Novedex or 6oxo

[The ChemistV2]

Hey Chemist, ya I tried it before.  It smells a bit, but I felt great off of it...just overall well-being and maintained my strength gains.  I'm surprised this brand isn't talked about more on this board.  Do you know the reason?  I know they don't advertise in magazines and such.  Give it a try and let me know what you think of it.

Thanks, I just ordered some from bodybuilding.com.  I'm very in tune with my body- having trained and supplemented for many years so I'll definitely know pretty quickly if it works for me.

[Van_Bilderass]

  Neither. Chrysin if you can find it. As for tamoxifene vs 6-oxo, tamoxifene is more potent on a miligram basis, but the body builds some toleration to it over time, which doesen't happen with 6-oxo. Notwithstanding, tamoxifene is still better. If I could get either, I would go for Nolvadex.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

  Ok. there's another post of yours on this very topic that I would like to adress but forgot. Anyway, the evidence you are giving is anecdotal. I am just telling what is in the scientific literature that, of all the non-prescription anti-estrogen, chrysin is the most effective on a miligram basis and has the highest bioavailability, because only about 20% of it is altered after first passage metabolism in the liver, meaning that more of it actually gets into the bloodstream and, thus, gets to bind to aromatase. 6-OXO doesen't seem to be as bioavailable or potent in the same dosage.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

  Interesting. I would be greatly interested in knowing the methodologies of the studies that concluded that chrysin doesen't work. I was reading the cliffnotes and then I did a basic search for the studies mentioned, and there were no references for any of them. I would be interested to know how they determined that crysin does not penetrate cell membranes, as this would involve chromatography and isotope tracing procedures that are simply too expensive to be done regarding a supplement - this kind of hardcore study about the pharmacodynamics of a compound is usually only done on prescription medications, and only because regulatory agencies such as the FDA demand it. Personally, I did get some boost in strengh and energy from chrysin, but of course it could be a placebo effect.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Interesting. Very interesting... in light of how you were complaining about gh15 and his recommendations not being scientific or peer reviewed or whatever you said. I'm not commenting here just to flame but these posts are downright scandalous.

Body builds some "toleration" to Nolvadex but not to 6-OXO?

You compare Chrysin to 6-OXO on a "mg to mg basis" when they aren't even in the same class of drugs/supps, and aren't supposed to work through the same mechanisms.

And say chemists posts on this topic are anecdotal while yours are scientific. Do you have ANY data on Chrysin that supports what you're saying?

Jesus Christ. I haven't read your other posts in this forum but I hope they are a bit better.

BTW, I think the OP referred to Gaspari's Novedex XT, not tamoxifen. Neither of these lower estrogen, I'm pretty sure, and 6-OXO actually raises it. Then there's the issue with cross-reactivity with testosterone on the assay with these compounds. The clinical data may not be reliable.

[suckmymuscle]

Interesting. Very interesting... in light of how you were complaining about gh15 and his recommendations not being scientific or peer reviewed or whatever you said. I'm not commenting here just to flame but these posts are downright scandalous.

Body builds some "toleration" to Nolvadex but not to 6-OXO?

You compare Chrysin to 6-OXO on a "mg to mg basis" when they aren't even in the same class of drugs/supps, and aren't supposed to work through the same mechanisms.

And say chemists posts on this topic are anecdotal while yours are scientific. Do you have ANY data on Chrysin that supports what you're saying?

Jesus Christ. I haven't read your other posts in this forum but I hope they are a bit better.

BTW, I think the OP referred to Gaspari's Novedex XT, not tamoxifen. Neither of these lower estrogen, I'm pretty sure, and 6-OXO actually raises it. Then there's the issue with cross-reactivity with testosterone on the assay with these compounds. The clinical data may not be reliable.

  Meltdown.

