Kurt Havens : Test Cypionate vs Enanthate Case Report

[SmallTitsIRL]

Pharma research for evaluating drug legality/usability? no.
That framing is also something I do not agree with. another part of the study that was poorly done.

Is this valid methodology for comparing 2 different drugs in a nonclinical setting, simply to highlight possible differences in metabolism/drug response? aka to learn more about the drugs/prodrugs themselves? Definitely.

An example where a third control group would be needed is Antidepressant A vs Antidepressant B.
Antidepressant A hits receptor ABC and affects neurotransmitter DEF
Antidepressant B hits receptor GHI and affects neurotransmitter JKL
One group takes A, the other B, and a third, a control, takes a placebo.
what effects are being reported? What efects can be maesured via questionares? etc.



Now we get to an example more closely related/ similar to the Test E vs Test C.
Insulin A has a half life of 72 hours.
Insulin B has a half life of 72 hours, but it gets that long lasting effect via a different mechanism as insulin A. Its molecule looks a bit different, and there is some anecdotal evidence to suggest some people might not reach similar serum insulin levels due to the odd shape it has.

Pharma company Novo-Lilly wants to test the differences in individual responses, because they fear that Insulin A might get metabolized differently than insulin B due to either: analysis of its structure and or: customer reports/anecdotes.

They take a hundred type 1 diabetics and give them insulin A in a trial. It works as they thought it would. serum insulin is at 27-34 in all subjects when measured (differences occur due to bodyweight differences, absorption differences, etc). This is their baseline which would be expected for insulin B as well.
So each individual now has a score attached to them.

Now the same 100 diabetics take insulin B. Equivalent dosages, all other variables accounted for. Serum insulin is about equal to the score for insulin A in 50 people.
The other half only shows a serum insulin of ~20. there may be some Glucose control issues in this half as well, but they are not quite sure.

That means they show a different serum score compared to the one they showed when taking insulin A, so now there is proof that some people have to either dose insulin B differently or switch to insulin A if they have issues with insulin B.
Novo-Lilly now knows, that there is something about those fifty people that changes the way the either absorb or metabolize Insulin B. They may now do whatever they want with that knowledge.

There is no need for a design that adds another control group of people who have nothing to do with insulin, like non-diabetic people (or in our case, testosterone and naturals) or diabetics who dont get any insulin (which would be cruel).
It is nonsensical to try to measure intraindividual differences with groupings used to measure interindividual differences.



We are not evaluating if these drugs are effective or permissible to be prescribed or used in humans. This is not that type of research. No stage 3 human trial. We are evaluating if one of them has a specific characteristic which may impact their effectiveness compared to another prodrug, both of which are already widely used and have identical APIs.
In that scenario, you would be 100% right

All I am trying to say is: research designs should be the right tool for the job.

in this case, everything was wrong, except for the tool used.

the number of objects interacting with the tool, too few. the reason you gave your boss as to why he should buy you this tool, bad. the thing you did with the object after using the tool, bad.
the fact that you put the object into an oven to dry it while you were using the tool that has a side effect of making it wet, and the customer specifically wanted the object to be soaked.
the fact that he did not really reflect on the object itself and what it was, also not good.

but at least he used a hammer to hammer in a nail. the chair still falls apart and only has 3 legs, but damn the one nail he put in sits well.

However, I am confident that he will publish a study using a larger sample, without Primo, and doing standardized, equally spaced IM shots.
And that he will discuss the results more in depth, and clarify reference ranges used, etc.
That obviously takes time, and I am confident he can do such a thing over the next 1-2 years, which will help clarify if this is a real issue people should mind or something to diseregard.

Stop with that science bullshit, we all meatheads here. What makes you think we still have neurons after all the tren usage?

 

[jitterbug128]

Its a shame it was done this way because there may be merit to the idea and this could've been useful insight but now we're stuck with complete speculation outside of existing studies still - doubt any more studies will even be attempted on it

 

[jitterbug128]

"This is the original case study we did. Larger scale in progress. Will leave this here while science direct gets their act together @scottpsloane @scottwellnessdoc This is not to deter anyone from anything. This is not one is better than another. This is science and science has no opinion. It was done to show that they are not the same. Use what you choose" - kurt on the instagram post where this was shared - looks this isnt the extent of the project at least

 

[NotHuman]

I don’t understand some of you guys. It’s like one person starts to say something wrong and then people just want to agree with one of the first replies even when it doesn’t make sense.

How exactly does primo make this case study any different? He used the same dose of primo with both testosterone esthers. If he used different primo doses, then yes it would muddy the data. However, the same dose was used both times.

That being said, this case study is an interesting data point but it’s a sample size of 1 so it doesn’t prove anything.

Worth exploring more though.

 

[NotHuman]

Subq makes the whole study trash. I thought Kurt was the "use drugs as designed guy".

As much as I agree that his constant preaching of using drugs “the way they were intended” is completely absurd, it seems to me like he just recorded the data and wasn’t coaching the guy on what to use. I’m not sure if this part is clear or not.