AOD9604 Patent Process, The BodyBuilders Speak Out

Remove this Banner Ad

Akka76

All Australian
Suspended
Dec 2, 2014
789
544
AFL Club
Gold Coast
The BodyBuilders have written a fresh article on AOD9604 Patent process, well worth a read, some key quotes are contained below:

http://musculardevelopmentmag.com.au/shane-charter-muscular-mythbusters/

You could be excused for thinking that peptides were a new innovation in the sports supplement market. The media saturation surrounding the cases made by multiple professional sporting bodies’ against players, and the Australian Crime Commission’s report into drugs in sport has portrayed an image of this new age scourge entering the sporting arena.

The fact is I was using my first peptides in sport over 20 years ago and have continued to do so since that first competition. The first peptide I used was IGF-1 lr3 and only due to my pharmaceutical industry job was I able to access such an innovative product back then.

Even then peptides had already been around for 10 years. It was 1984 when the first chemically synthesised peptide drug was launched. It was a luteinising hormone releasing hormone (LHRH). Today there are over 60 therapeutic-based peptides available on the medical market and hundreds of non-proven peptide entities marketed online, with many claims but not the clinical data to obtain a medical listing.

The market value exceeds $20 Billion USD per annum and it is one of the fastest growing segments of the health care market, with peptides providing some therapeutic solutions for diseases such as HIV, diabetes, cancer, hepatitis, sexual dysfunction, hepatitis, obesity and even wrinkle treatments. It is the innovative biochemist/bodybuilder that then looks at a medical therapeutic benefit and thinks of how it can be applied to building a better body.

This may be muscle building, fat burning, tendon and ligament strengthening or even for sexual improvements that could assist when the testicles have shut down

Let’s use AOD (Anti Obesity Drug) 9604 as a discussion peptide to get my point across of how difficult it is for the consumer to establish if a peptide is myth or magic.

The reason I am using this example is because ever since a high profile footballer came out and said he was injected with AOD-9604, I have had hundreds of emails enquiring about the efficacy and suitability of AOD for other people’s programs.

Metabolic Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturers and patent holders of AOD-9604 had effectively shelved the product after spending $50 million in development, saying that it would not be a viable entrant into the market.

The peptide was proven to be safe and well tolerated in a total of six human clinical trials involving 925 humans, and the preliminary work in test tubes showed that the peptide may stimulate the growth of bones, muscle and cartilage cells. This then led to massive funding and a trial in animals.

A special strain of obese mice supplemented with the peptide showed a reduction in weight, increased fat oxidation, and raised plasma glycerol, which are indicators of lipolysis or fat burning.

The next phase was to run human clinical trials. These trials however, had no positive outcome for the peptide; in fact when follow up trials were done in rats, they were unable to replicate the positive results of the obese mice from the first trial.

In 2007, the company that owns Metabolic Pharmaceuticals, Calzada, reported to their shareholders that AOD-9604 showed no promise, and was being abandoned as a weight loss drug. The peptide was shelved, until the company heard that athletes were using it based on the early work in obese mice. They found that there was a growing market for their patented product. So rather than try to sue the Chinese companies that were illegally copying their patented peptide, they decided to get their own version onto the market.

Calzada, the parent company of Metabolic Pharmaceuticals said in a statement in
June 2012: “Generally Recognised As Safe (GRAS) status allows AOD-9604 to be sold as a nutrient supplement in conventional and functional foods, drinks and dietary supplements in the USA at the daily level of up to 1mg per person.”


The doses used in trials were around 500ug/kg, which means a 100kg person was receiving 50mg of the peptide daily.

Irrespective of dose, the company themselves have previously stated that AOD-9604 is not effective orally. So potentially, the injected form may have some benefits but this has not been approved.

While AOD-9604 is not approved by the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), it can be legally obtained on a doctor’s prescription and dispensed by a compounding pharmacy.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

This shows how far athletes are prepared to go even if there is no proven effect.

They stopped producing the drug as they couldn't replicate the effect on the 'obese mice'. In other words, it wasn't even proven to work.

Yet athletes were lining up to get the product based on the initial findings.

This is why letting people like Dank have free reign over impressionable / gullible athletes without the oversight of trained doctors is so fraught with danger.

Also, the way this person seems to justify using these products because they are used to treat AIDS or cancer (or their effects at least) is worrying. Just because something is used to treat someone with AIDS or cancer, doesn't mean it is totally safe or benign. Radiation therapy is used on some cancer patients but that doesn't mean it's good for you. It's just that the benefits of the treatment outweighs the side effects.
 
Since when have body builders been regarded as athletes, and since when have we started to listen to them with any seriousness abt supplements?
 
what would this board be without you nowadays Akka?

But I wonder, why did you quote all the article, up to that point, then not the rest? Very strange.

Here's the rest. Might do some bolding myself, whaddya think?




But then again, I can get placebos prescribed and dispensed by a compounding chemist too. What that means is that after $50 million dollars of investment, the peptide was not considered viable enough to get over the line as a pharmaceutical product to be listed by the TGA along with the necessary clinical claims attached to it, such as ‘effective for fat loss’.

If you look at this peptide in first principles, then you would understand why it was worth the investment. Basically AOD-9604 consists of residues (177-191) of hGH, and an additional tyrosine residue. The developers believed it was the segment of the hGH that brought about the fat loss. So naturally if you isolated this segment and concentrated it then you could get an improvement in fat loss, without all the other effects of the hGH.

Add to this the government saying that AOD-9604 is being widely used as a PEID in professional sport, and then the captain of an AFL club admits his use, and once you have the online peptide marketers and retailers placing their unfounded claims to the product, then presto — you have massive sales campaign.

Below is an exact copy of marketing material used by one of the peptide sellers:

In summary, AOD-9604 may:

  • Reduces the most stubborn abdominal fat
  • Maintains muscle mass
  • Improve bone density fragility in Osteoporosis
  • Accelerate soft tissue damage from injury
  • Increases IGF-1 levels, in an effective manner, thus making this a peptide that burns fat
  • Increases energy expenditure
  • Imporoves (sic) lipid profiles and lipolytic activity, does not negatively impact blood glucose levels, nor does cell proliferation occur, like HGH
  • Extremely potent and effective fat burner.
Including the typo just highlights how marketing or hype can get sales without credibility — what maintains sales is results and clinical data.

This article was designed to highlight the hype versus hope of peptides. I think this clearly shows where AOD-9604 sits in the scheme of things — I don’t want people to think all peptides are full of the same marketing hype.

In fact, what I would like to do in future editions is highlight some of the highly effective peptides and show where they can be positioned in a well thought out clinically justified supplement program.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #8
what would this board be without you nowadays Akka?

But I wonder, why did you quote all the article, up to that point, then not the rest? Very strange.

Here's the rest. Might do some bolding myself, whaddya think?

I encourage participation from other BF Posters, it makes me feel alive - I most welcome contribution of Mr L. Uppercut to Thread of Creative Strength. Post, participate away, for magic is created, when one converse with one another.
 
So basically it maybe helped shed some of Jobe's puppy fat, but maybe did nothing.

Either way, his decision to inject such a substance into his body in order to gain an 'edge' was pretty ******* stupid.
mebbe he is just doing what his rivals do.

apart from ryan okeefe, birds chirping. And even wrt okeefe, his problem resides in getting caught, and the putative club institutional program. but i ask you, what is the difference if the injecting room in some players' sharehouse, where they share sources, supplies, technical specifics, expertise, plus mebbe an outside qualified medical professional. In comparison to a clinic across the road from the Windy Hill hq. In reality, there is no difference. The only difference is the sheen of the club imprimatur. And plausible deniability in the first instance.

This was why everyone inside the club, and inside the industry, never had too great a concern, the concern was more the public ridicule and the potential revenue damage in the AFL coffers. How they possibly could get the jacks,the customs,the gov't,theASADA,andThe feds off their back! Otherwise, Mcguire et al would not have had one gripe with this. It is just the nuclear arms race thing, and they know the motive and operation at Windy Hill with Corcoran and team. Windy Hill merely showed how not to do plausible deniability, how not to do risk management, and how not to plan for unforeseen unknowns(pleonasm not double negative) as they should have with their risk management. In effect, Essendon's incompetency, has tightened other teams and players self governance and plausible deniability, and tightened the screws on overall risk management. In Essendon's defense, it was customs' interdiction of PIEDs that kicked the ball rolling and this momentum tallied Windy Hill in its wake. It p'raps could have been half a dozen other teams, and a few years either side of 2013, it prolly would have been a different team who suffered this fate. Not Essendon, but your team, or my team, or our team if you barrack for Richmond.
 
