T Nation

Bill Roberts-Mag 10 vs Transdermal 1 Test


#1

How would you compare the the Mag 10 formula to the Transdermal versions being put out by other companies (who shall remain nameless). On some of the other message boards they keep putting Mag 10 down in favor of trandsermal formulas which supposedely give more of the active ingredients (and serious irritate the skin).


#2

No, the efficiency of MAG-10 can't be matched by transdermals.


#3

Care to elaborate.


#4

Perhaps I should have said "isn't matched" vs "can't be matched." Who's to say what sort of Star Trek technique might be developed in terms of transdermal technology that might give 100%.

Transdermal methods are a great alternative to oral when oral bioavailability is terrible, as with 4-AD powder for example, but when oral bioavailability is high, transdermal comes up short. This shouldn't be surprising. After all, the GI tract is made to absorb stuff. Whereas the skin is made to keep stuff out. So where's the surprise if oral absorption is better?

Sure, sometimes you have issues with first-pass metabolism where, despite good initial absorption, a substance is metabolized by the liver before ever reaching general circulation. That's the case with regular 4-AD for example. It's not the case with the compounds in MAG-10.

If you're talking about using enhancement via DMSO, you're going to get a pulsatile delivery. There's no reason to expect unesterified androgens to be long-lasting (more than a few hours if that) if delivered without esters. So even if bioavailability were excellent, duration of action would be a problem.

Or if you're talking about a gel or cream, bioavailability would have to be far below MAG-10. In the case of androst-1-ene, it would be less even than simple androst-1-ene powder, let alone A1-E ethylcarbonate ester in the liquid formulation.

I'd have done a transdermal if I'd considered it the better way to go. But it isn't in this case.


#5

bump


#6

would mixing fina in a solution of 25mg/ml with 99% alcohol yeild better absorbtion than 50mg/ml. I used 50mg/ml as per your instructions, and results were good but it was extremely sticky, I would have to peel my shirts off me. Also would adding say 58 sprays of androsol/day to single dose of mag-10 give better bumps, I really miss the pumps of androsol as well as the veins popping out. since fina is also a cns stimulant would it be better than the androsol or equal to it as far as adding pumps to my mag-10 cycle, I know "feeling it" is just a mental thing, but I like that great feeling. thankyou for any input, it is greatly appreciated.


#7

JT, I had the same idea as you. We all know that fina and 4-diol stack well, because finasol works by all accounts. To the real question about fina and Mag -10 comes down to whether it's a good stack with the 1-test. I've asked around a few places, and the answers have consistently been that fina and 1-test aren't a good stack because they're too similar already. My hope had been to use finasol with Mag-10, but Bill et al. advised against it on that basis. (Bill, I did understand that advice correctly, didn't I?)


#8

JT, I agree, and have since (for some time)
been recommending 25 mg/mL rather than 50
mg/mL because of the stickiness problem,
especially if Androsol is being used instead
of simply an alcohol (adding 4-AD on top
of the TA increases the stickiness.)

The 25 mg/mL film probably needs application
at least 3 times per day to maintain continuous delivery.

Adding Androsol to two doses per day
of MAG-10 would make no sense, since
the dose of 4-AD is certainly high
enough with that dose, but it does
stand to reason that some might prefer
adding more 4-AD to what's obtained
from a single dose -- though a single
dose probably gives levels equal to or higher than Androsol 70 sprays 2x/day.

Akicita, generally I agree with your point,
but someone might want to add Fina, not
because it does something anabolically MAG-10 doesn't, but because of desired CNS effect, or perhaps if it is already on hand, so why not use it then.


#9

Bill, how can you be so certain that the ethylcarbonate ester out preforms a transdermal equivelant? Are you extrapolating data from another chemical with the ec ester or did you try it out yourself?


#10

Due to some delays in blood assay work (it's a new method of quantitation that has to be developed -- blood androst-1-ene levels aren't an existing assay) biovavailability has to be estimated based on estimated comparison between injected use and oral via MAG-10, and MAG-10
clearly has very high bioavailability.

For that matter, it would be amazing if it didn't. Androst-1-ene itself -- in powder
form, if provided as microcrystals -- has
about 35% bioavailability. This is reasonably only increased, not decreased, by the liquid delivery system, and only increased further by the ethylcarbonate ester protecting the 17 position from first pass metabolism.

Yet the 35% figure alone, even unimproved, would
exceed bioavailability of pharmaceutical transdermal patches
or gels.

I know there's a "mystique" to transdermal
but, where GI tract absorption is good, it's better than transdermal.


#11

Bill, Thankyou very much, I will go with the 25mg/ml solution. I have decided to leave out the androsol. If anyone would like feedback on my progress I am more than happy to post it. currently I am 3 days from starting week 3 of my mag-10 cycle at one dose/day. I am dieting, I started week one at 200lbs (5'8") I was 196 a week later, kind of dissapointed, I would prefer t have lost less, because I would like to add some muscle, my daily cal are supposed to be 2400, but I fell short most of the week, this week my cals are perfect. strength is about same, nothing noticable yet.