Bill,
What do you think of 1-TEST UNDECANOATE ESTER? Another company is selling this is as another 1-Test alternative. Don’t know what the UE would do if it isn’t injected. Isn’t this ester well established to slow absorbtion but not be a good oral supplement? Wanted your oppinion.
EDog
Seems like UE would only increase the absorbtion a very little bit. Patrick Arnold wrote on Meso-RX that UE doubled oral testosterone absorbtion from from around 3% to 6%. Not exactly impressive.
EDog
BUMP
bump too.
I agree with Edog. You could expect the
ester to be cleaved prior to absorption.
If not using a carbonate ester and wanting
to use this compound, I’d take the
androst-1-ene (so-called 1-test) as is
rather than an alkanoate ester (e.g. undecanoate, enanthate, propionate etc) or
ether. In the case of this particular compound, oral bioavailabilty is not too bad even with nothing done. It’s about 30%.
Bill,
Do you see any value in including 1-AD in with Mag-10 or another 1-Test product? My thinking is that 1-AD converts to 1-Test, but is thought to be more orally availailable than straight 1-Test or the Ether products. Also, there is question if 1-AD has and A/A value to it as a hormone. Why do you think 4-AD has anabolic value, but Nor-4AD does not? (I could be wrong, but I thought you expressed this recently) Are there studies done on either of them to test their A/A profile? By the way, thanks again for all of the help on the BB here. You are truely a great asset.
EDog
In looking at EDog’s most recent post it raises a question for me. I’ve heard that 1-AD readily converts to DHT, is this true? Actually I think I’ve seen this written by a company selling a 1-AD product, as if they were saying it’s a good thing. Are there any positive side effects of DHT?
Whether 1-androstenediol has more oral bioavailability than androst-1-ene itself, I don’t know, though I think I have read the data in a study back in the 1950s. If there was a difference between the diol, the dione,
and the 17-ol-3-one (that is to say, androst-1-ene) it wasn’t large. There would be no reason to expect the 3-ol to have better bioavailability than the 3-one. If anything it would be more prone to excretion since excretion is more of 3-ol’s.
Anyway, no, no point in taking the diol in preference to adding more androst-1-ene itself or adding more MAG-10, unless the diol simply happened to be on hand. It would be less preferable.<P.
Nor-4-androstenediol certainly has anabolic value.
1-androstenediol itself probably has no intrinsic anabolic activity, though, unlike 4-AD and nor-4-AD. I base this on the fact that by injection, while the parent steroid (androst-1-ene) has 2-4 times the potency of testosterone by animal assay, the diol has only 40%. Either the entire 40% or certainly the great majority of it can be accounted for by conversion, leaving little or no anabolic activity that could be coming from the diol itself.
As mentioned before the entire “anabolic/androgenic ratio” thing needs to be forgotten in bodybuilding. What these numbers are, is effectiveness in increasing size of the rat levator ani, and effectiveness in increasing the size of the rat prostate. If these measurements were called what they were, e.g. “the rat levator ani/prostate ratio” then most likely they’d get the attention, or lack of, that they deserve; but somehow giving a different name to it, a name that does not describe the actual measurements, the numbers and the ratio are wrongly assumed to be of great importance.
So, all in all, 1-TU by Nutrex is crap.