Trest isn't test.
It's a 19-nor, which I'm sure you know so I am confused lol
Sent from my LM-K300 using Tapatalk
So Phill posted this on another forum and it explains ment very well. It’s a lot to read but very informative bro. Ment isn’t your typical 19nor it was used to treat low test at one point and can be used as a base in your cycle.
Trestolone, also known as 7α-methyl-19-nortestosterone (MENT) or 7α-methylestr-4-en-17β-ol-3-one, is a synthetic androgen-anabolic steroid (AAS) derivative of Nandrolone (19-nortestosterone) . It is used for its strong anabolic properties on the musculoskeletal system and is a candidate drug for use as a male hormonal contraceptive method. In males, regular administration of sufficient quantities of Trestolone induces a state of reversible sterility. Trestolone is used in the form of the acetate ester, Trestolone Acetate, which is administered intramuscularly.
Trestolone is a compound that is an experimental contraceptive treatment and is not yet legally commercially available. Safety and efficacy are currently being evaluated in scientific studies, supported by the Population Council.
As already mentioned, MENT is a derivative of Nandrolone, but despite the strong structural similarity with the starting molecule it differs from this for the presence of a 7-alpha-methyl bond, which prevents the molecule from being 5 alpha reduced, in addition to strengthening the androgen bond. Methylation in C-7 increases the overall potency of the steroid. The reason why a methylation increases the potency of the steroid is usually caused by one or more factors, in particular an increased resistance to hepatic metabolism (inactivation) or a reduced binding affinity with the transport proteins. In the case of MENT, we see a steroid with a relatively fast metabolic breakdown, but with no binding affinity for SHBG (Sex Hormone Binding Globulin).
Consequently, its reduced binding to serum transport proteins appears to be partly responsible for the potency of MENT. During testing in 1963, scientists reported an anabolic effect that was between 3.5 and 23 times greater than Testosterone, while being only 3-6 times more androgenic.
When studied on primates in 1998, it was shown to have 10 times the anabolic potency of testosterone, with only 2 times the stimulating action on the prostate. Its binding affinity for the androgen receptor was investigated a year later, and provided further explanation for the strong anabolic effect of this steroid. Here, MENT has been shown to bind to the androgen receptor more strongly than Testosterone, Nandrolone, or Dihydrotestosterone.
MENT (methylnortestosterone acetate, albeit known as Trestolone) was first described in 1963. The early 1960s were the heyday of anabolic steroid development, with new compounds being introduced in the trade journals. almost every week. Like a large number of effective steroids studied during that time, however, MENT did not go the way of becoming a commercial pharmaceutical product. For about four decades it sat gathering dust on the shelves, alongside many other effective but anonymous compounds. Historically, the lack of early financial support has been a death sentence for anabolic steroids. If a company is not there originally, to fund the millions needed to develop into a real prescription product, it does virtually nothing of the molecule. There was simply no money to invest in MENT in 1960, and it fell by the wayside. For a long time this agent remained in the "nowhere" in the world of steroids.
But things changed for MENT around the turn of the next century, in a very dramatic way. On October 30, 2000, international pharmaceutical giant Schering AG made an announcement to pubHc where it claimed to have entered into a partnership for research, development, and hinting at the market introduction of methylnortestosterone for use as a hormonal contraceptive. This follows several years of sporadic but positive studies on this agent. The gears were thus set in motion, and this old steroid, which scientists had ignored for more than thirty years, was suddenly put in the midst of an outbreak of new research and speculation they had never seen before. In their press release, Schering AG made the promise of a new androgen that offers the anabolic and endocrine benefits of injectable testosterone, but without a possible hypertrophic action on the prostate, and greater comfort for the patient. In other words, Schering is saying that MENT appears to be an easier compound to administer and equally useful as testosterone, without the same androgenic problems associated with it.
Schering's principle attraction towards MENT is probably not necessarily due to its potency, but to its ability to reproduce the positive effects of Testosterone on muscle mass and male sexual functions, minimizing the stimulating action on the prostate. Prostate cancer and benign enlargement of the prostate are very common problems among men in the United States, and both diseases are fueled at least in part by androgens. This has led to much caution when it comes to androgen replacement therapy in older men. Although medical data are still inconclusive in this regard, many doctors fear that the androgenicity of Testosterone can lead to negative effects. After all, the increases in PSA values with the use of Testosterone in older men are well documented. (4) Perhaps MENT was introduced to alleviate this concern. Noting MENT's lower relative androgenicity, researchers concluded more than a decade ago that it may be a far better option for hormone replacement therapy. To quote researchers from the NY Center for Biomedical Research, "We concluded that using MENT instead of T for androgen replacement therapy could have health-promoting effects, reducing the appearance of prostate disease." This is quite a statement, especially when we remember that it concerns the use of a synthetic anabolic steroid.
Looking a little closer at some of the recent studies conducted on MENT, we see an overall trend of success and relative safety. Perhaps the most noteworthy study to review is the international clinical study which was conducted between 2002 and 2003. (4) The study involved the use of MENT implants as long-term contraceptives in males. In this experiment, thirty-six men were enrolled in three separate clinics residing in Germany, Chile, and the Dominican Republic (12 men from each nation). The study examined the use of the implants for 6, 9, or 12 months, and the periodic examinations necessary to measure the effects and potential risks. Three different dosages were used, which consisted of administering one, two or four implants at the time of the start of the study. Each implant has been designed to deliver approximately 400mcg of steroid per day, which is equivalent to daily doses of 0.4mg, 0.8mg, or 1.6mg of steroid. The release rate is slowly reduced but nevertheless reaches around 200mcg per day after a year.
The results of the clinical study were very promising. Four implants of MENT (from 1.6mg / day) suppressed spermatogenesis with efficacy similar to that measured with Testosterone implants, Testosterone Enanthate injections, and Testosterone Undecanoate injections (all of which have been successfully investigated as contraceptives). MENT was able to produce azoospermia at 82 °; 0 of treated subjects, a figure that was actually higher than that reported with 200 mg of Testosterone Enanthate per week (which produced azoospermia at 65-660 / 0 of normal subjects of male sex in 6 months). As for the negative side effects, they were few in the subjects. Two subjects noted an increase in blood pressure that went outside the normal range, and one was forced to discontinue the study due to this (although no chronic effects were noted). In other cases, there was typically only a very small increase in systolic blood pressure (+4.8), and no significant changes in lipids (including cholesterol and triglycerides) or PSA values. Furthermore, the volume of the prostate was slightly reduced (not increased) in all groups. Liver enzymes were slightly elevated but remained within the normal range in all subjects. The average time to resume normal sperm production after the interruption was 3 months, similar to that reported by a 1990 World Health Organization study with 200 mg per week of Testosterone Enanthate. Overall, MENT did its job admirably, with a very noticeable (acceptable) level of effect, and minimal side effects. What's more, the drug can be effective when it is implanted more infrequently, once a year.
: