Something Wicked This Way Comes... Again

Nutrition
283

[quote]BeforeIforget wrote:
“Maximal effectiveness of 11-T�?� is reached with a light, thin coat sprayed evenly over freshly showered �?? but absolutely dry �?? thighs, torso, and arms. The key is not to concentrate extra spraying over your problem-fat areas.”

Thats from the article…now i’m confused. Should we spray the troublesome areas or not[/quote]

I don’t mean to be rude, but didn’t you just quote the answer?

“Not to concentrate extra spraying over your problem-fat areas.”

Which I take to mean normal application is more than enough on such areas.

284

[quote]BeforeIforget wrote:
“Maximal effectiveness of 11-T�?� is reached with a light, thin coat sprayed evenly over freshly showered �?? but absolutely dry �?? thighs, torso, and arms. The key is not to concentrate extra spraying over your problem-fat areas.”

Thats from the article…now i’m confused. Should we spray the troublesome areas or not[/quote]

The same thin film as on other areas.

285

Sorry if this has already been asked but:

  1. will this show up on a drug test for sports and
  2. if it will what is the detection period?

Thanks!

286

The marketing of this product is not what eventually put this in my basket, it was watching Bill Roberts verbally flay people.

I have been following this thread and I believe my question has not been addressed, but I may be wrong.

You mentioned that cortisol levels are suppressed for up to 8 hours after your initial application. I lift up to 13 or 14 hours after I shower in the morning, am I missing the main benefit of having my cortisol levels down while I exercise?

287

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Thank you! But to be clear and not take undeserved credit, while I developed the delivery system it is Patrick Arnold who is to thank for bringing adrenosterone and then 17b-hydroxyadrenosterone (also called 11-KT) to market, and Tim Patterson that was really responsible for using our transdermal technology on this product.

I consulted on it and contributed a couple of aspects (the new-to-the-non-pharmaceutical-industries penetration enhancer that this has, and I think the fact that it is an acetate though I’m sure Patrick would have advised the same for our application, and for what it’s worth which is nothing I did some early work trying to make a better-than-capsules liquid version of it that didn’t pan out) but it is really Tim and Patrick who pushed the envelope on this.[/quote]

Hi Bill!!

I’m confused about nomenclature: 11-T is transdermal 11-OXO or transdermal 11-Ketotestosterone??

288

[quote]BeforeIforget wrote:
Oh and how long would this still be in our system after discontinued use? JW[/quote]

Not measured but as a guess, to levels only insignificantly if any over baseline within a few hours of being removed from the skin by showering with soap and towelling thoroughly (but not abnormally vigorous degree of towelling), or probably within 16-24 hours of application if no effort is made to remove.

289

[quote]BeforeIforget wrote:
“Maximal effectiveness of 11-T�?� is reached with a light, thin coat sprayed evenly over freshly showered �?? but absolutely dry �?? thighs, torso, and arms. The key is not to concentrate extra spraying over your problem-fat areas.”

Thats from the article…now i’m confused. Should we spray the troublesome areas or not[/quote]

You should apply to the problem areas but not “concentrate” there. In other words, don’t spray extra-heavily because that probably won’t delivery any more material to those areas but, now not being available for other areas, will result in less total delivery.

290

Bill,

Let’s say, hypothetically, someone was to make an injectable preperation from the hormone powder that accidentally precipitated out of the solvent of this product. Not that I or anyone would or should think of doing this.

Just for fun, how would the dosing recommendations change and what injection locations would be ideal? Thanks for pretenting with me.

291

i just sprayed my first spray, i gotta say this stuff smells like cough medicine, and i just sprayed my arms to see how it smelled. i hope this product is worth it because being in sales, i really cant smell like halls cough drops all day long

edit: ok it wore off, just lasted about half an hour or so

292

[quote]JBerto wrote:
Hi Bill!!

I’m confused about nomenclature: 11-T is transdermal 11-OXO or transdermal 11-Ketotestosterone??
[/quote]
It can be confusing when the name of an overall product, e.g. a Sports Skin Spray, is also used as a trademarked name for the active ingredient. It makes sense to do it but it can be confusing – which is one talking about, the ingredient or the overall product?

So, 11-T is the name of the overall product (the spray) and also is a trademarked name for the ingredient, 17b-hydroxyadrenosterone acetate.

