Question about ultradrol and pct

[Jonny784]

Hey guys. I'm Jethro's brother and the foolish one in question considering the Ultradrol cycle. Let me share a few things I've learned about it. First off, it's not Superdrol. There is some basis for comparison, since they're both 17 Alpha Methyl Substituted to reduce liver metabolism. However, they interact with the androgen receptor and the body differently. In general. the 17 methyl substitution is essential for an oral androgen to retain activity after first pass metabolism. The difficulty in metabolizing the compound is both its benefit and its curse since the liver must work extra hard to process it. This is the theory anyway as to why it should be hepatoxic to a certain degree and might have side effects similar to Superdrol.

However, based on reading dozens of personal logs, this is not necessarily the case. I cannot say with certainty that these logs are 100% accurate since Ultradrol has not had the time and exposure necessary to reveal the nuances of its activity. However, every Ultradrol logger reported minimal sides compared to other AAS they had taken in the past. Some loggers even compared it to Superdrol saying that the sides were much less significant on Ultradrol. I admit though that this is just subjective opinion and should be taken with a grain of salt (I hope that idiom translates. The US probably took it from the UK anyway.) Then some blood work started to be published. This blood work showed very minimal increases in AST (Aspartate transaminase) and ALT (Alanine transaminase) which is highly distinct from the increased liver levels reported with Superdrol. Again several hundred more published tests are needed before it can be legitimately considered safer.

Here are two blood panels from UD cycles. The first is the before and after cycle condensed in one image. The second and third are both from after the UD cycle. Of course with any AAS the testosterone levels will naturally drop in response to hormonal overstimulation of the hypothalamus and pituitary and the subsequent downregulation of GnRH, LH, and then endogenous Testosterone.


Anyway, that being said, the case can be made that Ultradrol is more efficacious than Superdrol in producing the desired effect without the same risk of hepatoxicity or the serious side effects. However, this is as yet to be determined as more bodybuilders need to test this compound. I am willing to give it a try based on what I have read. I have no aversion to other compounds such as tren, other than problems with access, but I have Ultradrol in my possession and am willing to try it out. I have confidence in the manufacturing process of the UD and the quality of each batch produced since the company was dedicated enough to performing Mass Spectroscopy on each and every produced batch to assess purity. I will remain vigilant in monitoring my health, and will undergo blood tests available free at my school. I take this seriously and will monitor my health status carefully.

 

[Jamie555]

Hmm..ok I get that (and thank you) - but still....using several weeks of aggressive PCT for what is often a short cycle in the first place seems odd to me. Especially when the PCT lasts longer than the initial cycle (which i've seen several times). I struggle to see superdrol (or related compounds) shutting people down more than large doses of test for instance...

I disagree with some points here (although I generally agree with the unquoted part of your post).

I do believe in long androgen PCT, usually as long as the cycle, and sometimes longer. To me the concept of a cycle involves equal consideration to the on as well as the off time. Long duration, low dose clomid works very well IME.

I also believe that SD can shut some people down very hard, moreso than test. Quite what the reason/mechanism for that, I do not know, but I have encountered far too many anecdotes of hard shut down and hard sides from it. Small doses of designer steroids can have potent effects on endocrine disruption, for the reasons you eluded to wrt structural activity.

J

 

[Jonny784]

All that being said, I'm still curious about the OP's original question. What is the point of taking a SERM after a cycle of an AAS that does not aromatize? The way I see it, a nonaromatizable compound will first decrease one's natural testosterone production, of course. Testosterone is the precursor for Estradiol and the other estrogens, so estrogen levels will decrease as well. After the cycle ends, the pituitary and the hypothalamus respond positively to low levels of both testosterone and estrogen and will produce more GnRH and LH respectively. It is typically said that the main point of SERMs is to block the hypothalamus and pituitary from the negative feedback of estrogen. But if estrogen is already low, even lower than it would be naturally, is it really necessary to take a SERM? I understand that it would still be mildly beneficial since there is still some endogenous estrogen, but is it worth the side effects the SERM can produce? I've even heard the SERMs are carcinogenic.

Anyway, alternative mechanisms of action I've heard are that Nolva and Clomid can actually directly stimulate the Hypothalamus and Pituitary to release their hormones through an unknown mechanism. Hackskii also mentioned that Clomid can potentially increase the sensitivity of the pituitary to GnRH without the influence of estrogen. Has anyone else heard of any other possibilities?

In general, it seems to me that the use of SERMs with nonaromatizable compounds is based mostly on tradition. However, I am not certain. Tradition is often there for a reason. I was just wondering if anyone could provide some insight on SERMs and nonaromatizables, so I asked my brother to post this thread. Thanks to Jethro52185 for agreeing to help his kid brother.

 

[Jamie555]

Hey guys....

However, based on reading dozens of personal logs, this is not necessarily the case. I cannot say with certainty that these logs are 100% accurate since Ultradrol has not had the time and exposure necessary to reveal the nuances of its activity. However, every Ultradrol logger reported minimal sides compared to other AAS they had taken in the past. Some loggers even compared it to Superdrol saying that the sides were much less significant on Ultradrol. I admit though that this is just subjective opinion and should be taken with a grain of salt (I hope that idiom translates. The US probably took it from the UK anyway.) Then some blood work started to be published. This blood work showed very minimal increases in AST (Aspartate transaminase) and ALT (Alanine transaminase) which is highly distinct from the increased liver levels reported with Superdrol. Again several hundred more published tests are needed before it can be legitimately considered safer.

Here are two blood panels from UD cycles. The first is the before and after cycle condensed in one image. The second and third are both from after the UD cycle. Of course with any AAS the testosterone levels will naturally drop in response to hormonal overstimulation of the hypothalamus and pituitary and the subsequent downregulation of GnRH, LH, and then endogenous Testosterone.
View attachment 7315View attachment 7316View attachment 7317

Anyway, that being said, the case can be made that Ultradrol is more efficacious than Superdrol in producing the desired effect without the same risk of hepatoxicity or the serious side effects. However, this is as yet to be determined as more bodybuilders need to test this compound. I am willing to give it a try based on what I have read. I have no aversion to other compounds such as tren, other than problems with access, but I have Ultradrol in my possession and am willing to try it out. I have confidence in the manufacturing process of the UD and the quality of each batch produced since the company was dedicate to performing Mass Spectroscopy on each and every produced batch to assess purity. I will remain vigilant in monitoring my health, and will undergo blood tests available free at my school. I take this seriously and will monitor my health status carefully.

Welcome. Glad you have come here, as it is always easier talking to the people who are looking at playing, rather than through an intermediate.

I agree that there are a number of personal logs on the internet. One needs to be a bit careful with internet logs, due to the number of fake logs put out by suppliers. This is a far bigger bias than subjectivity of users IME. This also goes for published blood works. I have known companies in the US to fake all manner of test eg CoA, blood test results, etc.

The panels that you attached are interesting. Thanks.

Hepatoxicity is one factor. Trashing of HDL/LDL ratio is not a good thing, and I would get a lipids panel with breakdown too. Although there are hypotheses on the irrelevance of androgen mediated HDL/LDL change, there is scant evidence, especially when compared to the evidential mass in support of the association of HDL/LDL on CHD/CV pathologies.

Independent mass spec on every batch produced. Sounds good. What company are they?

All the best with your trial. It would be great if you could keep a log here of your findings.

Cheers,
J

 

[Jonny784]

Thank you Joshua for your warm welcome. I certainly appreciate your wisdom on the subject and will definitely take your advice. I am very skeptical about what I read, and I am generally not satisfied until I've seen it myself first hand. So I will continue to be very suspicious about what I read and choose to believe.

Therefore, I'll get my own blood work tested. I'm not certain of my school's policy with how frequently I can get it checked at no cost, but I will find out. My main concern is liver issues. I am still in my twenties and feel my HDL/LDL can recover. At my age, only several years of exposure to LDL should produce noticeable atherosclerotic plaques. I'll still get it checked though to see UD's effect.

The name of the company is called Antaeus Labs. I can't post links yet with less than 10 posts, but google Antaeus Labs and go to their website. The link to their Mass Spec results blog is in the top right.

And I'll do my best to update a log on here with my progress. I plan to begin this next Sunday. I've detailed my diet and exercise program on a separate post.

Thanks,
Jon

 

[henryv]

There are a couple of OTC pct supps that i've seen working on people extremely well...Triazole and Esto Surpress for starters. And before I get flamed for not suggesting nolva....have a look at the label for Esto Supress.

I've looked at the label for Esto Suppress. I've also looked at the labels of the same company's other products, Tren Bomb, and SD Matrix. Neither of the compounds listed on those two products could possibly exist without defying the laws of chemistry, so I have no reason to believe the label of Esto Suppress accurately describes its contents, which - if it did - would be illegal for sale in this country.

As for superdol (methasteron) I know of several people who have developed (including myself) progesterone induced gyno from it's use which should be highly unlikely if you look at the chemical structure, also it is one of the single strongest compounds I have ever used!

Do you have any evidence that the gyno was progesterone-induced.

Synonyms:

Methyl stenbolone, methyl sten, 17a-methyl-stenbolone, m-sten, ultradrol

History:

In 1966, researchers at Searle Laboratories set about methodically testing the myotrophic (anabolic) and androgenic effects of a series of A-ring modified androstane derivatives [2]. The compounds they explored reads like a who's who of designer steroids.
Methyl-1-testosterone (M1T), desoxymethyltestosterone (phera), 17a-methyl-1-androstenediol (Alpha One), and a variety of other 1- and 2-dehydro compounds were explored for activity.

The researchers proudly announced that "Even the least active compound in Table 6 possessed a higher relative myotrophic potency than previously has been obtained with several clinically interesting compounds which have been studied under identical conditions, i.e. oxymetholone, oxandrolone, stanozolol, and methandrostenolone." (anadrol, anavar, winstrol, and dianabol).

[2]

Key:
IIe = methyltestosterone
IIa = methyl-1-testosterone
IVd = methyl stenbolone
IIf = alpha one (17a-methyl-1-androstenediol)
IIIa = phera (desoxymethyltestosterone)

As you can see from the table above, methyl sten has somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4 the anabolic activity of methyl-1-testosterone, and a similar A:A ratio (by oral administration to castrated rats).

It can also be found in an earlier paper by two of the same authors [3], however at the time it was only studied for activity by intramuscular injection, so the figures it quotes are irrelevant for our purposes. It does, however, give a recipe for producing the compound from superdrol.

Methylsten™ is listed as one of the ingredients in a proprietary blend in a now-discontinued product called Mass Tabs by IDS, though testing has shown that this product (at least the later, bottled batches) in fact contained superdrol [4][5].

Structure and Function:

Structurally resembling the bastard child of M1T and superdrol, methyl sten is a DHT-derivative that is dimethylated at C-2 and C-17 (like superdrol) and has a 1-ene (like methyl-1-test).

It's important to note that while methyl stenbolone is dimethylated at C-2 and C-17 like superdrol, the spatial configuration is different due to the presence of a delta-1 double bond (the C-2 methyl group is therefore planar). This means that methyl sten is a 2,17a-dimethyl rather than a 2a,17a-dimethyl compound.

A more recent (2009) paper on the effects of structural modifications to steroids concluded that the addition of a 2-methyl function to a 1-ene steroid had little effect on the relative potency of the compound [6].

[6]

You'll note however that this is view is taken virtually word for word from the 1961 study that only examined the activity of the compounds by IM injection and is therefore questionable when discussing their oral activity.

[3]

Metabolism:

Since it's DHT-derived, aromatisation is impossible. 5a-reduction is also impossible, since it's already 5a-reduced. The 17a-methyl group greatly increases the bioavailability of the compound by oral administration.