  What has GH15 got to do with anything? The last time I checked, he actually recommends specific doses of drugs and stacks that require a prescription from an M.D, and he claims that certain stacks work better than others. This is pseudo-scientific. Do I do that? No. I never told anyone to take chrysin, nor did I give specific dosages. Also, chrysin is not a controlled substance, so I can give information on it without being an M.D, which does not apply to the myriad of substances GH15 recommends. All I did was state that chrysin is anti-estrogenic and that it works better than methoxyflavone from the anecdotal evidence I have.

  You think my advice sucks? Then don't follow it. I don't give a shit and I certainly don't owe you or any other poster here satisfactions. I didn't break any board rules by writing what I did about chrysin nor did I break the law, which is what GH15 does every time he posts.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Van_Bilderass]

  Meltdown.

  What has GH15 got to do with anything? The last time I checked, he actually recommends specific doses of drugs and stacks that require a prescription from an M.D, and he claims that certain stacks work better than others. This is pseudo-scientific. Do I do that? No. I never told anyone to take chrysin, nor did I give specific dosages. Also, chrysin is not a controlled substance, so I can give information on it without being an M.D, which does not apply to the myriad of substances GH15 recommends. All I did was state that chrysin is anti-estrogenic and that it works better than methoxyflavone from the anecdotal evidence I have.

  You think my advice sucks? Then don't follow it. I don't give a shit and I certainly don't owe you or any other poster here satisfactions. I didn't break any board rules by writing what I did about chrysin nor did I break the law, which is what GH15 does every time he posts.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Alright, so legality was your main problem with his posts. But take a look at this exchange. Here you have a problem with the Winstrol and "hardness" claim. He had no double-blind placebo control studies to back his claim.

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=237833.msg3347827;topicseen#msg3347827

[suckmymuscle]

Alright, so legality was your main problem with his posts. But take a look at this exchange. Here you have a problem with the Winstrol and "hardness" claim. He had no double-blind placebo control studies to back his claim.

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=237833.msg3347827;topicseen#msg3347827

  Legality and the fact that he made unsubstantiated, pseudoscientific claims about steroids. Comparing what I do to what GH15 does is like comparing apples to oranges. He gives specific dosages and says that will result in a gain of 20 lbs of mass. He says that stacking steroid "x" with steroid "y" will allow you to pack more mass with a lower dosage than you'd have to take i you took either steroid alone. This is pseudoscientiic. Do I do any of these things? No. I don't give specific dosages saying that dose "x" will give you a "y" effect without prefacing that is what happened to me, nor do I make claims that a certain substance will has an effect that has never been verified. I claimed that chrysin has anti-estrogenic effect. This is scientific, as there is ample evidence for it a few research papers stating otherwise notwithstanding. Saying that stanozolol causes increased hardness is not a scientific fact. First, what is hardness? Even defining that is close to impossible. Then, even if we defined hardness, there is no evidence that stanozolol does anything other than what all androgens do: increase muscle mass by increasing muscle protein synthesis by boosting levels of RNA-transcryptase. If I were to make a claim that were analogous to the ones GH15 makes, I would say that chrysin will dry you out because it lowers estrogen which causes water retention. See the difference?

  Scientific fact = something for which a cause-and-effect relationship has been established after isolating given cause from all other extraneous potential causes and determining that it alone produces the effect.

  Pseudoscientific gargabe = Claiming that something produces an effect without proof for it. Or, when something does cause an efect but there are several other potential causes for the efect, providing no proof that the aforementioned cause is responsible for the efect and not any other of the potential causes(eg. GH15 claiming that Winstrol causes increased hardness, when in reality it could be that the increased hardness is simply the result of decreased bodyfat due to dieting, or because, unlike other steroids, it causes increased muscle mass with less edema thus causing the decrease in bodyfat % that results from increased muscle mass to make the muscles more visible, unlike other edema-causing steroids which don't cause the muscles to become more visible because, even though they decrease the bodyfat % by increasing muscle mass, this is offset by the increase in intramuscular water retention.)

