Adamantyl Ester Steroids: The Ultimate Androgen?
-
@alfredoolivas Its structure is similar to Brassinosteroids. Those are the active ingredients in "pine pollen" supplements.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brassinosteroid
-
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31381816/
Derivatives of brassinosteroids are known to be anti-estrogenic (studied for breast cancer)
In time there is life but no knowledge; outside time there is knowledge but no life
-
@jamezb46
Well, 5a hydroxy laxogenin and laxogenin are brassinosteroids, so that makes them even more interesting with androgenic, and potential anti-estrogenic effects. They're basically plant anabolic steroids, leading to plant growth . -
"Brassinosteroids are plant-derived polyhydroxylated derivatives of 5a-cholestane, structurally similar to cholesterol-derived animal steroid hormones and insect ecdysteroids, with no known function in mammals. 28-Homobrassinolide (HB), a steroidal lactone with potent plant growth-promoting property, stimulated protein synthesis and inhibited protein degradation in L6 rat skeletal muscle cells..."
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3177571/This brassinosteroid increases steroidogenic enzymes and testosterone.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23012313/ -
5a hydroxy laxogenin and related compounds might have anti cancer effects.
Further corroborating its non-estrogenicity/anti-estrogenic effects.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0968089612001198
I found this Dutch company that sells 5a hydroxy laxogenin powder. 5g just 15€.
They also carry PRL-5-53, which I had on my "maybe" list for a quite a while.
https://dutchsarms.nl/de/products/laxogenin-poeder -
@alfredoolivas and @jamezb46: Thanks for confirming that OP's premise re "torching the liver" isn't a compelling motivation for what he suggests--separate from the other relevant critiques of the OP's conjecture and going down rabbit holes to chase 10-year-old conjectures by Haidut.
I second what @alfredoolivas wrote advocating for people bringing more of their own thinking to the forum, their own evidence, and their own experiences, rather than languishing in an echo-chamber around a single guru. You and others on this thread are exemplary contributors of new ideas and well-argued skepticism. We should indeed be challenging each other's thinking to learn and improve, while encouraging each other to continue posting original conjectures. And quickly tearing down bad ones re-focuses attention on generating and evaluating new ones. I like what happened in this thread and wish OP would like it, too--collaborative jousting in a competitive idea space.
@Mauritio : Duly noted that there's a mechanism and some evidence that oral androsterone is likely beneficial for the liver.
-
@Mauritio said:
What do you guys think of laxogenin?
Im just going to try it out. Some people notice nothing , some say it's great.
I found this Dutch company that sells 5a hydroxy laxogenin powder. 5g just 15€.
What dose are you going to trial? Intuitively I would assume it to require at least +-1g pd as the linked study showed effects starting at 25-50µg/mL in vitro. I'm curious about what dose-finding calculations you're applying.
-
@CrumblingCookie good question. The 50ug/ml would come down to at least 1.5g per day. But we cannot simply convert that to humans since we know nothing about the pharmacokinetics of this compound.
So I'll probably start with something like 50mg or even less.
There was a gentleman on a German bodybuilding forum who I think took 3x30 mg per day and had great results. -
@jamezb46 @Mauritio thank you for sharing. It's fascinating, because they don't exert these anabolic and anti-estrogenic effects via a genomic pathway right? ie, they don't bind to and activate the androgenic receptor or bind to the estrogen receptor?
Very interesting to think about the non-genomic effects of why it has these effects.
-
Heres a rather disappointing rat study using 5a hydroxy laxogenin.
It showed no androgenic or anabolic effect. It was even catabolic at some doses.
The androgen receptor density was increased .Quite odd ...the authors think the dosage might be too low or the fast degradation into inactive metabolites might play a role.
Maybe the metabolism is different in humans. We'll see as I've already ordered it.https://analyticalsciencejournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/dta.3881
