Damnit Pro!!! isn't that what I just vaguely insinuated with my tacitly crypic post!?!?

I simply cannot work with this caliber of posters!!!

Im trying to be "The People's" Mod.

yeah...I know, overpriced, overhyped, etc...etc......

I have had good gains with this company over some others, and I prefer sticking with oral delivery in terms of the PH's as well....THe prods that I mentioned are the ones I like, so we are talking of about 4 prods in their arsenal that have my attention. In other words, not trying to be a VPX pimp or anything....

I agree in terms of advertising, prices, and certain claims...but I do like the products for their results (some of the names have gotta go! Paradeca, Monstertest, clenbutrx, LOL)

Androgen Addendum
by Loki

'Methyldienolone'


The chemically-structured 'little cousin' of Methyltrienolone, one of the most potent steroids ever developed, 'MethylDienolone,' which also goes by the names 'Methyldien' & it's true, structural designation 17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyestra-4,9(10)dien-3-one, is one of the newest & most misunderstood 17-alpha-alkylated (i.e. 'methylated') androgens to have recently emerged in the PH/AAS market as of late.

Little true data exists concerning the use of methyldienolone in humans, and-- at the moment I am writing this article-- user feedback concerning the compound simply does not exist to any significant degree. To my knowledge, at present, I am one of only a half-dozen individuals in the United States to have used methyldienolone in a cycle. Thus, for the purposes of this piece, I will be relying more on my own individual experiences/observations with the compound, rather than lab assays & its presumed anabolic:androgenic activity ratio.

Methyldienolone, for all extents & purposes, can best be thought of as a highly orally bioavailable, non-aromatizing 19-Nortestosterone derivative that boasts a very anabolic and moderately androgenic profile. Just to give you an idea, methyldienolone is only a single double-bond away from the 'ubersteroid' 17a-Methyl-17b-Hydroxyestra-4,9,11-Trien-3-one, one of the most anabolic (as well as hepatotoxic) steroids known to man.

In my own limited experience with the compound, methyldienolone is a rather singular androgen in its utter absence of effects on mood, energy levels, and SNS activity. While it is moderately androgenic (and thus has the penchant to produce any/all of the typical androgenic sides associated with PH/AAS use [acne, hair loss, prostate hypertrophy, et. al.]), methyldienolone does not appear to have any significant effect on energy levels, appetite, aggression/complacency, or cognitive capacity. Furthermore, given its close structural similarities to methyltrienolone (as well as its tremendous potency), methyldienolone is probably also the most hepatotoxic commercially-available 17aa-androgen currently. As with all 17aa-androgens, those with prior liver conditions &/or concerns in this regard should make sure they exercise the upmost caution if they choose to pursue methyldienolone for personal use.

In terms of its anabolic capabilities, methyldienolone is, without doubt, the most potent (on a mg/mg basis), widely-available 17aa-androgen that one can currently obtain 'legally' (Author's note: Although it is important to note that the actual 'legality' of this class of compounds [re: 17aa-androgens] in compliance with the terms of DSHEA should be considered 'highly questionable' at best). As a comparison, 1mg of methyldienolone seems to be equivalent, anabolically, to ~8-12mg of 17aa-1-Testosterone (also known as Methyl-1-Test). Impressive (and often rapid) LBM gains (even in the face of a caloric deficit), marginal strength increases, and noticeable aesthetic improvements in vascularity, muscle hardness & fullness, and leanness are all facets to methyldienolone use that I have witnessed first-hand.

As a stand-alone androgen, methyldienolone should be used @ 1-3mg/day. Heavily experienced &/or much larger lifters might do better with 4-5mg/day, and I do not feel that there is any need whatsoever to exceed the 5mg/day dose-range. 750mcg-1000mcg (1mg) of methyldienolone can also be used in stacks with other androgens as well, although it is NOT recommended the use of methyldienolone in conjuction with aromatizing androgens such as 4-androstenediol (4AD) due to the potential incidence of progesterone-induced side-effects, which can negatively affect mood, skin appearance, insulin sensitivity, and vascularity, among other potentially-detrimental occurences/conditions.

Huh?? Why what ever do you mean?

