's supposedly been proven to be one of the most effective prohormones.

Someone suggested this on the other board, and i hope its not true, that they're promoting this product as non-systemic to avoid FDA troubles like they had with the other transdermal. I guess we'll know better when there's more feedback on it. If Sytenhance indeed turns out to have largely localized effect, the demand for this thing should be huge.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Baoh @ Dec. 08 2003,4:25)]1) I find nothing about that T-magger to be impressive. Not saying anyone should feel the same as I, but he's nothing special, even in a small gym. Also, his account has too much interference.
2) The first study didn't say it avoided systemic distribution.
3) I guess nobody read this part of the second study:
"Penetration was very effective and the erythromycin was detected in significant amounts in the underlying muscle, various organs and later in the urine."
Various organs.
Urine.
Not systemic? Rethinking, this claim needs.
Click to expand...
Unless you remove the muscle, bathe it in a vat of hormone solution, and replace it into one's body, there's no way anyone can acheive 100% local delivery without any spillover whatsoever.

You can use Google to analyze every utterance made about this product by its creators and knowledgable users, and you are not going to find anyone claiming the actives remain completely confined to the exact spot of application. In fact, many suggest cycling it.

The important point is that the delivery vehicle used in that study did better at confining the drug to a particular site than the regular transdermal carrier. Eventually, yes, some did "leak", but it would be almost ridiculous to expect otherwise.
 
wow.gif
6-->
[b said:
Quote[/b] (foozballking @ Dec. 08 2003,8
wow.gif
6)]Baoh, i dont think the inventor's physique is a good indicator of how effective the product is. Par Deus is the same guy who came out with Super One, and that's supposedly been proven to be one of the most effective prohormones.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is sort of silly. By this criterion, which supplement maker should we trust? (Maybe none.) I don't see any Mr. Olympias. I've seen a pic of Pat Arnold in pretty good shape, but I'd expect he wouldn't have much patience for anyone that would judge the effectiveness of his product based on what he looks like.
Plus, the key variable is value-added. How much improvement has someone experienced. You have to see where they started to assess this. A static picture of someone in tip-top condition doesn't tell you much. They might look that way year-round due to good genetics, and it might have nothing to do with the supplements they use or the training strategies they are touting.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (foozballking @ Dec. 08 2003,8:06)]Baoh, i dont think the inventor's physique is a good indicator of how effective the product is. Par Deus is the same guy who came out with Super One, and that's supposedly been proven to be one of the most effective prohormones.
Someone suggested this on the other board, and i hope its not true, that they're promoting this product as non-systemic to avoid FDA troubles like they had with the other transdermal. I guess we'll know better when there's more feedback on it. If Sytenhance indeed turns out to have largely localized effect, the demand for this thing should be huge.
Click to expand...
Did I not say it was an ad hominem fallacy?

I have nothing against his One, One+, and Super One formulations. I think they are top-notch products, actually.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Jon Stark @ Dec. 08 2003,8:36)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Baoh @ Dec. 08 2003,4:25)]1) I find nothing about that T-magger to be impressive. Not saying anyone should feel the same as I, but he's nothing special, even in a small gym. Also, his account has too much interference.
2) The first study didn't say it avoided systemic distribution.
3) I guess nobody read this part of the second study:
"Penetration was very effective and the erythromycin was detected in significant amounts in the underlying muscle, various organs and later in the urine."
Various organs.
Urine.
Not systemic? Rethinking, this claim needs.
Click to expand...
Unless you remove the muscle, bathe it in a vat of hormone solution, and replace it into one's body, there's no way anyone can acheive 100% local delivery without any spillover whatsoever.
You can use Google to analyze every utterance made about this product by its creators and knowledgable users, and you are not going to find anyone claiming the actives remain completely confined to the exact spot of application. In fact, many suggest cycling it.
The important point is that the delivery vehicle used in that study did better at confining the drug to a particular site than the regular transdermal carrier. Eventually, yes, some did "leak", but it would be almost ridiculous to expect otherwise.
Click to expand...
I'll agree with this, for the most part.

However, it has been touted as not being suppressive. Since it does elevate systemic levels, it is suppressive.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Jon Stark @ Dec. 08 2003,8:43)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (foozballking @ Dec. 08 2003,8<!--emo&amp;
wow.gif
)]Baoh, i dont think the inventor's physique is a good indicator of how effective the product is. Par Deus is the same guy who came out with Super One, and that's supposedly been proven to be one of the most effective prohormones.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is sort of silly. By this criterion, which supplement maker should we trust? (Maybe none.) I don't see any Mr. Olympias. I've seen a pic of Pat Arnold in pretty good shape, but I'd expect he wouldn't have much patience for anyone that would judge the effectiveness of his product based on what he looks like.
Plus, the key variable is value-added. How much improvement has someone experienced. You have to see where they started to assess this. A static picture of someone in tip-top condition doesn't tell you much. They might look that way year-round due to good genetics, and it might have nothing to do with the supplements they use or the training strategies they are touting.
Click to expand...
As I said, it was an ad hominem fallacy.

It strikes me as amusing, though, to see certain fellows getting praise for physical qualities that the photographs do not reveal...at all...in any capacity, and not because of poor photo quality. I'll let that one lie peacefully, though.
 
In addition, I should mention I think highly of Caleb Stone, the person, for the most part. Some projected claims for the effects of his products (Leptigen, Sytenhance, Tranquili-G, etc.), however, are more than a little overblown.

These are simply my opinions. I never said they had to be shared by anyone else.

For the original poster:

If you experienced lethargy from using the product, which can be caused by the interaction between 1-test and the CNS, then it has significant systemic effects, despite claims stating otherwise. I had a good deal of lethargy when I used One+ many moons ago.
 
Just a couple of comments.

1) I personally believe that the only way to get a drug &quot;into&quot; muscle tissue and not in the blood stream at the same time is to inject it. That's the simplest terms I can use. Scientific and physiological explainations can be given, but it doesn't change anything.

2) About what people who design and/or market supplements actually look like. There is one very big confounding variable, steroid use. Why do I say this? Because anybody can get big enough to look &quot;big&quot; simply by training hard, eating a lot, and doing a small amount of test. This however doesn't teach them anything about physiology.

On the other hand, a guy can learn a great deal about physiology, even enough to design great supplements, and still not get very big.

The problem with both is one of focus. There are only so many things you can focus on at a time and be really good at simultaneously.

Now I am not &quot;huge&quot;, but for a guy who has been lfting 20 years it shows. 10 years of moderate hormone assistance would probably have given me about 40 more pounds. But for me, it wasn't the right choice to get involved with something illegal. Of course I would love to be 280 ripped, but I'll survive with what I've got.

I'm sure everyone agrees credibility should be judged by evidence. At times this evidence can be in the form of a physique. But a physique can be created in many different ways, and being born with the right physique also complicates things.

But a physique is not our only way to measure the truthfulness of someones claims. Take a look at the science. Sure, not everyone has the background to interpret the research, but there are many resources available on the internet to get help. This being one of them.

So don't judge a book by its cover (unless the cover tells you you won't like what's inside).

And finally, there are no more supplements that work (build muscle) today than there were 4 years ago. They are:

1) Protein (any kind)
2) Creatine (any kind)
3) OTC hormones. (4-AD, 4-NorAD, and so called 1-Test)
4) Ephedrine/Cafeine (anticatabolic)

Obviously, prescription anabolics fit into what &quot;works&quot; but they aren't sold as legal supplements.

Sure, other supplements have benficial effects for bodybuilders, but they are complimentary, not anabolic. I refer to essential fats, HMB, glucosamine/chondroitin, Vit/minerals, perhaps some flavones, garlic, and a few other herbal based compounds. But once again, these are not anabolics and will do nothing to directly increase muscle growth.
 
