Brock, I appreciate your plans to do an article on these controversial compounds. I would only ask that you include ALL the research (i.e. Japanese work of Uchiyama and Otaka, Hikino and Takemoto circa 1974, 1972, respectively) as well as the human studies done on man (P. Simon & J Koolman, 1988). Most notably, please consider Hikino’s and Takemoto’s findings on the analgesic effects. I believe this is where the enhanced recovery is coming from, though admittedly it’s only a theory on my part.

Research has in fact been ongoing, even in this country. Baylor University, in fact, recently conducted a study on one sapogenin compound (competitive binding inhibition study). You might also want to consult the journal “Chemical Abstracts” 102:72695c and 83:5875n for a closer look at mechanism of action etc… CA 124:251167 (comparitive study of ekdisten, leveton and prime plus) is also worth looking at.

This brings up an important point - let’s not just bash 20HECD. The sapogenin analogs are the “viable” alternatives to 20HECD or the other ecdysterones.

It’s easy to bash foreign research. Let’s not necessarily discount all of it due to some of it being from “behind the iron curtain”. If you did, you’d have to re-write your Methoxy-7 articles about those dusty Chinoin flavone patents “buried” away in Hungary.

I believe what I see, not what I read. Nonetheless, I look forward to your article as I believe that if you dig deep enough and talk to enough people who are getting something from even the crude versions of this compound you’ll see there really is something going on here.

I do appreciate the time and effort you are putting into this. Even if it is a slam job, I respect your decision to look further into something your customers find that is working…