The combination of delta 1-dehydrogenation and 2-methylation is likely to make the A-ring very resistant to metabolism. 3z-,16z-, and 18-hydroxylated metabolites are likely to be the only ones detectable after administration, other than the unchanged compound [7][8].

Effects:

It is a strong oral steroid in the vein of pheraplex, superdrol, and M1T. It should be an excellent bulking compound at an appropriate dosage.

Side Effects:

It is inevitable that the compound will display some degree of hepatotoxicity. This is discussed in some detail on the manufacturer's blog, which I would recommend reading [9].
The standard list of steroidal side-effects listed in the other profiles will also apply to this compound.

Recommended Dosages and Cycle Durations:

These will be formed by the weight of public opinion after enough logs have been recorded. The only confirmed product on the market to contain this compound comes in 4mg caps and recommends dosing at two caps per day, and not to exceed three caps per day. It is likely in my opinion that the "standard dosing" will end up significantly higher (20mg+).
Given that the level of liver toxicity is at this stage unknown, cycles should be kept to four weeks or less, as is usual with a strong methyl such as superdrol or M1T.

Legality:

Methyl sten is not specifically legislated against in either the USA or the UK at the time of writing. Those who are subjected to testing for performance enhancing drugs should avoid this and all other prohormones/designer steroids.


References
[1] Vida J.: Androgens and Anabolic Agents. Academic Press, New York (1969) p. 212.
[2] Acta Endocrinol 1966 53 627-634 & 635-643
[3] J. Org. Chem., 1962, 27 (1), pp 248–253
[4] test results IDS mass tabs - ThermoLife International Forums
[5] Affidavit for bodybuilding.com raid: image 1, image 2, image 3
[6] Steroids 74 (2009) 172–197
[7] J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 115 (2009) 44-61.
[8] J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 101 (2006) 161–178.
[9] Antaeus Labs: A few words on the hepatotoxicity of 17a-methylated androgens/anabolics

I wrote this.

The above is actually a copy and paste so goes to henryv, who hopefully will come back on board in the future.

Hi.

Bottom line for me is - if you're going to use androgens of any kind - get bloodwork.

One problem with this in the UK is that it leads to bad headlines like "Steroids costing NHS millions" which leads to clamping down on their use.

With regard to Ultradrol.... I also take issue with "small tweaks" to molecules. "Try our new amazing test boosting muscle building supplement!! We simply fiddled with one aspect of teh molecule so we could get it on teh shelves without being busted but hey...its still basically the same ocmpound right??"

You're way off the mark on this one. The guys behind this product are highly intelligent, and more than willing to take the time to educate people on the use of ergogenics. They have a blog you should check out.

Id be willing to bet, superdrol would in fact be more harsh, and further suppress the HPTA than testosterone.

I don't see why some guys use the compounds they use when there is access to better drugs.

"Better" is a subjective term.

All that being said, I'm still curious about the OP's original question. What is the point of taking a SERM after a cycle of an AAS that does not aromatize? The way I see it, a nonaromatizable compound will first decrease one's natural testosterone production, of course. Testosterone is the precursor for Estradiol and the other estrogens, so estrogen levels will decrease as well. After the cycle ends, the pituitary and the hypothalamus respond positively to low levels of both testosterone and estrogen and will produce more GnRH and LH respectively. It is typically said that the main point of SERMs is to block the hypothalamus and pituitary from the negative feedback of estrogen. But if estrogen is already low, even lower than it would be naturally, is it really necessary to take a SERM? I understand that it would still be mildly beneficial since there is still some endogenous estrogen, but is it worth the side effects the SERM can produce? I've even heard the SERMs are carcinogenic.

SERMs are generally well tolerated drugs with few if any side effects when used for the duration that bodybuilders take them for, certainly less than the androgens they usually follow. Androgens have been shown to cause an increase in aromatase levels that can cause a heavy imbalance in androgen to estrogen ratios in the period immediately post-cycle.