Last edited:
mebbe he is just doing what his rivals do.

apart from ryan okeefe, birds chirping. And even wrt okeefe, his problem resides in getting caught, and the putative club institutional program. but i ask you, what is the difference if the injecting room in some players' sharehouse, where they share sources, supplies, technical specifics, expertise, plus mebbe an outside qualified medical profession. In comparison to a clinic across the road from the Windy Hill hq. In reality, there is no difference. The only difference is the sheen of the club imprimatur. And plausible deniability in the first instance.

This was why everyone inside the club, and inside the industry, never had too great a concern, the concern was more the public ridicule and the potential revenue damage in the AFL coffers. How they possibly could get the jacks, the customs, the gov't, ASADA, and the feds off their back. Otherwise, Mcguire et al would not have had one gripe with this. It is just the nuclear arms race thing, and they know the motive and operation at Windy Hill with Corcoran and team. Windy Hill merely showed how not to do plausible deniability, how not to do risk management, and how not to plan for unforeseen unknowns as they should have with their risk management. In effect, Essendon's incompetency, has tightened other teams and players self governance and plausible deniability, and tightened the screws on overall risk management. In Essendon's defenense, it was customs' interception of PIEDs that kicked the ball rolling and this momentum tallied Windy Hill in its wake. It p'raps could have been half a dozen other teams, and a few years either side of 2013, it prolly would have been a different team who suffered this fate. Not Essendon, but your team, or my team, or our team if you barrack for Richmond.

Wow, reading this post is like going down the rabbit hole.

4b29a5ad6929e348b71a6ff56702d4901042e1d8be40c4d87ab40f54a607e1d2.jpg
 
I encourage participation from other BF Posters, it makes me feel alive - I most welcome contribution of Mr L. Uppercut to Thread of Creative Strength. Post, participate away, for magic is created, when one converse with one another.
Ok so you're weird today
 
mebbe he is just doing what his rivals do.

apart from ryan okeefe, birds chirping. And even wrt okeefe, his problem resides in getting caught, and the putative club institutional program. but i ask you, what is the difference if the injecting room in some players' sharehouse, where they share sources, supplies, technical specifics, expertise, plus mebbe an outside qualified medical professional. In comparison to a clinic across the road from the Windy Hill hq. In reality, there is no difference. The only difference is the sheen of the club imprimatur. And plausible deniability in the first instance.

This was why everyone inside the club, and inside the industry, never had too great a concern, the concern was more the public ridicule and the potential revenue damage in the AFL coffers. How they possibly could get the jacks,the customs,the gov't,theASADA,andThe feds off their back! Otherwise, Mcguire et al would not have had one gripe with this. It is just the nuclear arms race thing, and they know the motive and operation at Windy Hill with Corcoran and team. Windy Hill merely showed how not to do plausible deniability, how not to do risk management, and how not to plan for unforeseen unknowns(pleonasm not double negative) as they should have with their risk management. In effect, Essendon's incompetency, has tightened other teams and players self governance and plausible deniability, and tightened the screws on overall risk management. In Essendon's defense, it was customs' interdiction of PIEDs that kicked the ball rolling and this momentum tallied Windy Hill in its wake. It p'raps could have been half a dozen other teams, and a few years either side of 2013, it prolly would have been a different team who suffered this fate. Not Essendon, but your team, or my team, or our team if you barrack for Richmond.

Possibly true, but one team was caught, and the mice will have scurried for their holes. Also I liked the punctuation in the post, blackcat. Makes it much easier to read.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Since when have body builders been regarded as athletes, and since when have we started to listen to them with any seriousness abt supplements?

Really? I can't think of a group of people better able to make statements on that subject. A group who year by year display the ability to develop ever more extreme quantities of lean muscle mass. They may not be so well versed on growing an extra testicle (or losing the original two) and perishing of a variety of nasty rare diseases at an early age, or maybe they just don't care. But they sure as s**t have the runs on the board when it comes to the intended outcome.


what would this board be without you nowadays Akka?

