17-07-2014, 09:35 PM
(advertisement)
18-07-2014, 03:16 AM
(18-07-2014, 01:12 AM)lovely11 Wrote:(17-07-2014, 12:49 AM)ClaraKay Wrote: [DHT] WTF good is it?
DHT has use, but too much of it does as you say. DHT even up-regulates estrogen receptors.
Lowering DHT up-regulates the effects of estrogen in the body, and once DHT is converted to aromatase it can't be converted back to E. Are your talking about the study where they castracted rats, which isn't relevant at all.
In the present study, efferent ductule ligation and castration, followed by replacement with testosterone, dihydrotestosterone (DHT) or estradiol was used to investigate the relative importance of circulating and luminal sources of steroid for the modulation of ERα, ERβ and AR in rat efferent ductules. Uni- or bilateral castration and ligation did not affect the expression of ERα and ERβ, but bilateral castration caused down-regulation of AR. Replacement with DHT and testosterone alone or in combination with estradiol caused the recovery of AR expression to control levels. A slight recovery of AR was also observed after estrogen replacement. ERα expression was decreased to nearly undetectable levels after estrogen replacement.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2973561/
DHT is a potent androgen and cannot be aromatized to oestrogens, therefore acting as a pure androgen. DHT has been proposed as an androgen replacement therapy, with possible advantages over testosterone in certain circumstances in the ageing population as well as in patients with gynaecomastia and microphallus. A potential advantage of DHT over testosterone as an androgen replacement therapy is the reported and seemingly paradoxically muted effects of DHT on prostate growth. The decreased effect of DHT compared with testosterone on the prostate gland of humans may be due to the decrease in intraprostatic oestradiol levels. The potential beneficial effect of less prostate growth after DHT requires substantiation and, if true, must be balanced against any negative effects that might occur on bone, lipids and sexuality when a pure androgen replaces treatment with an aromatizable androgen.
Dihydrotestosterone: a rationale for its use as a non-aromatizable androgen replacement therapeutic agent.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10332569
18-07-2014, 04:04 AM
Its relevant to some degree. It's not important. DHT does more against NBE, than it could potentially do for NBE. There are other hormones that can upregulate receptors. Of course, there may be small amounts of DHT in the body, better off leaving that alone, or lowering it. Many times an antagonist also upregulates that receptor, but we don't know if this is always the case. That's why there's red reishi to lower DHT. It's way better to use progestogens, estrogens, and prolactin which all cause growth, to be agonists to their own receptors, while potentially upregulating the other two.
"Lowering DHT up-regulates the effects of estrogen in the body, and once DHT is converted to aromatase it can't be converted back to E" DHT is converted by aromatase?
This is interesting about progesterone regulation of ER, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7629427 .
There was a database somewhere, where it showed which hormones interacted in what way with which receptors. If only that database was better made. It has a meter that goes by how many NIH studies showed an effect, rather than potency (which would be difficult if not impossible).
"Lowering DHT up-regulates the effects of estrogen in the body, and once DHT is converted to aromatase it can't be converted back to E" DHT is converted by aromatase?
This is interesting about progesterone regulation of ER, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7629427 .
There was a database somewhere, where it showed which hormones interacted in what way with which receptors. If only that database was better made. It has a meter that goes by how many NIH studies showed an effect, rather than potency (which would be difficult if not impossible).
@ Lotus, thanks for the White Peony Recommendation, So-far I am feeling more than seeing noticeable differences with using White Peony.
On top of a slight but noticeable slowing of unwanted hair regrowth I've been feeling the sensations of fat relocation more frequently and newly in my backside as well (that one feels a bit different though, think the tingly sensation with also the warmth/heat of a heat pack)
Also my Buds became sore again much much sooner than with anything else.
I do have one question for you Lotus, when did you (or what size were you) when you started using PC?
I noticed it was on most of your programs and am curious.
(Yes I do have some, but have not used it yet)
On top of a slight but noticeable slowing of unwanted hair regrowth I've been feeling the sensations of fat relocation more frequently and newly in my backside as well (that one feels a bit different though, think the tingly sensation with also the warmth/heat of a heat pack)
Also my Buds became sore again much much sooner than with anything else.
I do have one question for you Lotus, when did you (or what size were you) when you started using PC?
I noticed it was on most of your programs and am curious.
(Yes I do have some, but have not used it yet)
18-07-2014, 05:17 AM
(18-07-2014, 04:47 AM)Lenneth Wrote: @ Lotus, thanks for the White Peony Recommendation, So-far I am feeling more than seeing noticeable differences with using White Peony.
