
This is from the study, now note cyproterone acetate is just a little bit more active than cb-03-01 in the hamster flank organ test. I have a study about RU-58841 on hamster flank organ test also I'll dig it up later if you are interested but I'm sure it was more potent than these figures. Secondly the following is a statement about RU58841;
When compared with the antiandrogenic compound cyproterone acetate, PSK-3841 exhibited a 20% increase in AR binding [18].
Also be aware that the cb-03-01 comparison to finasteride in this test is hilarious. They are comparing a 5ar2 inhibitor with a anti-androgen. This obviously will say nothing about it translating for AGA, keep that in mind.
Now guys, think about it. Why was the vehicle ever a problem? Wouldn't it be logical for it that we need a higher concentration for it being effective?
If RU-58841 and cyproterone acetate outperform cb-03-01 then why would cb-03-01 work at a dosage of 1-2%, do you see RU-58841 or cyproterone acetate working that good at such a dosage? I don't think so.
That is what the problem ever was, cosmo just released a new patent in 2014, where they also state the pharmaceutical composition of the cream, and it is nothing special.
The vehicle was never a problem, the concentration was. If you think otherwise come up with reasoning, or I would like to hear it from desmond. I have spoken to chemists and there is literally no reason to think the vehicle was a problem ever.
And yes 5% is going to be expensive as hell I guess.
Leave a comment: