OK- somebody tried to tell me today that Pat Arnold brought us, and named the compound 1-test? And he also said that it was the same thing that was in the mag-10 (A1E). It didnt sound right to me. He was trying to tell me that Bill Roberts took one of this guys inventions and made it into an ethylcarbonate ester. What is the real story? I have heard Bill say before that 1-test is really not such a good name for what the compound actually is. What is the difference between A1E and 1-test? Sorry for my rambling.
-Jason
The legal standard for invention requires that a thing be novel, that is to say not already known, and not obvious to one skilled in the art.
Mr Arnold’s standard for whether he has invented something is whether he has read about someone else’s work and decided to do the same thing himself. If he is the first in the supplement industry to decide to do what scientists have published, in his mind he is the “inventor.”
For example, 4-androstenediol was tested for its anabolic properties, its potency quantitated, and these values published. It was also tested for conversion to testosterone in human blood, and this was published. So Mr Arnold reads this and calls himself the inventor of 4-androstenediol as an anabolic and as a precursor for testosterone. It's a joke and would never stand up were anyone to take his patent to a jury but that's his "invention." Reading what others have done and doing the same: but since he was the first in the nutritional supplement industry to read it, he's the "inventor" in that industry.
Ditto for 19-nor-4-androstenediol except that there, it was even sold as an anabolic steroid in other countries. Yet he's the "inventor" of its use as an anabolic, by virtue of having read about it.
As for 17b-hydroxy-5a-androst-1-ene-3-one (androst-1-ene) which he misleadingly calls "1-testosterone," his claim of "invention" if he makes it is even more absurd.
Of course, there is published data on its efficacy as an anabolic, and its potency quantitated. By several people. There's published data on the interconversions too.
By his usual standards, well, if he found it by reading the work of real scientists well then he's the inventor... but here I think he doesn't even meet that standard, since so far as I know Bill Llewellyn was the first in the nutritional supplement industry to be aware that the 1-enes are naturally occurring. While knowing of their anabolic activity (they are listed in Vida's Androgens and Anabolic Agents, a work I am very familiar with) I had not known they were naturally occurring until Bill Llewellyn so informed me. Though I might well have also uncovered the natural occurrence myself in a while, nonetheless, having learned it from him I kept the matter under confidence and did not use the information for Biotest until such time as Bill Llewellyn had released the information publicly.
By no means am I the inventor or discoverer of androst-1-ene or its anabolic properties, nor is Bill Llewellyn, and most certainly Mr Arnold is not. (All this is true of the diol and dione as well.)
I hope this should be clear enough.
As for carbonate ester derivatives of androgenic steroids (or for that matter, any sort of steroid so far as I know) to improve oral bioavailability, unlike Mr Arnold, my inventions are actual inventions. Novel and not obvious to one skilled in the art.
Mr Arnold for example -- though it could be argued he is not so skilled in the art -- certainly didn't find their utility obvious: in fact he denounced carbonate esters as a scam, unable to increase oral bioavailability. Just one example of their non-obviousness. The use is also novel. (His main objection to them was that no one had published that they worked. Well, what sort of invention would it be if they had?!)
This is the difference between Mr Arnold and myself when it comes to "invention."
Now, it is rare for me to discuss anything involving the individual in question at all, due to the utter cesspool of ethics and behavior that are all too often suffered on any close dealings with him, but inasmuch as someone was telling you I stole one of the main components of MAG-10, on the one hand such an accusation doesn't inherently merit reply, but on the other hand, there is precise information to answer it, and I appreciate that you genuinely would like accurate information on it. I hope the matter is now clarified.
Thanks for taking the time to check it out instead of just "buying" the assertion!
Oh, and here’s why “1-test” is an invalid name for the compound.
1) It isn't a testosterone derivative. 'Nuff said right there really, but...
- Even if it were, for a number in a chemical name to have significance, the functionality it refers to must also be in the name, where you can figure out what the number is talking about.
For example, 17-methyltestosterone makes perfect sense. The 17 tells you where the added methyl is. Or 4-androstenediol. The
4 tells you where the “ene” is.
There’s nothing in “testosterone” that the “1” is telling you about. The only
functionality name that appears within
the word “testosterone” is the “one” group
(rhymes with phone) but it isn’t in the
1 position.
- It could be confused with delta-1-testosterone which is an entirely different
compound, namely, boldenone.
I have to believe that those that call it
by that name do so not on the merits, but because the name has great sales appeal. But it is no more valid than, say, 17-testosterone
would have been for androstenedione (actually,
even less valid.)
- There’s no precedent: it’s never been
called that. While one could say it’s
never been called androst-1-ene either,
at least androst-1-ene is a logical abbreviation of 17b-hydroxy-5a-androst-1-ene-3-one. (The 17b-hydroxy and 3-one are more or less expected for active androgens, and the
5a stereochemistry is expected for androgens
saturated at that position, so those are
the parts of the name most logically omitted: whereas the facts that the molecule is in
the “androst” series and has the 1-ene are
the key points.)
Anyway, that’s the story on the name.
In my younger years, I remember reading a publication in which a very fortunate young man found himself being fellated in a laundromat. Immediately after the story was another one in which a similar man was seduced by two lovely coeds.
Both of these stories involved rather unique contortions of the human body to achieve, for the women, what the writers could only describe as "shuddering orgasms" that turned them into "wailing, moaning bansees".
Now, I did read about it in the work of others. However, since such positions are clearly not obvious to others "skilled in the art", and are quite "novel", I would like to hereby take credit for "inventing" the female orgasm (at least at that level of intensity).
Perhaps I shall name my invention "1-Org".
Bill, I’d just like to say that that was an amazing post.
It reminded me somehow of Chomsky’s dissection of Skinner’s behavioralism “science” back in the late 50’s - the one where he derides Skinner as merely “play-acting” at science, and the one that effectively killed behaviorism throughout American universities.
Whew.
To hear the guy himself though, he’s, quote, a “Gifted chemist and world-renowned as the Father of Modern-day Prohormones.” That’s what he says about himself on his website.
Bill:
Thanks for the clarification. Your integrity seems rock solid. However there is one other thing I would like you to “clarify” if you don’t mind. Before working for Bio-Test you stated that ZMA was nothing special and that Tribex didn’t work. (Not your exacte words.) Now I know you haven’t changed your opinion on ZMA(not to my knowledge), but you seemed to have done a 180 on Tribex. What new data did you see that changed your mind…etc. etc. Thanks Bill. 
Prior to doing consulting for Biotest, what I had said was that I had tried Tribestan and found no benefit from it and accordingly didn’t think that Tribulus terrestris was effective. I think that anything I ever said was directed towards Tribestan and the herb in general. There was nothing specific towards the Tribex product. I hadn’t even tried it.
I did make a criticism related to Tribex, however, not specifically of the product’s efficacy but rather an article promoting it. A given T-mag article had had some sort of error in units of measurement and also was
reporting T increases in men who were low in the first place without, if I recall correctly, pointing this out: and I felt that given my lack of results with Tribestan (which I thought if anything would be a higher quality Tribulus product being the then-flagship) that the article seemed unacceptable hype of something that didn’t work.
However, I have since used Tribex and had clearly positive results with it as have many others. Also it turns out that Tribex has much more of the active principle, protodioscin, than Tribestan and so
it turns out that there’s nothing inconsistent with Tribex performing
differently than Tribestan.
So you got your job at Biotest by holding their feet to the fire? That’s a sure sign of a squared-away organization!
Also, I’m betting there’s a lot of selective breeding and molecular biology being applied to dramatically improve a final product over its original herbal extract form (THAT’S the trick!).
Finally, an honest question, sir. Is ZMA useful in absence of zinc/magneium deficit? Granted, many of us suffer from same, though.
I don’t think there is value to ZMA if there’s no deficiency of zinc or magnesium, and I find it hard to believe, with no evidence to support it, that the typical weightlifter who consumes a good amount of red meat and especially who consumes some
bb’ing supplement products like MRP’s or
protein bars, etc. which typically contain
quite a lot of their own zinc supplementation, is going to be zinc deficient.
There ARE cases where it can be a concern, for example when dieting heavily and living largely off of a protein powder that doesn’t have zinc supplementation and off of flax oil, and in that sort of case one definitely wants to make sure that the various minerals are well taken care of, not only zinc but also calcium, magnesium, and (often overlooked) potassium, and even sodium. I sometimes use ZMA in this situation. However, a zinc oxide product could do as well. You’d just need somewhat more zinc oxide to get the same effect. (If you want, you can easily get
TOO MUCH zinc from zinc oxide so that surely
proves you can get enough if you want.)
So in other words, I view ZMA as being
a perfectly good means of getting zinc and
magnesium if you happen to want them in
the ratio provided (heavier on zinc than
on magnesium) but this is not necessary
for most who lift weights most of the time, or
if necessary as in the severe dieting example it’s not as if other zinc and/or magnesium supplement products cannot do the job as well.
(Also, I know you were just joking, but to clarify, I’m not a professor. Instead I’m another of all too many who get all their research and studies completed, and various scientific papers published, and then get hanged up on the last business of getting the doctoral thesis finally done. I’m under a
deadline to get it done this Fall though.)
Thanks Bill.
Bill, to veer slightly off course, I’m interested in the sleep aid part of ZMA. What is it about ZMA that users report help them sleep?
I have been using melatonin for quite some time and am thinking of cycling off for a while and use another supplement. Would you recommend - ZMA, Kava or St. John’s wort?
Hmmmm, how long 'til Jeff Summers steps us to take credit?
It is the magnesium that can promote sleep if someone is deficient in magnesium. Or perhaps a deficiency is not required for the effect: I don’t know.
I’m not an expert on what works best for sleep in terms of supplements, but valerian works well with the problem being a horrid smell which can come up on you. The “Alluna”
brand available in supermarkets (sold in sleep aids section) is probably the best in that regard. Kava kava can combine well with it but I think isn’t as effective by itself. Diphenhydramine HCl, available in the supermarket also, is effective and also can combine well with valerian but it seems to me to impair quality somewhat and also to be a little habit forming despite claims to the contrary.
I’m surrounded by really, really smart people, all day, every day (while Yours Truly is merely an 'ol plow horse, plodding along). Amongst this plethora of talent, some REALLY stand out as being able to (1)boil down complex subjects and make them quite understandable for others (2)are able to apply these concepts to real-world situations and therefore (3)move their field forward, and (4) conduct themselves as gentlemen, going far out of their way in service of others. These fellows I address as “Professor”, because while all have professional credentials, a few I choose to offer special respect. I guess I’ve blown enough smoke up your backside now (P.S. I already have a TESTOSTERONE t-shirt, so I’m not playing for one). And also, good luck on your doctorate; those letters after your name will look great (I’m proud of mine). However, I can’t see how they’ll make us respect your good works anymore than we already do.
Hey Bill, I just wanted to encourage you to keep plugging along and finish that Ph.D. You may not even need it, but it will feel great when it is done. I’ve had several friends either not finish and move on or take several years to finish their Ph.D.'s. The ones that got it done said that it was a very rewarding exeperience to finally hand in their dissertation and have everything done. It took me a year after being done with everything to finish up my Master’s Thesis and I really disliked the feeling of having something like that hanging over my head. Anyway, good luck with the deadline!
You embarrass me!
Just doing what I enjoy and trying to help, with the bonus of actually being able to make a living at it, so far anyhow. That works out pretty well.
(Previous reply was to SWALE. Thanks also to Jason for the encouragement!)
Magnesium is essential to the conversion of serotonin to melatonin in the brain. I do not know for sure but I believe even if you are not magnesium deficient an extra shot of a high dose of magnesium will facilitate this process (serotonin>melatonin). Otherwise, ZMA would lose it’s sleep enhancing qualities over time, which for me it doesn’t.
My problem with taking ZMA is sequestering it from calcium. I cannot take it at bedtime, because I need to get a load of protein in then, which contains calcium. I tend to wake up after 4 or 5 hours, start thinking about my business, or just get excited about the things I get to do the next day, and, after half an hour of that, just get up and to work. So if ZMA would help, in a natural way, I’d like to use it. Questions? Comments? Smart remarks?