Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
PA and Par - 1-T Ethergels
- Thread starter b007
- Start date
Look,
if you want pills go with 1-AD
If you want transdermal go with ONE
Nobody knows how good the ethergels are going to be. My personal opinion (which may mean squat) is that the two mentioned above will still be the top products 6 months from now. I only base this off my customers experience with Sauce. I will still pick up molecular's product and try it out. It may surprise me, but like I said...in a few months those two mentioned earlier will still be your best choices.
if you want pills go with 1-AD
If you want transdermal go with ONE
Nobody knows how good the ethergels are going to be. My personal opinion (which may mean squat) is that the two mentioned above will still be the top products 6 months from now. I only base this off my customers experience with Sauce. I will still pick up molecular's product and try it out. It may surprise me, but like I said...in a few months those two mentioned earlier will still be your best choices.
Well, in regards to b007 and 1fast400, I will be doing a heavy cycle with the 1-T Ethergels and Boldione. I will keep you all up to date with my results as time progresses. Hopefully 1-T Ethergels will be the new top choice for 1-Test products. I know I don't doubt Bill and his capabilities of knocking all of our socks off with a new kick ass 1-Test product. He definitely knows what he's doing.
I hope it does well. I just hate to see companies or individuals who are automatically thrusted into the light of "they can't make a bad product". When a company or individual comes out with a formula that works well, it generally takes 2 bad products to bring him down. I'm not molecular's product is bad, I'm just saying we'll see the real world results in about 6 months.
I think the data from almost all of the ether studies is extremely suspect because of the methodology.
1) They chose to bypass the stomach and deliver straight into the small intestine.
2) They used 5 times as much sesame oil as the ethergels use.
3) They also infused the intestine with bile -- there is a study showing that bile is absolutely necessary for lymphatic uptake, when it was not present, there was almost no uptake.
4) The studies did not use a THP ether, they used a methoxycyclopentane ether.
5) Given # 1 -- Is there evidence to suggest that that the ether does not undergo acid hydrolysis in the stomach??
Then, even all of this aside, something Bill said makes me question the THP technology even more.
Lymphatic absorption is thought to be do to super-lipophilicity of the drug. Bill mentioned that the THP ether is only soluble at 50mg/ml -- this is NOT spectacularly lipophilic.
A decanoate ESTER, for example, can get 300mg/ml, an undecanoate ester is pretty much infinitely soluble -- it and the oil can pretty much dissolve in each other.
Yet, the undecanoate esters, which HAVE actually been tested in numerous studies, through true ORAL administration, are extremely mediocre (I have seen bioavailablity form less than 1% to as high as about 6%) -- this is not much different than the base androgen.
So, either 1) the Super-lipophilicity theory is wrong (and keep in mind it comes from the same researches who did the studies that people are getting there data from, and it IS the accepted theory), 2) the THP ether provides significantly less of an increase in lipophilicity than the methoxycyclopentane ether (the one from the studies), or 3) ethers, like esters, are pretty much worthless.
Either of the last two would take the 41% estimations from highly suspect to utterly absurd. And, the first one still requires a very good explanation as to why it would be superior to an ester (which sucks).
So, basically, I think Bill did pretty well with what the data gave him, but the data just does not give much at all when you get into real world usage.
1) They chose to bypass the stomach and deliver straight into the small intestine.
2) They used 5 times as much sesame oil as the ethergels use.
3) They also infused the intestine with bile -- there is a study showing that bile is absolutely necessary for lymphatic uptake, when it was not present, there was almost no uptake.
4) The studies did not use a THP ether, they used a methoxycyclopentane ether.
5) Given # 1 -- Is there evidence to suggest that that the ether does not undergo acid hydrolysis in the stomach??
Then, even all of this aside, something Bill said makes me question the THP technology even more.
Lymphatic absorption is thought to be do to super-lipophilicity of the drug. Bill mentioned that the THP ether is only soluble at 50mg/ml -- this is NOT spectacularly lipophilic.
A decanoate ESTER, for example, can get 300mg/ml, an undecanoate ester is pretty much infinitely soluble -- it and the oil can pretty much dissolve in each other.