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Van_Bilderass]

He says that stacking steroid "x" with steroid "y" will allow you to pack more mass with a lower dosage than you'd have to take i you took either steroid alone. This is pseudoscientiic. Do I do any of these things? No. I don't give specific dosages saying that dose "x" will give you a "y" effect without prefacing that is what happened to me, nor do I make claims that a certain substance will has an effect that has never been verified. I claimed that chrysin has anti-estrogenic effect. This is scientific, as there is ample evidence for it a few research papers stating otherwise notwithstanding.

Well, do you still maintain that these claims are scientific?

  Ok. there's another post of yours on this very topic that I would like to adress but forgot. Anyway, the evidence you are giving is anecdotal. I am just telling what is in the scientific literature that, of all the non-prescription anti-estrogen, chrysin is the most effective on a miligram basis and has the highest bioavailability, because only about 20% of it is altered after first passage metabolism in the liver, meaning that more of it actually gets into the bloodstream and, thus, gets to bind to aromatase. 6-OXO doesen't seem to be as bioavailable or potent in the same dosage.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Do you have any of the "ample evidence" that chrysin is anti-estrogenic in humans? You also make a claim about its bioavailability. Since you only make claims with hard data in hand I'm eager to see it.

http://www.vrp.com/articles.aspx?page=LIST&ProdID=1208&qid=&zTYPE=2

If gh15 gives an estimation of how much bodyweight you put on with a certain compound why does he have to give scientific proof for this? It's obvious these types of comments are based on what one has seen it do IRL.

If gh15 says Winstrol imparts a hard look to the physique why does he have to explain the exact mechanism behind it? Let me ask you this, if you were a bodybuilder prepping for a show would you not use the compounds in the last phase of prep which most users have found to be beneficial or do you need some sort of scientific explanation behind the exact mechanism first? No one is pretending that bodybuilding polypharmacology is an exact science. You go by what the mirror tells you a lot of times. If bodybuilders would've waited for such data we wouldn't have the monsters we have today. We wouldn't have Larry Scott or Arnold either (scientific data said steroids didn't increase muscle mass or performance).
It's the exact same mindset you had when you popped chrysin (no real difference between an effective supplement and drug) without ANY real scientific data behind its supposed ergogenic effects. This didn't stop you from recommending it in this thread either. And let's not forget that if it were an effective aromatase inhibitor one could expect potential health problems from it (resulting from low estrogen). One animal study did suggest thyroid dysfunction being a potential side effect.

At least the 6-OXO does something... caused a transient disruption in the hormone system upon discontinuation too. I'm sure you know there was a study on it (and I have seen anecdotal reports about long term problems from it on some forums).

I am not against science. Not at all. But please be consistent.

[Griffith]

At least the 6-OXO does something... caused a transient disruption in the hormone system upon discontinuation too. I'm sure you know there was a study on it (and I have seen anecdotal reports about long term problems from it on some forums).

Could you please elaborate on this?

[Van_Bilderass]

Could you please elaborate on this?

Patrick Arnold said it takes a while to normalize after coming off. You can see the tables in the studies. Some have complained on forums about not feeling normal for a while after coming off long cycles.

6-OXO study:

http://www.jissn.com/content/pdf/1550-2783-4-13.pdf

Novedex XT study:

http://store.gasparinutrition.com/products.html

Look at what happens to estrogens during supplementation. They increase! Patrick has an explanation for this, don't know if he's right, but isn't it strange that pharmaceutical AIs lower estrogen like they are supposed to do but these don't?

[DK II]

Wasn't there some talk that these actually raise test levels by raising estrogen instead of lowering it?

I think these products may be even more dangerous than roids. You get less performance with god knows what side effects.

[DK II]

Patrick Arnold said it takes a while to normalize after coming off. You can see the tables in the studies. Some have complained on forums about not feeling normal for a while after coming off long cycles.

6-OXO study:

http://www.jissn.com/content/pdf/1550-2783-4-13.pdf

Novedex XT study:

http://store.gasparinutrition.com/products.html

Look at what happens to estrogens during supplementation. They increase! Patrick has an explanation for this, don't know if he's right, but isn't it strange that pharmaceutical AIs lower estrogen like they are supposed to do but these don't?

it lowers GH levels significantly as well.

[Van_Bilderass]

Wasn't there some talk that these actually raise test levels by raising estrogen instead of lowering it?

I think these products may be even more dangerous than roids. You get less performance with god knows what side effects.

No, estrogen doesn't convert to testosterone. The discussion has been whether the compounds cross-react with testosterone on the assay. ATD which is the principal ingredient in Novedex XT has been shown to do that. Gaspari's reps say they can differentiate between the two nowadays but I'm not so sure.

I agree with you on the safety issue.

[DK II]

No, estrogen doesn't convert to testosterone. The discussion has been whether the compounds cross-react with testosterone on the assay. ATD which is the principal ingredient in Novedex XT has been shown to do that. Gaspari's reps say they can differentiate between the two nowadays but I'm not so sure.

I agree with you on the safety issue.

where did i say that?? Do you think i'm dumb? If you raise estrogen, the body will make more testosterone to keep the levels even, that's what i meant.

[Alex23]

I'm pretty sure neither of these reduce estrogen! 6-OXO actually increases estrogen!

I'm no chemist but I don't trust the data on the fantastic test elevations you're supposed to get from Novadex.

hahahahahahhah!!!!!!!! listen to this champ once again... hundreds of thousands of happy users with significan results and lab studies to back it up... been on the market for more than 6 years but WATCH OUT: VanBilderarses has spoken


Both works pretty well; I happened to be on 6 oxo before a blood test 2 years ago and my plasma test was significantly higher from the previous week.

On Novedex, I debloat in a matter of days...

[DK II]

hahahahahahhah!!!!!!!! listen to this champ once again... hundreds of thousands of happy users with significan results and lab studies to back it up... been on the market for more than 6 years but WATCH OUT: VanBilderarses has spoken


Both works pretty well; I happened to be on 6 oxo before a blood test 2 years ago and my plasma test was significantly higher from the previous week.

On Novedex, I debloat in a matter of days...

i thought you claimed natural? 

[Griffith]

Thanks for the info Van_Bilderass.

With regards to the safety of 6oxo, I believe it to be safe. You only use it for 2 weeks at a time or 1 week if the dosage is doubled.
I used it once in 2007 and honestly didn't notice anything different, positve or negative. I'm really surprised at the results of the study.
I used Oxo-Test by Musclescience which contained 6oxo, ZMA and also tribulis.

Waste of money in my opinion.
I just started lifting then and didn't know much about nutrition etc.
Glad I stopped using all supplements including whey and focused on good healthy food.

[Van_Bilderass]

where did i say that?? Do you think i'm dumb? If you raise estrogen, the body will make more testosterone to keep the levels even, that's what i meant.

Not calling you dumb.  The thing is that virtually all estrogen in males is from testosterone aromatizing. That's why you can't have high estrogen without "high" testosterone i.e. the estrogen can't appear before the test. See what I mean? Then there's the fact that high estrogen always lowers test, not the opposite.

hahahahahahhah!!!!!!!! listen to this champ once again... hundreds of thousands of happy users with significan results and lab studies to back it up... been on the market for more than 6 years but WATCH OUT: VanBilderarses has spoken


Both works pretty well; I happened to be on 6 oxo before a blood test 2 years ago and my plasma test was significantly higher from the previous week.

On Novedex, I debloat in a matter of days...

You are a fucking moron, nothing new.  You obviously don't know what I'm talking about here so why comment at all? There are a lot of experts who have questioned the fantastic T labs from ATD in particular, which I was mainly referring to. Among those have been Patrick Arnold. It sounds kind of fantastic that ATD can give you T levels similar to shooting many hundreds of milligrams of test, yet no one gains like you'd expect from a T level like that. What's also interesting is that you debloat with it, maybe it's true... but it's not due to a lowering of estrogen as you can see from Gaspari's own study!

Steroids. 1980 Dec;36(6):717-21.Links
    Immunological interference of the synthetic aromatase inhibitor 1,4,6-androstatriene-3,17-dione (ATD) and its metabolite(s) in the radioimmunoassay for testosterone.
    Donaldson MD, Forest MG.

    Radioimmunoassay (RIA) for testosterone (T) in unchromatographed plasma extracts from ATD-treated rats gave spuriously high values for T. Cross-reaction and chromatographic studies subsequently showed that ATD and, to a much greater extent, its metabolite(s) were responsible for this overestimation. Celite column chromatography proved to be an effective way of separating T from ATD and its product(s) of metabolism.

Now, I'm no chemist and they say they are using methods that are able to differentiate the compounds but I've read enough to be skeptical. Sort of too good to be true.

[The ChemistV2]

Not calling you dumb.  The thing is that virtually all estrogen in males is from testosterone aromatizing. That's why you can't have high estrogen without "high" testosterone i.e. the estrogen can't appear before the test. See what I mean? Then there's the fact that high estrogen always lowers test, not the opposite.


You are a fucking moron, nothing new.  You obviously don't know what I'm talking about here so why comment at all? There are a lot of experts who have questioned the fantastic T labs from ATD in particular, which I was mainly referring to. Among those have been Patrick Arnold. It sounds kind of fantastic that ATD can give you T levels similar to shooting many hundreds of milligrams of test, yet no one gains like you'd expect from a T level like that. What's also interesting is that you debloat with it, maybe it's true... but it's not due to a lowering of estrogen as you can see from Gaspari's own study!

Now, I'm no chemist and they say they are using methods that are able to differentiate the compounds but I've read enough to be skeptical. Sort of too good to be true.

I think what you are failing to take into account is that it doesn't matter if the estrogen increased slightly over the period of the study. It's the ratio of testosterone to estrogen. For example, if you administered HCG to someone, they would have a large increase in test and a large increase in estrogen. Therefore you would tend to have a watery look on it. The proportion or ratio of testosterone to estrogen causes that. The rise in testosterone with Gaspari's product shows a high increase in test, but only a small increase in estradiol. Where as injecting test or taking HCG would undoubtably show a much higher rise in estrogen levels in relation to the increased test. Besides, for good hdl levels, you don't want estrogen totally eliminated, plus totally lowering estrogen lowers libido. I have used 6-oxo on and off for several years. I always get a harder look on it, good libido and when i go off, I have never had a rebound or any other adverse reaction. Again I don't usually go over the 3 capsule a day dose. I do think higher doses could cause too much DHT production which could result in hair loss or prostate swelling.

[Van_Bilderass]

I think what you are failing to take into account is that it doesn't matter if the estrogen increased slightly over the period of the study. It's the ratio of testosterone to estrogen. For example, if you administered HCG to someone, they would have a large increase in test and a large increase in estrogen. Therefore you would tend to have a watery look on it. The proportion or ratio of testosterone to estrogen causes that. The rise in testosterone with Gaspari's product shows a high increase in test, but only a small increase in estradiol. Where as injecting test or taking HCG would undoubtably show a much higher rise in estrogen levels in relation to the increased test. Besides, for good hdl levels, you don't want estrogen totally eliminated, plus totally lowering estrogen lowers libido. I have used 6-oxo on and off for several years. I always get a harder look on it, good libido and when i go off, I have never had a rebound or any other adverse reaction. Again I don't usually go over the 3 capsule a day dose. I do think higher doses could cause too much DHT production which could result in hair loss or prostate swelling.

You might be right that the ratio affects water retention like that. I'm not sure though, since you still have more of both hormones. I'm pretty sure testosterone itself causes water retention through other, non-estrogen related, mechanisms.

