Methyl-1-Testosterone (M1T) was one of those anabolic steroids that made its way onto the American nutritional market during the prohormone craze started by Patrick Arnold
Because it was legal to sell as a dietary supplement we never really got a good, objective look at it. Instead, we got bombarded with marketing and advertisements. Think about that for a second – traditional anabolic steroids were never marketed to the mass bodybuilding market. As a result, we never needed to wonder about the properties of Trenbolone or Anadrol. The research spoke for itself and, even when I wrote my first book on steroids, I could easily search medical databases for the scientific data on any given compound.
This isn’t the case with so-called prohormones (which in many cases are, scientifically speaking, just regular anabolic steroids). Generally, what we saw with prohormones was a reliance on an old textbook by the name of Androgens and Anabolic Agents by Jules Vida. Supplement formulators and nutritional companies simply looked through this book, found something that was anabolic and could (sort of) still comply with American nutritional laws, and released it on to the market, often without having so much as a single study performed on humans.
And, to be honest, for several decades there weren’t really that many studies performed on anabolic steroids. While we saw the occasional study on testosterone or something with AIDS patients, the field was essentially stagnant. However, since then we’ve seen some legitimate scientists taking a new look at anabolic steroids and giving us some nice data to look at.
“Unfortunately for everyone, the marketing machine really made this steroid appear to be much more potent than it actually was and, even now, it’s still got a reputation for being one of the most powerful prohormones ever sold.“
The older research on M1T tells us that it’s only 25% as anabolic and 50% as androgenic (Counsell RE, Klimstra PD, Colton FB 1962 Anabolic agents: derivatives of 5a-androst-1-ene. J Org Chem 27:248 –253) as the equivalent dose of testosterone. And in our classic reference book, by Vida, it shows a wide range of being 50-200% as anabolic as testosterone and 14-30% as androgenic. Still, people have reported some decent gains on M1T, but the wide variation in the anabolic range makes me think that this explains away some of the non-responders.
In this most recent study, composed by the Center for Preventive Doping Research, in Germany, scientists examined both the anabolic and androgenic activities of M1T after oral (po) and subcutaneous (sc) administration. This study used orchidectomised rats who received either 0.03, 0.3 or 2mg/kg of M1T for 12 days (respectively using either route of administration). After 12 days, their prostate and musculus levator ani were analysed to determine the androgenic and anabolic potential of the steroid, respectively. This is the standard way to measure anabolic steroids for their anabolic potential. In other words, the end weight of the levator ani muscle is used to determine how anabolic a substance is, and the end weight of the prostate is used to figure out how androgenic it is.
The injectable (subcutaneous) results aren’t that important to me, because nobody is actually injecting this stuff – it was available as a pill, after all. Interestingly, the lowest dose (.03mg/kg) caused an increase in the weight of the levator ani muscle that was slightly greater than a dose 10x higher (.3mg/kg), while the highest dose (2mg/kg) ultimately stimulated the most growth. We see something similar with certain other steroids, notably Anadrol, which can actually cause less weight gain with very high doses. Speaking from experience, this is probably because it impairs the appetite when you take too much.
Although M1T had very little observed effect on the end-weight of the liver, it had a considerable effect on tyrosine aminotransferase (TAT), which can indicate a strain on the liver. This is typical of methylated steroids that have been designed for oral administration. Obviously this strain on the liver wasn’t as pronounced with subcutaneous administration, but that’s because injecting a drug allows it to avoid the first-pass metabolism through the liver.
Unfortunately for everyone, the marketing machine really made this steroid appear to be much more potent than it actually was and, even now, it’s still got a reputation for being one of the most powerful prohormones ever sold. The truth is, it’s not… if you’re a mid-range responder in terms of the anabolic rating we’ve seen here, then it’s going to give results that are on par with testosterone. However, if you’re at the bottom of the curve, you could barely see any gains. At the top of the curve, you’d be rocking and rolling with twice the gains you’d see with testosterone, but this all seems like a bit of a crap shoot, especially when you consider the fact that there were a lot more consistent prohormones available (and still available) on the market, for roughly the same price.
By Anthony Roberts