Also, another issue is that the actual, tested lab assays for 17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyestra-4,9(10)dien-3-one seem to just be, well, incorrect-- it's far more anabolic in humans than the levator ani assays on it have indicated. I mean, it scores a:

1. 200 - 2. 300 - 3. 1000 (vs. 17a-MT Oral-- the 'standard')[1.V.P/2. S.V./3. L.A.]

which puts it roughly about 110% the potency of 17a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-5a-androst-1-en-3-one (Methyl-1-Test). But-- just between 'you and me' -- well...



It's a LITTLE stronger than even that...

You Gotta check out Cy wilsons little comentary on Methyldienolone in this weeks T-mag. What a long winded bunch of crap. Why does he continue to make himself look like such an ass?Mabey somebody smarter than me can post a link.

Cy Wilson's column

Wow!
Hey, Cy-Borg, what's up with this Methyldienolone stuff? [17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyestra-4, 9(10)dien-3-one] It's supposed to be 1.1 times as anabolic as Methyl-1-Testosterone (according to those who sell it) while being only 15% as androgenic. What do you think?

A: What do I think? Well, I think the people selling it and the people in the community in general need to put down their copy of Vida’s book and realize some facts. The collections such as Vida’s which have bioassays used to measure anabolic/androgenic activity in rats, are at the very best inaccurate when applying the data to the same species.

Extrapolating from one species to another (in this case, a rat to a human) is a very big "no no" in any scientist's book. It’s just not something you do. When scientists see such things occurring in the supplement industry, it’s no wonder they don’t take most of the community seriously. Animals in general are merely research tools used as a rough model for study. Data obtained from such studies isn’t meant for direct extrapolation across species, and this case, to humans.
...

What a moron. Animal studies are done because they are useless. Scientists just get wood at the thought of torturing animals for the hell of it. Mary had a little lamb... and that made me cry...

His "argument" basically is a "chewbacca offense" against a product that kicks the crap out of his line.

yadda yadda
"So, going back to the methyldienolone, it may be an effective product or it may not be, but stating that it’s so much more or less potent than another androgen according to bioassays isn’t accurate. In these cases, it’s basically up to what the "real world" results reveal.

The only problem with that is the psychological influence a person can experience when they’re being told a compound is so many more times potent than a compound they’ve already used. When you’re relying on subjective data, the placebo effect can play a significant role. This isn’t to say an androgen won’t be effective, but it could mean the difference between a person saying he made greater gains as compared to another product or not.

People all too often forget that many variables need to be taken into account, whether it be training, diet, compliance in terms of taking the compound regularly, etc., and while people always claim their diet and training are the same irrespective of whether they’re using androgens or not, this usually isn’t the case.

In other words, if you tell a person you have this super potent compound that’s 300% more potent than a compound he's already used and had success with, chances are he's going to make sure everything in his program is in line to maximize gains. On the flip side, you’ll also have guys who believe a compound is so powerful that they tend to let their diets go to crap as they rationalize that the compound will make up for it. (1-5)

In summary, buyer beware. Perhaps more importantly, be educated.

That’ll teach you to ask me a question like that!"

Hey Pro, how many % more than placebo is your 12lb gain from MD?

Another gem is that he claims to know that M1T has "about one-fourth the anabolic potency of Testosterone propionate and about half the androgenic activity." - why did I waste my time looking at this drivel?

Oh Cy...you warm my heart on this dreary day...

Yes but he also undermines just about every one of his good contentions with hs belligerent method of question answering, not to mention the fact that a.) if we don't go by lab assays, your screwed because there's really nothing else to go on in the realm of designer steroids, because you certainly can't just 'trial-and-error' with individuals, b.) methyldienolone seems to be an odd outlier (normally steroids data is more consistent than Mr. Wilson is asserting it is...) in the rankings-dept., because most other compounds can be linked/contrasteid quite effectively.

I mean, if you think about it, if this data was so unreliable, why do you think BK would be banking on it so heavily. There are literally hundreds of designer steroids that can be synthesized over in Asia and shipped here. But look at the ones that have emerged as of late-- 17aa-1-Test, and now Methyldienolone (which is better), and pretty soon 7a-4OHN, which also has the looks of a goood androgen...