Note: The last two shits have been back to normal solidity while keeping on the normal dose of 2 caps a day, hopefully this keeps up.
Guess maybe I just needed getting used to it?
First week I was down exactly 5 pounds, which is about as expected, should lose 2-3 this week and then 1-2 after after.
That would explain a lot indeed. So it acts as a filler and less or anything metabolically special. That’s a shame.
Higgins - Have you experienced any changes in mood?
It seems to me that there has to be an appetite suppressant effect other than merely being a fiber filler, since the milligram amount is much too small to account for fiber-type effect alone.
It has nothing to do with being a filler as Bill said. I just don’t want to eat. Both of my parents are taking this and have little control over what they eat, I’m gonna call them tonight and see what their experiences are.
As I said before, this seems for people who can’t control their eating but I’ll need the other effects to help with fat loss as I really no problems controlling my intake on during a cut.
Bulking is where I need to learn how to control the intake, is there a pill for that haha
Cyproheptadine may do this. There’s an odd version of Dianabol sold in the Dominican Republic that includes it for the purpose of increasing appetite. I really don’t know if it works, but it’s supposed to.
The brand name of cyproheptadine itself (sans the Dianabol) is Periactin.
You can find more information on it, which at a glance (that is all I did) looks correct, at Cyproheptadine - Wikipedia
Oh and for moods swings, none.
Interesting. For people used to bulking and eating alot this may be something good. Although, yes, it does seem this is more effective for the overweight people whom really can’t control their intake.
I have been taking this supplement for 4 days now. My wife has declined for now. My appetite is normal, and I am not experiencing any abnormal issues with my bowel movements. To be honest, I am not noticing anything different.
I am taking one pill in the morning, and another in the evening. I have noted my weight prior to taking the first pill (179.5 lbs). I will weigh myself once each week.
The product is a very good one. Im in the health food industry and was lucky to my hands on a bottle of it for free, and ive been taking it for about 2 weeks now and ive gained about 3 pouns but my bodyfats gone down 0.4%.
When we had the training on this product the guy who did was a bodybuilder himself and i asked him what effect would it have on someone like me because im already lean and i eat every three hours and my nutrition is tight. He told me that they havent done a study on that yet but from his personal experience he noticed less cravings at night and an increase in lean body mass.
Its also safe to take with any stimulant fat burner ive been taking it with atro-phex the entire time, and also in 3 years of testing has not showm any side effects.
[quote]NaturalBeast275 wrote:
When we had the training on this product the guy who did was a bodybuilder himself and i asked him what effect would it have on someone like me because im already lean and i eat every three hours and my nutrition is tight. He told me that they havent done a study on that yet but from his personal experience he noticed less cravings at night and an increase in lean body mass.
[/quote]
The night cravings is the thing that actually has helped me, although I haven’t really cut calories far enough yet to warrant me ever being hungry.
I am looking much better for a 6 pound weight loss than I thought I would but I don’t have any experience cutting down and how quickly visually the changes come since I’ve put on a decent amount of muscle in the past few months.
Spending more time with the LEF article, the herb is looking quite interesting.
Not even considering fat loss, the reported changes in LDL, HDL, and C-reactive protein are very impressive and could easily represent very significant health benefit.
I’d have to characterize the LEF article as being flawed by what I call the Marcia Clark method of presenting a case.
In this method, instead of sticking to one really clear, conclusive point or with a very few completely sound points that can’t be refuted, one thinks that presenting a vast number of points is better. It’s not.
And furthermore, to really be a Marcia Clark, at least one of these points has to be dubious. This has the result of the person trying to follow the argument wondering if maybe all the points are dubious.
It could also be called the “bedazzling with bullshit” method of presenting a case. It’s not the way to go.
My estimate at this point is that most of the claimed mechanisms have nothing to do with anything. For example claiming it as an amylase inhibitor. Maybe such an effect can be detected but I doubt it has the slightest trace of relevance.
And also as mentioned I just do not believe people lost 28 lb in 10 weeks with no change in diet or exercise. No change in instructed diet I believe, but no change in actual diet, I do not. There is no reason to believe that the herb increases energy expenditure so dramatically.
However, if the body is triggered to release and not re-uptake into adipose tissue a large amount of fat, then this supplies energy that no longer is needed from the diet. If the person feels correspondingly less hungry and eats correspondingly less, then sure the weight loss is possible.
It seems most likely the truly causative effect on fat loss is the effect on adiponectin.