 

[kuju]

HMmmm.....ok well just to address my bits in there; the esto surpress really does contain what it looks like (or at least the batch we tested did, based on prelim results - still waiting for the whole thing). Technically its not "illegal" but controlled. But the police aren't about to arrest anyone for selling it.

The bloodwork thing - I see where you're coming from mate but firstly - i didn't say it had to be on the NHS. Secondly, it's already happening and it's seen as an effective engagement tool with a particular group of people. Thirdly - given the very poor quality of a lot of street level gear - if people don't start doing things like bloodwork so they actually know..for certain...what state they are in hormonally; then we're going to see more and more people experiencing problems as a result of their PIED use. THOSE headlines will be much worse. To argue that people shouldn't get bloodwork because the press might start banging on about steroids makes no sense whatosever to me.

The issue of tweaked molecules was more of a general comment rather than one specifically referring to Ultradrol. Admittedly it came from the idea that this is a "tweaked version of superdrol" but it was a more general comment than that. I see a lot of drugs (incl reccreational drugs) that are slightly tweaked versions of something else and I think it's worth pointing out that those little tweaks can sometimes make a massive difference.

 

[fitdog]

So are we saying that the esto surpress is actually Nolva? Iv seen that written on a few places online!

 

[kuju]

So are we saying that the esto surpress is actually Nolva? Iv seen that written on a few places online!

Seems that way - but I wouldn't say it definitively. Even if the batch we looked at comes back as that it doesn't mean other batches will. Or that they'll be consistently dosed. Somme people say it is purely on the basis of the label.......but I prefer going by test results for just abotu everything these days.

 

[henryv]

HMmmm.....ok well just to address my bits in there; the esto surpress really does contain what it looks like (or at least the batch we tested did, based on prelim results - still waiting for the whole thing). Technically its not "illegal" but controlled. But the police aren't about to arrest anyone for selling it.

It's illegal to sell prescription-only drugs in the UK without a prescription. So yes. It's illegal. To sell. Without a prescription.

The bloodwork thing - I see where you're coming from mate but firstly - i didn't say it had to be on the NHS. Secondly, it's already happening and it's seen as an effective engagement tool with a particular group of people. Thirdly - given the very poor quality of a lot of street level gear - if people don't start doing things like bloodwork so they actually know..for certain...what state they are in hormonally; then we're going to see more and more people experiencing problems as a result of their PIED use. THOSE headlines will be much worse. To argue that people shouldn't get bloodwork because the press might start banging on about steroids makes no sense whatosever to me.

Please point out where I said people shouldn't get blood work. I didn't. I pointed out that there would be adverse consequences should everyone start doing so. Please read my posts more carefully. On the ground, in support units, yes, the aim is to "connect with users". Above, in government departments, in the event steroid users became a massive drain on public services they would seek to reduce their numbers.

The issue of tweaked molecules was more of a general comment rather than one specifically referring to Ultradrol. Admittedly it came from the idea that this is a "tweaked version of superdrol" but it was a more general comment than that. I see a lot of drugs (incl reccreational drugs) that are slightly tweaked versions of something else and I think it's worth pointing out that those little tweaks can sometimes make a massive difference.

Nobody here is claiming it doesn't. I understand what differences these "tweaks" make better than almost anyone. One of the few people that knows this stuff better than me is the guy that brought out ultradrol.

 

[kuju]

You really have got quite feisty these days haven't you.....

Please point out where I said people shouldn't get blood work. I didn't. I pointed out that there would be adverse consequences should everyone start doing so. Please read my posts more carefully. On the ground, in support units, yes, the aim is to "connect with users". Above, in government departments, in the event steroid users became a massive drain on public services they would seek to reduce their numbers.
.