What do you think about these products not lowering estrogen - I mean all these other pharma AIs available do to my knowledge. Kind of strange to me. You might say they are so weak in comparison but then why does the ATD cause such drastic T increases? AFAIK potent AI's like arimidex do not raise testosterone to this degree.

[The ChemistV2]

You might be right that the ratio affects water retention like that. I'm not sure though, since you still have more of both hormones. I'm pretty sure testosterone itself causes water retention through other, non-estrogen related, mechanisms.

What do you think about these products not lowering estrogen - I mean all these other pharma AIs available do to my knowledge. Kind of strange to me. You might say they are so weak in comparison but then why does the ATD cause such drastic T increases? AFAIK potent AI's like arimidex do not raise testosterone to this degree.

Well, in effect their mode of action isn't neccesarily lowering estrogen. They start by blocking some of the aromitization of your own testosteone to estrogen and as you know, that signals the pituitary to cause a chain of events resulting in higher testosterone levels. Again, it all depends what you want out of a product. If I were to shoot 500 to 1000 mg of testosterone a week, I would look into taking .5 mg of Arimidex daily or up to a milligram, if I wanted to insure the least amount of estrogen for lean gain purposes and less pituitary inhibition. The less estrogen produced on a cycle, usually the less inhibitory, although not always the case or drugs like Tren wouldn't be inhibitive. My goal for using something like 6-0xo is to lower my estrogen to testosterone ratio to enough of a degree where a harder look and increased fat loss are noticeable. My theory is with a lower estrogen to test ratio, it is easier to lose fat, since higher estrogen ratios make fat harder to lose. For example, women have testosterone and estrogen (and progesterone) in their bodies, but it's the higher estrogen to test ratio that makes it harder for them to lose fat. When you give them steroids, they get ripped much, much easier. Now they still have plenty of estrogen, but they've tipped the balance towards androgens in their favor. Also, being I'm in my mid 40's, I am always utilizing strategies that will keep my natural testosterone in the higher normal ranges. After a cycle of 6-oxo, I switch to some plant derived compounds that I've also found to be effective for this. One day, if I feel I can't get results from this, I know it will be time for HRT. As far as building any significant muscle from 6-oxo, it is highly unlikely. In fact, anything that doesn't boost you into a supraphysiological hormonal range probably won't yield significant musclebuilding effects.

[Van_Bilderass]

Well, in effect their mode of action isn't neccesarily lowering estrogen. They start by blocking some of the aromitization of your own testosteone to estrogen and as you know, that signals the pituitary to cause a chain of events resulting in higher testosterone levels.

Well, in short that's pretty much the explanation given. There are some things that can be discussed wrt this explanation, considering how other AIs affect the hormonal profile.

My theory is with a lower estrogen to test ratio, it is easier to lose fat, since higher estrogen ratios make fat harder to lose. For example, women have testosterone and estrogen (and progesterone) in their bodies, but it's the higher estrogen to test ratio that makes it harder for them to lose fat. When you give them steroids, they get ripped much, much easier. Now they still have plenty of estrogen, but they've tipped the balance towards androgens in their favor.

Estrogen is actually a lipolytic hormone. It affects fat pattern though. Progesterone is the "evil" one that causes fat gain.

After a cycle of 6-oxo, I switch to some plant derived compounds that I've also found to be effective for this.

Did you happen to have blood work done that showed plant compounds to raise your test? I'm not convinced any of them work and if they do it's through adrenal hormone output stimulation.

[darksol]

I had great results from previous cycle of Novadex.  However the sides ( decreased sex drive, not taking any lip from the wife, and loss of creativity ), forced me to stop.  I have started taking it again, but this time I am only taking 1 pill once a day.  So far the results are pretty good.  I think with products like these its all about figuring out how much is right for you, considering your lifestyle.  Before I was taking 2 pills twice a day.