If I were editing the article – fat chance I’d be chosen for such a job! – I’d have boiled down the claimed fat loss results to the measured change in adiponectin, brought in the discussion on leptin, admitted more clearly in the text that the article was unpublished and the subjects had metabolic syndrome and therefore more study should be done with the normal population; and brought in the effects on blood lipids as a further likely health benefit.
That would have been really solid I think, instead of all over the map and with questionable points.
Sometimes focus makes things clearer. (Uh, a lot of the time it does.)
I have now been on this for one week. My weight this AM is 179. I started at 179.5. 179 is within the normal variation, so little or no weight loss yet. I am not dieting with this, as the article said it was not necessary to change your diet to lose weight. We shall see. Also, still no side effects for mee.
It’s 26 December, and I’ve been taking this product from LEF for 3 weeks without having lost a single pound. No lower GI effects, but still no weight loss either. AND, I’ve actually been more mindful of what I was putting in my body than usual. I’m going to return it to LEF. Glad to hear that it worked for Higgins. Just not my luck.
My weight loss has stalled as well, albeit Christmas might have something to do with it but with how I ate around the holidays I would of expected to stay about the same.
Still depresses the appetite but I think that might be all it is good for.
No weight loss here either. Admittedly it is the holidays and I have eaten much more than usual. We will see what happens in January. paugustin, did LEF say anything when you returned it? I am disappointed, but I will keep taking it through January to see what the result is.
If this stuff did work…
You’d have to consider whether it’s mechanism of action is likely to benefit you. For example, if restoring hormonal sensitivity were the mechanism of action then you may not get any benefit unless you have an issue in that respect.
So, to be clear, people who are fairly lean and healthy might find it difficult to get help losing weight via a supplement that is supposed to work by fixing something that isn’t wrong with them anyway.
Hi Bill,
Thanks a lot for your thoughtful discussion of this topic. I love your posts in general (about HOT-ROX, etc.), but I’m glad you put in some effort in criticizing the unbelievable claims associated with Irvingia. You’ll appreciate this list of abstracts, which includes where that 28LBs study ( IGOB131, a novel seed extract of the West African plant Irvingia gabonensis, significantly reduces body weight and improves metabolic parameters in overweight humans in a randomized double-blind placebo controlled investigation | Lipids in Health and Disease | Full Text ) was finally published in March: http://search.lef.org/cgi-src-bin/MsmGo.exe?grab_id=0&page_id=2165&query=irvingia&hiword=IRVING%20IRVINGIAS%20irvingia
Anecdotally, my overweight, synthroid-taking mom didn’t see any results after taking a whole bottle. I’m currently seeing some great results taking Hot-Rox Extreme w/Carbolin 19, and I’ve been thinking on-and-off about tanking Irvingia, Panthenine, and/or Fucoxanthin. For kicks or whatever.
BTW, off-topic, but is there any reason you would recommend Biotest’s Rhodiola over clinical-trial-proven Adapt232 ( http://www.proactivebio.com/viewproduct.php?id_product=6 ) ?
Thanks!
On the LEF promotion of this: I do think they erred on this one, but I also think they are honest people generally doing a good job and a good work.
I don’t know anything at all on this other Rhodiola product you mention. The link says little to support it beyond “Adapt 232 was developed to provide astronauts with increased energy and has been tested in outer space,” and I see that “Clinically Tested” is stamped on the box.
Probably no one here has any specifics on it.
The scientist associated with Biotest to ask about the Rhodiola product is Tim Ziegenfuss: myself I have no details on how it specifically differs, whereas he has all the facts.
Generally speaking, actually much of one of my very first conversations with Tim was him telling me of some things that were just uncovered by Biotest on, for a given thing, how the most useful actives proved to be(I forget now whether it was one or more than one) other than the one that others were standardizing for (trying to maximize in the extraction process, and judging the quality of their product only by the amount of that.) And so work was ongoing in developing extraction methods to obtain the best profile of the useful actives, yielding a much better product.
I don’t know for a fact that the Biotest product is by a different extraction method and has a different profile of actives than the product you mention, as I know nothing about what would be the case for that product nor do I know the specifics of the Biotest one.
However, Rhodiola is one of those things where there is more than one active, and differing extraction processes will yield products of differing quality. And Dr Ziegenfuss has gone into that quite extensively with Rhodiola, so he would be the one to say.
There is probably an article discussion thread on it where he might see your post. However as a guess it’s likely he has no means of knowing the specifics of that tested-in-outer-space product. (Sorry, couldn’t resist 