Gain .5 inch/month with no excersizes

There is a study, however it is in a satellite stack. My library will get it to me in less then a week.

Increase in penis size from test is temporary at best. An yes Exogenous (outside) sounces of test shut down endognous (your own) test and will cause erectile dysfunction after a while. You want the test insrease use a god quality tribbilus which increases LH the body’s precursor to test production.

????Ok, how so? Do those with Microphallus loose their growth after the DHT is stopped? Trib. is a good ideal but wont work for this study. LH would signal an increase in T but the local effect would be minimal. We are looking to increase the level inside the penis itself. Topical application being the only way to achieve this. Unless you are into big, long needles.

ED from lower T is from collagen fibers from the lack of androgen induced repair. Since we would be putting T on the pecker. This effect wouldnt happen.

This has turned into an “I know more about prohormones than you” debate, hasnt it!

It is one thing to post a study or a link to a study or a title of a study, but its another to use it in your argument. What about the guys that dont know how to look up the information, much less understand it. Please, if you have a point to make, do it by quoting the relevent parts of whatever you are referencing to, and under it put your own comments on why this helps your argument. Anything else is jsut showing off. AGAIN, for those that were speed reading - Dont shoot your mouth off, back it up!

This is a discussion about hormone effects on PE, try to move FORWARD. Look at cya’s posts, he’s on the right track.

Also, would you all remember to be nice! Dont be confrontational, you would not like to get banned for flaming or just generally being an asshole, would you?

north,

>SS4, I take it your position is that 4-AD has such a small capacity to be converted to test, that (for the purpose of this discussion), it’s really snake oil.<

Yeah, thats pretty much my stance. OK for bodybuilding, useless for this discussion when unconverted, and with little benefit (even if all this hormone talk is true, which I dont believe) when it is converted.

>Poor substitute for test, little to no DHT conversion, your dick will not get bigger…your hair will not fall out.<

Those are wide statements, but yeah basically.

>How do you feel about Nearly’s assertion that it will result in a shutdown of test?<

I dont think so, i’ve never heard of any cases of shutdown from 4-AD use. With large active doses, maybe. I’d need to read up to be more specific, but this is my opinion right now.

SS4

Thanks SS4, this was turning into a pissing contest.

“>SS4, I take it your position is that 4-AD has such a small capacity to be converted to test, that (for the purpose of this discussion), it’s really snake oil.<

Yeah, thats pretty much my stance. OK for bodybuilding, useless for this discussion when unconverted, and with little benefit (even if all this hormone talk is true, which I dont believe) when it is converted. “

The fact is that 3HSD converts 4AD to T, 5AR converts T to DHT. These conversions are documented in the literature already given. The extent, is somewhat speculative. But considering ive gained .61 inches now, I would have to argue that it must be an efficent conversion.

>Poor substitute for test, little to no DHT conversion, your dick will not get bigger…your hair will not fall out.<

How is somebody qualified to make this statement? Would you not need to actually try it?

jones,

>The fact is that 3HSD converts 4AD to T, 5AR converts T to DHT. These conversions are documented in the literature already given.

I said what you say here.

4-AD is useless in this context when unconverted, we both agree on that then?

From this point on jones, could you please quote the relevant segment of the literature when you reference to it, and put your comments beneath it. This way your points will be clearer, and there will be more understanding to be gained by people who are actively participating in the discussion and also those who are just observing it. Thanks!

>The extent, is somewhat speculative.<

I said this as well. So we are on the same page here then?

>How is somebody qualified to make this statement? Would you not need to actually try it?<

I think the statement by north which I quoted was just how he interpreted the information so far, and he was asking for clarity. My response said that these are wide statements, what I meant was that there will be exceptions, but in general I agree with what he said.

SS4

EDIT: If you previously read any edits here, ignore them, I am confusing the hell out of myself.

cya at 8:

Trib is a good idea. But once you see what it really is you may change your mind. It is a steroid which somehow enhances 5AR.

http://www.nutr ica.com/Libilov … ew_Arsyad96.htm

The active molecule is a 5-ene androstane with ester linkages to carbs at C3 and C17. Its mechanism may or may not be local.

"In respect to improving fertility, protodioscin increases the level of spermatogenesis by stimulating the Sertoli and germinal cells, resulting in the increased production of sperms. In this process, protodioscin improves the conversion of testosterone to DHT, which in turn stimulates the production of Androgen Binding Protein (ABP) in the Sertoli cells. Increased ABP production results in increased formation of DHT-ABP complex, which stimulates spermatogenesis in the germinal cells. Another fraction of the DHT-ABP complex is transported to the epididymis, which increases the efficiency of the maturation of spermatozoa into fertile sperms. "

Summarizing: Makes more test, enhances T to DHT conversion. Whether the increase of DHT is from more actual activity of 5AR, or the increase in free T, is not stated.

(More 5AR would mean more conversion of the 4AD-thus more growth)

Jones,

How about posting the ScienceDirect URL’s.

They are after all widely quoted by you and what you are basing your theories on.

I said what you say here. 4-AD is useless in this context when unconverted, we both agree on that then?

>The extent, is somewhat speculative.<
I said this as well. So we are on the same page here then?

Yes and yes. Enzymatic conversions are necessary and crucial. Studies quantifying the activity of these enzymes are few and far between

Jones,

How about posting the ScienceDirect URL’s.

They are after all widely quoted by you and what you are basing your theories on.

I cant, they are part of my subsciption service to ScienceDirect. They are PDFs, I cant copy and paste. You will have to go to a library, sorry.

This is new…..Interesting….

Jones,

>The are PDFs, I cant copy and paste.<

Why not? Are they locked or something? I dont know much about pdf’s but I can copy and paste from the ones have.

If not, just type out the areas of interest.

SS4

Sure, which study interests you, regarding what fact?