Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
holy ghost
New member
Metabolic waste
Metabolic wastes or excretes are substances left over from respitory processes, which cannot be used by the organism (they are surplus or have lethal effect), and must therefore be excreted. This includes nitrogen compounds, water, CO2, phosphates, sulphates, indoles, medicals, food additives etc. Animals treat these compounds as excretes. Plants have chemical "machinery" which transforms some of them (primarily the nitrogen compounds) into useful substances, and it has been shown by Brian J. Ford that abscised leaves also carry wastes away from the parent plant. In this way, Ford argues that the shed leaf acts as an excretophore (= organ carrying away excretory products).
All the metabolic wastes are excreted in a form of water solutes through the excretory organs (nephridia, Malpighian tubules, kidneys), with the exception of CO2, which is excreted together with the water vapor throughout the lungs. The elimination of these compounds enables the chemical homeostasis of the organism.
[edit] Nitrogen wastes
The nitogen compounds through which the very toxic nitrogen is eliminated from the organism are ammonia, urea and uric acid. All of these substances are product from the protein metabolism.
Ammonia forms with the oxidation of amino groups (NH2), which are removed from the proteins when they convert into carbohydrates. It is a very toxic substance and only one nitrogen atom is removed with it. A lot of water is needed for the ammonia excretion. Thus, the marine organisms excrete ammonia directly in the water (aminothelic organisms), while the terrestrial (mainly amphibians and mammals) convert ammonia into urea, a process which occurs in the liver.
Urea is a less toxic compound than ammonia; two nitrogen atoms are eliminated through it and less water is needed for its excretion. Urea is a protein metabolism product at vertebrates and part of the invertebrates. These organisms are called ureothelic.
Uric acid is a protein metabolism product of terrestrial invertebrates, birds and terrestrial reptiles. This is the reason of which these animals are called uricothelic organisms. In humans and anthropoides, this acid is purine metabolism product. Uric acid is less toxic than ammonia or urea; it contains four nitrogen atoms and a small amount of water is needed for its excretion. Out of solute, it precipitates and forms crystals.
Water and carbon dioxide
These compounds form during the catabolism of carbohydrates and lipids, and in some other metabolic reactions of the amino acids.
Proviron, SHBG and Anabolic Steroids
Q: Does Proviron increase or reduce the anabolic effect of the steroids?
A: At one time it was a commonly held belief that Proviron was an anti-anabolic steroid – that it reduced the anabolic effect of other steroids. I believe Dan Duchaine’s Underground Steroid Handbook II was the first to popularize this theory. In it, Dan comments that Proviron itself has little anabolic value. Noting that it is also binds the androgen receptor with high affinity, he further concluded that it must act as a blocking agent, incapable of imparting a strong anabolic effect, and at the same time preventing other (more anabolic) steroids from binding the receptor. The conclusion seemed logical, but it turned out that Dan was only partly correct. Proviron indeed has little anabolic value by itself. Studies that were uncovered much later, however, would give a different explanation as to why. As it turned out, the poor anabolic potency of Proviron was caused by the drug being very rapidly metabolized to inactive metabolites in skeletal muscle tissue, not issues with receptor activation or transcription. While Proviron could bind the androgen receptor very avidly and impart a normal anabolic message to the cell, in this area of the body very little drug will actually make it to the receptor to do so. So, alas, Proviron is not the anti-anabolic agent we once thought it to be (but it is still a weak anabolic).
This leaves us with the other side of your question. Does it increase the anabolic potency of other steroids? The answer is that it may to some extent, but it depends on the context. The main trait we are looking at here is the high binding affinity Proviron has for SHBG (sex hormone binding globulin). SHBG is a protein that binds to and temporarily prevents anabolic/androgenic steroids from activating their receptors. The higher the percentage of unbound steroid in the blood, the more active the steroid is going to be in the body. Given that Proviron binds to SHBG so strongly, perhaps more strongly that any commercial steroid known, it may displace other steroids that also like to bind this protein. With Proviron beating the other molecules to the seat, so to speak, it is forcing a greater percentage to remain in a free (active) state. This is, of course, essentially the same thing Duchaine first proposed, but with a different target site and outcome.
Testosterone is a good drug for stacking Proviron with in this regard, as it likes to bind SHBG. Many other synthetic steroids, however, bind with SHBG in much lower percentages. So depending on the other steroid(s) taken, the impact of Proviron will range from “noticeable” to “very slight if any at all”.
Steroid Cycles with Minoxidil and RU58841
Q: I am going to make a cycle testo/win/deca and I would like to know if with minoxidil and RU58841 wouldn't have any problem. I also would take saw palmetto and not propecia for Deca?
A: By problems I am going to assume you are referring to both an increase in androgenicity (and hair loss potential), and a reduction in anabolic effect. These are the two most common questions in my experience when it comes to stacking ancillaries with the focus of reducing hair loss. The first thing I will tell you before even getting into the drugs is that if you are noticing active hair loss already, experimenting with anabolic/androgenic steroids is definitely not going to help the situation. While some strategies may slow the loss you’d otherwise notice from steroid therapy, in the end taking high (anabolic) levels of these drugs seems to almost invariably speed up the process of androgenic alopecia overall. If it is something you have, and you absolutely want to fight to keep your hair as long as possible, you should probably avoid getting into such stacks/anabolic use.
With that out of the way, I will address the specifics. First you asked about minoxidil, which is a topical vasodilator that helps the re-growth of hair. This drug doesn’t work as a systemic anti-androgen or reductase inhibitor, so it shouldn’t have a strong inhibiting value. I wouldn’t stress over its use if it were I. Next is RU58841. For those unfamiliar with this drug, it is a new topical anti-androgen currently being investigated for the treatment of acne and hair loss. It seems to offer a localized action without much systemic spillover. In other words, it may help block androgens from stimulating hair loss in your scalp when applied there, but isn’t supposed to block testosterone throughout your body. Of course there is always some concern there may be some low-level absorption in the bloodstream, as well as the general fact that this drug is still being experimented with and its side effects are not yet fully known. But outwardly, it doesn’t seem like it would be a major issue if you really needed it. Lastly, you asked about avoiding the 5-alpha reductase inhibitor Propecia. Indeed, this drug does increase the androgenicity of nandrolone, making it more prone to stimulate hair loss. When taken with testosterone, however, it will reduce its relative androgenicity. So its effect here depends on the context. You should know that saw palmetto is also believed to work by inhibiting 5-alpha reductase. While its exact level of effectiveness in humans may be up for debate, if it works as described it would have a similar effect as Propecia.
Drug Tests and Halodrol 50 and 6-OXO
Q: I recently bought the prohormone products halodrol 50 and 6-oxo. However, I play athletics at a division 1 university that randomly selects athletes all the time for steroid drug tests. I read on the label that they COULD result in a positive test. Is that true? What are the best supplements you guys would recommend I take without potentially failing a drug test and costing me my eligibility, maybe my scholarship? Is there anything I can take to raise my testosterone levels enough so I don't test positive.
A: The products you mentioned might indeed cause a positive result, so I would not recommend taking them if you are subject to drug testing. 6-OXO, for example, is a banned aromatase inhibitor. Most athletic bodies ban such drugs as a general classification. More specifically, however, detection methods for 6-OXO were published back in 2005 (Biomed Chromatogr 2005 Nov;19(9):689-95). So the testing labs have known about it for some time. And as could be expected, we’ve already seen some hi-profile suspensions with this agent. This includes U.S. Olympic wrestler Nathan Piasecki, who was suspended from competition for 2 years after failing a urine test for 6-OXO in early 2007. U.S. Track and Field athlete Scott Boothby was also suspended for 8 years after failing a urine test for both 6-XO and finasteride. Halodrol 50 is also structurally very similar to Oral Turinabol, a drug made famous by the former East German doping machine. Although I can’t recall any major athlete failing for its use as of late, it most certainly should shares some key metabolites in common with OT, and be a big failure risk as well.