Right. You're being deliberately obtuse here and you know it. Your original comment is a negative response to the idea of peopler getting testing - that's what I responded to. I stand by my rebuttal of it as well; whilst it may be an outside possibility that the press may decry it and the government clamp it's a huge leap from where we are now to that. Especially bearing in mind the huge raft of services and interventions for injecting heroin users. I think "public opinion" is somewhat lower of injecting heroin users than it is of PIED users. Your point that thousands of people getting testing would create a massive drain on resources is - with all due respect - a bit daily mail round the edges. The original suggestion was that people should get bloodwork to assess their state of health before embarking on yet more chemical manipulation. It is a perfectly valid point. How can you reset your natural hormonal production withotu knowing what state it's in in the first place? This is a futile discussion mate.... your comment was unecessarily negative; especiallytaking into account the fact that people's health going west because they adopt a "chuck some pct gear in and see what happens" approach is much more likely to produce those headlines and knee-jerk governemt responses. You obviously didn't state people shouldn't get bloodwork - but you did quite clearly state a reason why it's not a good idea. And I'm sorry but I respectfully...and I think justifiably...disagree.

Nobody here is claiming it doesn't. I understand what differences these "tweaks" make better than almost anyone. One of the few people that knows this stuff better than me is the guy that brought out ultradrol.

Again - you're shifting the goal posts. Your original point was that I was way off the mark. I was merely pointing out that my comment was meant in a more general way rather than a specific 'attack' on Ultradrol. Perhaps you should read my posts more carefully? You know full well what point I was making.

Seriously...Henry..please...stop being so combative in your posts. It's not productive...or particularly pleasant.

 

[henryv]

You obviously didn't state people shouldn't get bloodwork - but you did quite clearly state a reason why it's not a good idea.

I didn't say that it wasn't a good idea. I said it was likely to have repercussions if everyone descends on their local GP for a referral en masse.

In truth I have mixed feelings about blood work. The forum I mod has a blood work section with well over a hundred cases of private blood work.
One problem is that if the blood work is done by a private lab then they don't have a doctor to interpret the results.
Another problem is the extent of the testing is not uniform and may not be extensive enough.
A third problem is that good or adequate blood work is often used as an excuse to go straight back on the juice. Even bad blood work can be ignored when the need for self-justification is high enough. "Yeah but it's only just out of range... I'll be fine" "I wasn't planning on having kids anyway" etc..
It can also ignore the cumulative damage that steroids can do. A normal HDL/LDL ratio for example is only a snapshot in time - it would take an angiograph to show the atherosclerotic effects the previously adverse ratio may have had.

Again - you're shifting the goal posts. Your original point was that I was way off the mark. I was merely pointing out that my comment was meant in a more general way rather than a specific 'attack' on Ultradrol. Perhaps you should read my posts more carefully? You know full well what point I was making.

Seriously...Henry..please...stop being so combative in your posts. It's not productive...or particularly pleasant.

I understand that the thalidomide comment was meant for effect. The truth is that anabolic steroids as a class tend to have similar effects and side-effects. Yes, tweaks may alter their metabolism or their affinity for nuclear steroid receptors, but they're unlikely to make the kind of difference you insinuate. They usually just make them more or less effective. If anyone wants to understand the science behind those tweaks - well, that's why I write these profiles.

And I'm sorry for being combative. It's a knock-on from trying to deal with the mods here, it's like bashing my head against a brick wall. Which they'd probably rather I do, in fact.

 

[JW007]

Henry stop being a pr1ck or I will ban you for good!!

IIRC you said you didnt need this board and threw your dummy, so why are you trying so hard to get threads re opened and come back!!

With all your pro hormone knowledge (so called) Im assuming you must have a rather impressive physique??

Can you please post a picture as im failing to take your "secert" internet warrior persona seriously!!

 

[RS]

Henry, while I acknowledge it doesnt take a freak to know how to make a freak, I too would be interested in seeing the physique behind your keyboard warrior posts, and to see if it backs up in anyway your arrogant demeanour.

And no, this isn't "mod harrasment", and neither is JWs post above like you said in your whiney post report, and we certianly won't be "Calling our boy off" - more calling you out - if someone is being a dick on here, then we deal with - simple.

 

[JW007]

What a shame, seems Henry has been banned!! Permanently!

Oh well, sure will be sorely missed