Yet, the undecanoate esters, which HAVE actually been tested in numerous studies, through true ORAL administration, are extremely mediocre (I have seen bioavailablity form less than 1% to as high as about 6%) -- this is not much different than the base androgen.
So, either 1) the Super-lipophilicity theory is wrong (and keep in mind it comes from the same researches who did the studies that people are getting there data from, and it IS the accepted theory), 2) the THP ether provides significantly less of an increase in lipophilicity than the methoxycyclopentane ether (the one from the studies), or 3) ethers, like esters, are pretty much worthless.
Either of the last two would take the 41% estimations from highly suspect to utterly absurd. And, the first one still requires a very good explanation as to why it would be superior to an ester (which sucks).
So, basically, I think Bill did pretty well with what the data gave him, but the data just does not give much at all when you get into real world usage.
I believe super-lipophilicity was meant in terms of comparing the ether-modified hormone to its original base. I am not sure of the exact oil-solubility of 1-testosterone, but it has to be far less than the 50mg/ml+ with the THP ether. Yes, the studies referenced used a different ether. There is no reason to think the properties of THP are far removed however. There are many different esters and ethers, and their effect on oil-solubility is the key trait of them all here.
Par does raise some good points. The studies directly quoted bypass the stomach, probably to limit other factors from interfering with what they were looking at (specifically lymph transport, not overall oral bioavailability). I expect some hydrolysis will occur in the stomach, and do not believe we can state 41% absorption. In fact the inconsistencies with Andriol tell us well we can't put an exact figure on this type of thing at all. And the studies I have looked at reported both very poor and excellent responses to Andriol in terms of oral bioavailability. Often in the same people.
If you think about it, you can increase the absorption of many lipophilic drugs and hormones by dissolving them in an oily vehicle. Improving a hormone's oil-solubility and protecting it with an ether will only improve on this.
Clearly you will concede that this design is far better than stuffing some capsules full of powder? If you were reliant on either Andriol or a powdered testosterone capsule for androgen replacement, which would you choose? Andriol is widely produced, while powdered testosterone products are not, for a reason. I'm not saying this type of design is the best for an oral steroid, but with the constraints of making a legal supplement, I think it is our best option so far. I am confident the bioavailability of my oil-solubilized 1-T will be near or better than a well-designed dermal, with a lot more convienence.
- Bill Llewellyn
Par does raise some good points. The studies directly quoted bypass the stomach, probably to limit other factors from interfering with what they were looking at (specifically lymph transport, not overall oral bioavailability). I expect some hydrolysis will occur in the stomach, and do not believe we can state 41% absorption. In fact the inconsistencies with Andriol tell us well we can't put an exact figure on this type of thing at all. And the studies I have looked at reported both very poor and excellent responses to Andriol in terms of oral bioavailability. Often in the same people.
If you think about it, you can increase the absorption of many lipophilic drugs and hormones by dissolving them in an oily vehicle. Improving a hormone's oil-solubility and protecting it with an ether will only improve on this.
Clearly you will concede that this design is far better than stuffing some capsules full of powder? If you were reliant on either Andriol or a powdered testosterone capsule for androgen replacement, which would you choose? Andriol is widely produced, while powdered testosterone products are not, for a reason. I'm not saying this type of design is the best for an oral steroid, but with the constraints of making a legal supplement, I think it is our best option so far. I am confident the bioavailability of my oil-solubilized 1-T will be near or better than a well-designed dermal, with a lot more convienence.
- Bill Llewellyn
Last edited:
Oh, and response to your two other points:
Bile plays an important role in fat absorption. Thankfully, humans have bile.
- Bill Llewellyn
The studies looked at both more and less sesame oil as well as the 1% solution we are referring to, and concluded the effects of such variations were small. Using more oil is not practical for our purposes anyway.Par Deus said:
Bile plays an important role in fat absorption. Thankfully, humans have bile.
- Bill Llewellyn
Last edited:
naturally anabolic
New member
a true battle of the minds 
when will the ethergels be available to us, the oh so waiting and oh so willing public ?
when will the ethergels be available to us, the oh so waiting and oh so willing public ?
Similar threads