17b-hydroxyadrenosterone itself, not the acetate, is also known as 11-KT (Patrick Arnold’s abbreviated for it) and some call it “11-test” or “11-ketotestosterone.”

On your exact question, it’s neither transdermal 11-OXO or exactly transdermal “11-ketotestosterone,” but the acetate ester of that. The unesterified compound would not work as well, for reasons of skin solubility.

293

[quote]toughcasey wrote:
i just sprayed my first spray, i gotta say this stuff smells like cough medicine, and i just sprayed my arms to see how it smelled. i hope this product is worth it because being in sales, i really cant smell like halls cough drops all day long

edit: ok it wore off, just lasted about half an hour or so[/quote]
That is to say, the menthol wore off. The active ingredient did not: when properly applied, it’s completely imperceptible after drying.

It is possible you applied too heavily to too small an area. That will cause the menthol effect to last too long also, such as you experienced.

294

[quote]W.H.B. wrote:
Bill,

Let’s say, hypothetically, someone was to make an injectable preperation from the hormone powder that accidentally precipitated out of the solvent of this product. Not that I or anyone would or should think of doing this.

Just for fun, how would the dosing recommendations change and what injection locations would be ideal? Thanks for pretenting with me.[/quote]

It would make for a problematic injectable because the oil solubility – though it hasn’t been tested but just based on the alcohol solubility, the melting point, and comparison with how these factors relate to oil solubility with other similar compounds – is almost undoubtedly much less than would be desired.

The half-life of the injectable would undoubtedly be short, being an acetate: so daily injection would be best.

While one would want to work up to it in the event side effects (probably just being excessively stimulatory) were problematic, I would guess that somewhere around 150-200 mg/day would probably be about right.

That might very well, with the poor oil solubility, be something like 15 or 20 mL per day of injectable required. That’s obviously not reasonably feasible.

Probably the only practical way would be as a suspension, but I don’t know how to make a good one. (Simply being a suspension isn’t enough to be a good product: particle size and particle size distribution are important.)

It doesn’t seem worth the trouble if the bioavailability improvement would be only say 2 to 1 which is all it may be.

Locations wouldn’t be important, I don’t think, as the injection sites have to be muscle, and blood flow is such that blood returns to the heart first from muscle before getting to any fat (except intramuscular fat, but that’s not a major cosmetic issue usually.)

295

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

I know quite a few including myself that very, very strongly suspect from personal experience that Androsol had a very, very significant pheromone-like effect on women.

Sadly, the chance of 11-T replicating that is essentially zero.

[/quote]

Damnit!! Why?! I was too young then!

…Must find Androsol…playmates…Mmmmm…

On a serious note, just wanted to say thanks a lot for taking time out to answer all these questions Bill (some of which have no doubt been rather frustrating!). I always enjoy hearing your advice and always learn something, sometimes completely unrelated to the topic at hand.

296

[quote]rurumon wrote:
The marketing of this product is not what eventually put this in my basket, it was watching Bill Roberts verbally flay people.

I have been following this thread and I believe my question has not been addressed, but I may be wrong.

You mentioned that cortisol levels are suppressed for up to 8 hours after your initial application. I lift up to 13 or 14 hours after I shower in the morning, am I missing the main benefit of having my cortisol levels down while I exercise?

[/quote]
You’re right, it hasn’t been addressed.

I don’t actually expect cortisol levels systemically will be suppressed. There could be a trace of such effect but it doesn’t seem it should occur in any major way, as the mechanism is to reduce local, in-the-tissue conversion of cortisone to cortisol, which is not a major contributor to systemic cortisol but is a major contributor within the tissue.

So I don’t think timing relative to the time of workout is important, except as may be convenient as showering may relate to the workout.

If the workout is that long after the first application, especially if you mean that it starts 13 or 14 hours later, then maybe having the second application a couple of hours before the workout would be the optimum, if for no other reason than getting the two applications approximately even spaced.

I didn’t mean to “flay” anyone – if there was that appearance in a couple of cases, hopefully it was reasonably civil at least. (Ten to fifteen years ago, I did have a problem with coming down on people with rhetoric that was just too hard on occasion and hoped I had overcome it, as it most surely was not the best way to be.)

297

[quote]CrewPierce wrote:
Sorry if this has already been asked but:

  1. will this show up on a drug test for sports and
  2. if it will what is the detection period?