But I wonder, why did you quote all the article, up to that point, then not the rest? Very strange.

Personally I found both halves of the article logically weak and largely bereft of anything more than "no s**t fellas", I know what I'm talking about. The cynic in me asks why someone would approach an audience with a voracious appetite for PEDs and attempt to appear wise and all knowing on what is REALLY the good stuff.

Vis a vis the second half. Strangely AOD did not burst onto the body building scene after it became notorious at Essendon. Quite the contrary. It would be far more supportable to suggest that Essendon got the idea from body building.

AOD was a prominent drug in those circles before the EFC "program", except it was called "frag". Derived from the phrase HGH fragment. And now as ever, it is plain dumb to take the stance "This fragment of HGH could not be demonstrated to have the HGH like property the manufacturer hoped for. Therefore it has no HGH like properties.

Personally I'd lean towards the part of the population which has the runs on the board.
 
Really? I can't think of a group of people better able to make statements on that subject. A group who year by year display the ability to develop ever more extreme quantities of lean muscle mass. They may not be so well versed on growing an extra testicle (or losing the original two) and perishing of a variety of nasty rare diseases at an early age, or maybe they just don't care. But they sure as s**t have the runs on the board when it comes to the intended outcome.

indeed. They do seems quite the pedants with their excruciating detail of their drug regimens.

tho, whatever they can divine, and albeit, they do have a wealth, the weakness manifest is their copious appetites and diets wrt PEDs, not foodstuff. or whey protein.

They cannot isolate individual drugs effects.

for example, the research shows hgh does not work, but when it is used in combination with testosterone, an exogenous testosterone, it works very well for explosive efforts. say, weightlifting, 100m sprinting, other track&field events,

but I actually would lean to professional sportsmen, and bodybuilders, with their anecdotal or heuristic evidence, in comparison to strict academic science, peer reviewed science. Because these professionals in sport, are down on the detail, they will not be pursuing a regimen with no consequence. You say placebo? well, these athletes have exhausted every human asset and regime to perform at 100% of what man/woman can achieve, I am finding it quite simple to dismiss placebo across an entire sample. one, two, once or twice? yes, 60 years of PEDs, no.

but apart from this caveat, i agree with Laphroaig. We gunna do 19 holes at National LP?
 
Last edited:
Statement rather than criticism. :) I think Akka brings certain intangibles to the table

I don't mind the work he does, I will read all the articles he posts, some I find interesting , some not. People give him a lot of crap but I can vouch for the fact that he was saying WADA were trying to develop a new test for peptides before anything came out about the 2 elevated samples.
 
Really? I can't think of a group of people better able to make statements on that subject. A group who year by year display the ability to develop ever more extreme quantities of lean muscle mass. They may not be so well versed on growing an extra testicle (or losing the original two) and perishing of a variety of nasty rare diseases at an early age, or maybe they just don't care. But they sure as s**t have the runs on the board when it comes to the intended outcome.




Personally I found both halves of the article logically weak and largely bereft of anything more than "no s**t fellas", I know what I'm talking about. The cynic in me asks why someone would approach an audience with a voracious appetite for PEDs and attempt to appear wise and all knowing on what is REALLY the good stuff.

Vis a vis the second half. Strangely AOD did not burst onto the body building scene after it became notorious at Essendon. Quite the contrary. It would be far more supportable to suggest that Essendon got the idea from body building.

AOD was a prominent drug in those circles before the EFC "program", except it was called "frag". Derived from the phrase HGH fragment. And now as ever, it is plain dumb to take the stance "This fragment of HGH could not be demonstrated to have the HGH like property the manufacturer hoped for. Therefore it has no HGH like properties.

Personally I'd lean towards the part of the population which has the runs on the board.
- Yes really.
- Someone with a science qualification related to human biology and nutrients. Lab rats would be useful though, but not to comment.
 
I don't mind the work he does, I will read all the articles he posts, some I find interesting , some not. People give him a lot of crap but I can vouch for the fact that he was saying WADA were trying to develop a new test for peptides before anything came out about the 2 elevated samples.
they dont wanna catch anyone, they only wanna communicate catching someone
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top