As for what supplements are best to take, there is a fairly long list of products that might be used without causing a failure. Creatine is often looked at harshly by University athletics, but it is presently not an issue with testing. As you probably know, this supplement has been extensively studied by a number of Universities, and has proven to improve various measures of athletic performance. To this list I would also add BCAA (branched chain amino acids), arachidonic acid (my personal favorite of course), and arginine-based nitric oxide boosters. Beta alanine is also a very popular as of late, and seems to improve muscle endurance. Any one of these might help nudge your performance forward. As for boosting testosterone, you may be hard pressed to find an agent that can do this to very high levels, yet at the same time be non-steroidal in nature and lack the potential for testing positive. Even ATD, which was far less popularized in the media but still very potent, is on the testing radar these days. So your options are limited. It is of note that Longjack was recently tested, and proven to increase androgen levels in men. But the increases were within the normal range, not supraphysiological (in excess of normal), as I am sure you are trying to focus on. In all honesty, there are many non-banned supplement ingredients that have the potential to offer some benefit to you with regards to supporting your training and performance goals. Just remember, a positive can come from a banned substance, or steroidal or other banned components that may be in the supplement as a result of manufacturing contamination. Just be careful what you buy.
Blood Testing versus Saliva Testing
Q: Blood test vs saliva testing - which is best, or more accurate for estrogen, testosterone, and hormones? Why?
A: I think given the right lab and testing conditions, saliva testing can be an acceptable option if you just want a quick glance at what is happening with your free testosterone and estrogen levels. But you asked for what one is better, and in that regard blood testing is by far the better option, in spite of what many online saliva-test-kit-selling companies will tell you. For one, blood testing will offer you the most accuracy in the results. While some contend that saliva is the “most accurate”, I have failed to find any medical support for this conclusion. Instead, while there is support for the use of saliva testing, there seems to also be criticism of its overall reliability and accuracy. Many things ranging from medicines to the level of hydration can affect the accuracy of the result. Blood testing is regarded as the standard for true accuracy these days, and is also going to give you a lot more information than saliva testing. Not just in regard to other hormones and clinical markers of health not reported with a saliva test (usually you get a basic panel done with your hormones, liver enzymes, PSA level, blood cells, etc during blood testing), but also with regard to your active and bound fractions of testosterone. Saliva testing will not report the level of protein-bound or total testosterone, only the level of free testosterone. If you want my .02, although saliva testing offers the convenience of mail-it-in testing and results, I’d spend the extra time to go to the doctor and get a full and highly accurate blood panel done.
Metabolic wastes or excretes are substances left over from respitory processes, which cannot be used by the organism (they are surplus or have lethal effect), and must therefore be excreted. This includes nitrogen compounds, water, CO2, phosphates, sulphates, indoles, medicals, food additives etc. Animals treat these compounds as excretes. Plants have chemical "machinery" which transforms some of them (primarily the nitrogen compounds) into useful substances, and it has been shown by Brian J. Ford that abscised leaves also carry wastes away from the parent plant. In this way, Ford argues that the shed leaf acts as an excretophore (= organ carrying away excretory products).
All the metabolic wastes are excreted in a form of water solutes through the excretory organs (nephridia, Malpighian tubules, kidneys), with the exception of CO2, which is excreted together with the water vapor throughout the lungs. The elimination of these compounds enables the chemical homeostasis of the organism.
[edit] Nitrogen wastes
The nitogen compounds through which the very toxic nitrogen is eliminated from the organism are ammonia, urea and uric acid. All of these substances are product from the protein metabolism.
Ammonia forms with the oxidation of amino groups (NH2), which are removed from the proteins when they convert into carbohydrates. It is a very toxic substance and only one nitrogen atom is removed with it. A lot of water is needed for the ammonia excretion. Thus, the marine organisms excrete ammonia directly in the water (aminothelic organisms), while the terrestrial (mainly amphibians and mammals) convert ammonia into urea, a process which occurs in the liver.
Urea is a less toxic compound than ammonia; two nitrogen atoms are eliminated through it and less water is needed for its excretion. Urea is a protein metabolism product at vertebrates and part of the invertebrates. These organisms are called ureothelic.
Uric acid is a protein metabolism product of terrestrial invertebrates, birds and terrestrial reptiles. This is the reason of which these animals are called uricothelic organisms. In humans and anthropoides, this acid is purine metabolism product. Uric acid is less toxic than ammonia or urea; it contains four nitrogen atoms and a small amount of water is needed for its excretion. Out of solute, it precipitates and forms crystals.
Water and carbon dioxide
These compounds form during the catabolism of carbohydrates and lipids, and in some other metabolic reactions of the amino acids.
Proviron, SHBG and Anabolic Steroids
Q: Does Proviron increase or reduce the anabolic effect of the steroids?
A: At one time it was a commonly held belief that Proviron was an anti-anabolic steroid – that it reduced the anabolic effect of other steroids. I believe Dan Duchaine’s Underground Steroid Handbook II was the first to popularize this theory. In it, Dan comments that Proviron itself has little anabolic value. Noting that it is also binds the androgen receptor with high affinity, he further concluded that it must act as a blocking agent, incapable of imparting a strong anabolic effect, and at the same time preventing other (more anabolic) steroids from binding the receptor. The conclusion seemed logical, but it turned out that Dan was only partly correct. Proviron indeed has little anabolic value by itself. Studies that were uncovered much later, however, would give a different explanation as to why. As it turned out, the poor anabolic potency of Proviron was caused by the drug being very rapidly metabolized to inactive metabolites in skeletal muscle tissue, not issues with receptor activation or transcription. While Proviron could bind the androgen receptor very avidly and impart a normal anabolic message to the cell, in this area of the body very little drug will actually make it to the receptor to do so. So, alas, Proviron is not the anti-anabolic agent we once thought it to be (but it is still a weak anabolic).
This leaves us with the other side of your question. Does it increase the anabolic potency of other steroids? The answer is that it may to some extent, but it depends on the context. The main trait we are looking at here is the high binding affinity Proviron has for SHBG (sex hormone binding globulin). SHBG is a protein that binds to and temporarily prevents anabolic/androgenic steroids from activating their receptors. The higher the percentage of unbound steroid in the blood, the more active the steroid is going to be in the body. Given that Proviron binds to SHBG so strongly, perhaps more strongly that any commercial steroid known, it may displace other steroids that also like to bind this protein. With Proviron beating the other molecules to the seat, so to speak, it is forcing a greater percentage to remain in a free (active) state. This is, of course, essentially the same thing Duchaine first proposed, but with a different target site and outcome.
Testosterone is a good drug for stacking Proviron with in this regard, as it likes to bind SHBG. Many other synthetic steroids, however, bind with SHBG in much lower percentages. So depending on the other steroid(s) taken, the impact of Proviron will range from “noticeable” to “very slight if any at all”.
Steroid Cycles with Minoxidil and RU58841
Q: I am going to make a cycle testo/win/deca and I would like to know if with minoxidil and RU58841 wouldn't have any problem. I also would take saw palmetto and not propecia for Deca?
A: By problems I am going to assume you are referring to both an increase in androgenicity (and hair loss potential), and a reduction in anabolic effect. These are the two most common questions in my experience when it comes to stacking ancillaries with the focus of reducing hair loss. The first thing I will tell you before even getting into the drugs is that if you are noticing active hair loss already, experimenting with anabolic/androgenic steroids is definitely not going to help the situation. While some strategies may slow the loss you’d otherwise notice from steroid therapy, in the end taking high (anabolic) levels of these drugs seems to almost invariably speed up the process of androgenic alopecia overall. If it is something you have, and you absolutely want to fight to keep your hair as long as possible, you should probably avoid getting into such stacks/anabolic use.
With that out of the way, I will address the specifics. First you asked about minoxidil, which is a topical vasodilator that helps the re-growth of hair. This drug doesn’t work as a systemic anti-androgen or reductase inhibitor, so it shouldn’t have a strong inhibiting value. I wouldn’t stress over its use if it were I. Next is RU58841. For those unfamiliar with this drug, it is a new topical anti-androgen currently being investigated for the treatment of acne and hair loss. It seems to offer a localized action without much systemic spillover. In other words, it may help block androgens from stimulating hair loss in your scalp when applied there, but isn’t supposed to block testosterone throughout your body. Of course there is always some concern there may be some low-level absorption in the bloodstream, as well as the general fact that this drug is still being experimented with and its side effects are not yet fully known. But outwardly, it doesn’t seem like it would be a major issue if you really needed it. Lastly, you asked about avoiding the 5-alpha reductase inhibitor Propecia. Indeed, this drug does increase the androgenicity of nandrolone, making it more prone to stimulate hair loss. When taken with testosterone, however, it will reduce its relative androgenicity. So its effect here depends on the context. You should know that saw palmetto is also believed to work by inhibiting 5-alpha reductase. While its exact level of effectiveness in humans may be up for debate, if it works as described it would have a similar effect as Propecia.
Drug Tests and Halodrol 50 and 6-OXO
Q: I recently bought the prohormone products halodrol 50 and 6-oxo. However, I play athletics at a division 1 university that randomly selects athletes all the time for steroid drug tests. I read on the label that they COULD result in a positive test. Is that true? What are the best supplements you guys would recommend I take without potentially failing a drug test and costing me my eligibility, maybe my scholarship? Is there anything I can take to raise my testosterone levels enough so I don't test positive.
A: The products you mentioned might indeed cause a positive result, so I would not recommend taking them if you are subject to drug testing. 6-OXO, for example, is a banned aromatase inhibitor. Most athletic bodies ban such drugs as a general classification. More specifically, however, detection methods for 6-OXO were published back in 2005 (Biomed Chromatogr 2005 Nov;19(9):689-95). So the testing labs have known about it for some time. And as could be expected, we’ve already seen some hi-profile suspensions with this agent. This includes U.S. Olympic wrestler Nathan Piasecki, who was suspended from competition for 2 years after failing a urine test for 6-OXO in early 2007. U.S. Track and Field athlete Scott Boothby was also suspended for 8 years after failing a urine test for both 6-XO and finasteride. Halodrol 50 is also structurally very similar to Oral Turinabol, a drug made famous by the former East German doping machine. Although I can’t recall any major athlete failing for its use as of late, it most certainly should shares some key metabolites in common with OT, and be a big failure risk as well.
As for what supplements are best to take, there is a fairly long list of products that might be used without causing a failure. Creatine is often looked at harshly by University athletics, but it is presently not an issue with testing. As you probably know, this supplement has been extensively studied by a number of Universities, and has proven to improve various measures of athletic performance. To this list I would also add BCAA (branched chain amino acids), arachidonic acid (my personal favorite of course), and arginine-based nitric oxide boosters. Beta alanine is also a very popular as of late, and seems to improve muscle endurance. Any one of these might help nudge your performance forward. As for boosting testosterone, you may be hard pressed to find an agent that can do this to very high levels, yet at the same time be non-steroidal in nature and lack the potential for testing positive. Even ATD, which was far less popularized in the media but still very potent, is on the testing radar these days. So your options are limited. It is of note that Longjack was recently tested, and proven to increase androgen levels in men. But the increases were within the normal range, not supraphysiological (in excess of normal), as I am sure you are trying to focus on. In all honesty, there are many non-banned supplement ingredients that have the potential to offer some benefit to you with regards to supporting your training and performance goals. Just remember, a positive can come from a banned substance, or steroidal or other banned components that may be in the supplement as a result of manufacturing contamination. Just be careful what you buy.
Blood Testing versus Saliva Testing
Q: Blood test vs saliva testing - which is best, or more accurate for estrogen, testosterone, and hormones? Why?
A: I think given the right lab and testing conditions, saliva testing can be an acceptable option if you just want a quick glance at what is happening with your free testosterone and estrogen levels. But you asked for what one is better, and in that regard blood testing is by far the better option, in spite of what many online saliva-test-kit-selling companies will tell you. For one, blood testing will offer you the most accuracy in the results. While some contend that saliva is the “most accurate”, I have failed to find any medical support for this conclusion. Instead, while there is support for the use of saliva testing, there seems to also be criticism of its overall reliability and accuracy. Many things ranging from medicines to the level of hydration can affect the accuracy of the result. Blood testing is regarded as the standard for true accuracy these days, and is also going to give you a lot more information than saliva testing. Not just in regard to other hormones and clinical markers of health not reported with a saliva test (usually you get a basic panel done with your hormones, liver enzymes, PSA level, blood cells, etc during blood testing), but also with regard to your active and bound fractions of testosterone. Saliva testing will not report the level of protein-bound or total testosterone, only the level of free testosterone. If you want my .02, although saliva testing offers the convenience of mail-it-in testing and results, I’d spend the extra time to go to the doctor and get a full and highly accurate blood panel done.