Thanks![/quote]
It should not, as it’s not a banned substance, does not metabolize to a banned substance, and is naturally present in the body in pretty large amounts.

If it becomes banned, the detection period will be short because of it being necessary only for levels to drop back to the normal range, rather than all the way to very nearly zero as is necessary with substances not naturally present in the body.

298

Thanks, Aragorn! :slight_smile:

At least there is some benefit then to the occasional, or more than occasional, total digressions from topic, as I tend to do!

299

Maybe I missed this, but would this product be beneficial during a cut, or should one wait for the topical fat-loss product? Which is coming out soon??? I hope…

300

Also on a serious note, to the people that are skeptical of a transdermal delivery system, such a delivery system is ABSOLUTELY viable and efficient for a variety of compounds. It has scientific backing conceptually as well as evidentially. It can also lead to gains above oral availability as well, depending on the compound, because it bypasses 1st pass metabolism.

The trick is knowing which compounds are viable candidates for transdermal delivery, which is something only researchers and companies can do through research and experimentation. That’s why most supplement companies have given such a bad name to the completely valid transdermal delivery system–they either didn’t do their research, and/or didn’t do experimentation to justify it and relied instead on ideal concepts: “this should work” kind of science.

That’s why having a supp company actually attempt to do things properly leads to great products, like Biotests line.

/brown nosing

There are of course many things a small supp company cannot do in terms of validation and experimentation due to having an infinitely smaller total operating budget (and target audience/potential income) than pharma companies. This is one reason even good supp companies in general sometimes come up with things that sound good and “seem” to be validated, but suck. They just don’t have the budget to put 50 million dollars into R&D like Big Pharma does (deliberate understatement, btw).

But it’s nice to have a company you know will try its damnedest to do the most validation it can on it’s budget.

301

Ok, now a couple questions for Bill–

if I were to pick a single best use for this product, it would seem to be fat loss / spot reduction, based on it’s inhibitory effects towards cortisol in tissue. Is this true?

Now, I would assume that it would lead to an accelerated fat loss, any ballpark to that? I know this is asking perhaps too much in terms of specifics, but assuming diet is on track and bf is dropping before using 11-T, can you ballpark any kind of effect?

I know a very famous canadian strength coach who has a supplement stack for reducing/normalizing cortisol levels (I assume systemically). These apparently work very well w/ his clientele. would 11-T be able to be used for a similar purpose, given that chronic elevation of cortisol is present in peripheral tissues in someone with cortisol problems? Or would 11-T simply be a temporary fix, with the problems revisiting upon cessation of use?

Finally, if someone were to go to the dark side of training and look for benefits in terms of increased fat loss or spot reduction from 11-T (not lean mass gains) in tandem with black market items and HRX, would that be worthwhile over just black market items and HRX?

302

[quote]HG Thrower wrote:
Maybe I missed this, but would this product be beneficial during a cut, or should one wait for the topical fat-loss product? Which is coming out soon??? I hope…[/quote]
After being wrong repeatedly in estimating how long to release for a couple of other products, I’ve given up on doing that.

So without prediction, I can report on the topical fat loss that the formulation is finalized, the manufacturing plant has verified that they have no problems with the process, most of the materials are on hand for production quantities and the remainder are on order with no expected great delay.

So does that mean it’s going to be in the store in a matter of just a couple of months or whatever? I have no idea. Maybe not.

The topical fat loss product is almost entirely local in effect and the only thing I can understand, besides what degree of beneficial side effect there is from what reaches systemic circulation, is dermal topical fat loss. Not fat deep beneath the skin: its blood supply is independent from the skin.

So in other words, I’ve always had it and still say that such a product is best suited to someone lean enough already that reductgion of dermal fat is cosmetically significant. In contrast, with someone who is well overweight, dermal fat is a drop in tbe bucket, relatively speaking.

That said, for some reason women do much better than this theory would have it. Very substantial improvement can occur, more than makes sense from just dermal fat. That has been true also with some other products that rely on one or two of the actives in this product. (There has never, so far as I know, been anything nearly so comprehensive.) I don’t know why this is. I don’t know if it’s true for men. In my own case, personally I think I just get the dermal effect.

The topical spray will be more effective at the sprayed location than 11-T will, when the goal is being leaner there. The 11-T is more effective for fat loss if more systemic effect is desired and especially so if reduction of visceral fat is desired.