I read Par Deus's review of his product and I found it to be very interesting and he had some fairly solid references to localized delivery systems and the such. I found it interesting that he would end his review by stating their was absolutely no rersearch to back his claim of localized delivery of his prohormone concoction. Zero research, and he admits to making huge assumptions in regards to its localized effects. Not saying he is wrong or that he is trying to dupe people, in fact it is a bit refreshing to see his bluntness that he may be full of it. I am not convinced that his product does what it says it can do, and for the price I am not going to find out. I'll stick to what I know works and the delivery system I use is the BEST. ;)
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Baoh @ Dec. 08 2003,10:33)]I hate to use an ad hominem fallacy, but how come none of those guys appear to have gotten significant growth from this product? I speak of the inventor, specifically. His development is...not what I'd expect for one you would imagine could apply a great deal of knowledge- both in regards to eating, training, and his products. I like him, but he's become more &quot;heady&quot; in the last year or so, from what I have observed.
That's just my opinion, though. I do believe he's an innovator, all the same, and a bright individual.
Click to expand...
Probably because I do not work out -- I've averaged maybe 30 minutes per week in the gym for 2 years. I also am known to be fond of drugs and drinks.

I'm still 190-200 at 12-15% bodyfat.

Outside of the bodybuilding world, I am considered big -- at least the ladies always give me nice compliments, which is all I really care about.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Baoh @ Dec. 08 2003,4:25)]1) I find nothing about that T-magger to be impressive. Not saying anyone should feel the same as I, but he's nothing special, even in a small gym. Also, his account has too much interference.
2) The first study didn't say it avoided systemic distribution.
3) I guess nobody read this part of the second study:
&quot;Penetration was very effective and the erythromycin was detected in significant amounts in the underlying muscle, various organs and later in the urine.&quot;
Various organs.
Urine.
Not systemic? Rethinking, this claim needs.
Click to expand...
Reading of the full papers, not just the abstract, you need.
 
And, finally, I have never said it will completely avoid uptake -- I have said it will greatly minimize the amount of non-metabolized active that gets into the bloodstream. And, that the ratio of local vs systemic will be much better.

If one want to take the time to read the full papers on the studies I have referenced in regard to local delivery, you will see that the ratio of active concentration deep to the spot of application vs systemic is much higher than with oral or a systemic transdermal formula.

This includes muscle tissue, and even the joint capsule deep to the muscle.

And, unless the comment about making way overblown statements is directed toward people who have used our products and said how good they are, i find this almost fully absurd, given the way we market (just a bunch of science and no exclamation marks), and the feedback our products get. Especially in the context of the industry we are in.

In the very, very beginning, I overstated the effects of tranquili-G, because of what it looked like on paper, and the way it affected myself and the two other people that beta tested it, but before it even got out of beta stage, the product description on our site stated that despite what it looked like on paper, it did not fvck you up like G/GVL
 
By the way, there are several people involved in a 6-week trial of various &quot;Sytenhance&quot; formulations on their arms -- 1T, 1T+4AD, Nor+4AD, 1T+HydroxyT.

So if you are curious you can read them. Some are in the &quot;Feedback&quot; section on Avant. I'm sure others have theirs posted elsewhere.

I am actually testing the 1T+HydroxyT. I'm not optimistic, but hopefully I'll be surprised. And it's not that I doubt the delivery technology, I just don't think the actives in mine (particularly the hydroxyT) won't do as much as the others will.

Even so, I can see the value of testing this... if it turns out the formulas with aromatising actives (or at least without anti-aromatase actives) are superior, it might highlight the benefits of having a little estrogen action.

I think this is how it's gonna turn out, but we'll see.

Here's a link if you are curious. I'll have some week zero and week 1 pics up next week.

http://forum.avantlabs.com/?act=ST&amp;f=2&amp;t=8109&amp;st=0
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top