That's great news Lenneth,
(18-07-2014, 04:47 AM)Lenneth Wrote: On top of a slight but noticeable slowing of unwanted hair regrowth I've been feeling the sensations of fat relocation more frequently and newly in my backside as well (that one feels a bit different though, think the tingly sensation with also the warmth/heat of a heat pack)
That's cool too, imo it indicates a shift in the T/E ratio favoring E of course.
(18-07-2014, 04:47 AM)Lenneth Wrote: Also my Buds became sore again much much sooner than with anything else.
Glandular tissue is always more painful than fat tissue, don't forget to massage and break up it for the growth process, (yup!, it's gonna hurt lol)
(18-07-2014, 04:47 AM)Lenneth Wrote: I do have one question for you Lotus, when did you (or what size were you) when you started using PC?
I noticed it was on most of your programs and am curious.
(Yes I do have some, but have not used it yet)
I think I was a B-cup when I started using PC, I applied it directly to the breasts 3-4x times a week (I was greedy, lol). My thinking was the elongation and side branching PC would bring, of course I was taking 3000mg of PM at the time. When I found out that PC off-sets E, I backed it down to 2-3x times per week. Is it worth the extra aggression it will bring?, honestly? 50/50 I guess.
18-07-2014, 05:22 AM
(18-07-2014, 04:04 AM)lovely11 Wrote: This is interesting about progesterone regulation of ER, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7629427 .
Estrogen induction of this protein was inhibited by at least 70% in T47D cells exposed to R5020 for 24 hours before estrogen administration and by about 25% in MCF-7 cells under the same conditions.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
70% is a big number!
(18-07-2014, 04:04 AM)lovely11 Wrote: There was a database somewhere, where it showed which hormones interacted in what way with which receptors. If only that database was better made. It has a meter that goes by how many NIH studies showed an effect, rather than potency (which would be difficult if not impossible).
I vaguely remember this or something similar, I might have it, maybe!
18-07-2014, 05:35 AM
"Dihydrotestosterone (DHT) or dexamethasone (DEX) had no effect on ER sites" but effects on normal cells and cancer cells are different, except when it comes to regulation. I missed this. It was another study where I saw DHT regulate a non androgenic receptor. Ill just go with this quote above.
18-07-2014, 06:02 AM
(18-07-2014, 05:17 AM)Lotus Wrote: Glandular tissue is always more painful than fat tissue, don't forget to massage and break up it for the growth process, (yup!, it's gonna hurt lol)
Yes, I know, been there before, and actually glad to get back to it.
(18-07-2014, 05:17 AM)Lotus Wrote:(18-07-2014, 04:47 AM)Lenneth Wrote: I do have one question for you Lotus, when did you (or what size were you) when you started using PC?
I noticed it was on most of your programs and am curious.
(Yes I do have some, but have not used it yet)
I think I was a B-cup when I started using PC, I applied it directly to the breasts 3-4x times a week (I was greedy, lol). My thinking was the elongation and side branching PC would bring, of course I was taking 3000mg of PM at the time. When I found out that PC off-sets E, I backed it down to 2-3x times per week. Is it worth the extra aggression it will bring?, honestly? 50/50 I guess.
You applied it to your breasts? I've heard that was a big no-no and can shrink them....
18-07-2014, 06:17 AM
(18-07-2014, 06:02 AM)Lenneth Wrote:(18-07-2014, 05:17 AM)Lotus Wrote: Glandular tissue is always more painful than fat tissue, don't forget to massage and break up it for the growth process, (yup!, it's gonna hurt lol)
Yes, I know, been there before, and actually glad to get back to it.
(18-07-2014, 05:17 AM)Lotus Wrote:(18-07-2014, 04:47 AM)Lenneth Wrote: I do have one question for you Lotus, when did you (or what size were you) when you started using PC?
I noticed it was on most of your programs and am curious.
(Yes I do have some, but have not used it yet)
I think I was a B-cup when I started using PC, I applied it directly to the breasts 3-4x times a week (I was greedy, lol). My thinking was the elongation and side branching PC would bring, of course I was taking 3000mg of PM at the time. When I found out that PC off-sets E, I backed it down to 2-3x times per week. Is it worth the extra aggression it will bring?, honestly? 50/50 I guess.
You applied it to your breasts? I've heard that was a big no-no and can shrink them....
Yeah I've heard that too, however I've read and found that to be the opposite, at least in my case. I can only think that the other supplements I was taking countered those effects, everyone's different in their response as you already know.
One thing for sure is that PC is a strong 5 ar, and on the other hand it also off-sets estrogen dominance along with a few other bennies. I sift through everything I can about a supplement and try to make the best choice, probably one reason I had 6 or 7 programs, lol.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
(advertisement)
Users browsing this thread: 16 Guest(s)
(advertisement)
Cookie Policy Privacy Policy