Turinabol Metabolite Detection Time: 40-50 Days

[Doughie99]

Hey guys, sorry to bump this dead thread but I'm one of the guys who worked on development and confirmation of the M3 metabolite so I hope I can shed some light here. ask me anything.

The detection window timeframes you guys throw around were determined from one individual who took a SINGLE very small dose (typically 5-10 mg). Furthermore excretion studies are generally performed for only about 30 days.
Athletes abusing DHCMT are suspected to ingest around 40-70 mg per day. This big bolus may lead to incorporation of metabolites into fatty tissue which is again liberated when the fat is cut finding it's way into the urine.
All these factors paint a plausible picture as to how M3 could be detected almost 500 days after the last ingestion. Additionally, DHCMT metabolism shows great inter-individual variability, meaning the amount of M3 produced by Jones'
specific enzyme cocktail might be higher than that of other people.

interesting stuff. Quick question, may I ask are you a biochemist by profession or something similar?

 

[Nicolas Kratena]

interesting stuff. Quick question, may I ask are you a biochemist by profession or something similar?

I'm a synthetic chemist, my PhD was synthesizing these long-term metabolites and confirm or correct the proposed molecular structures.
I'd like to think I have a solid grasp on metabolism and biochemistry in general though.

 

[HHJ]

Give the belt back to DC plz

 

[IDGETKTFO]

Why even keep bringing this shit up? UFC, USADA , the NSAC, and CSAC are just going to keep using the pulsing picogram excuse, so its pointless to even discuss this anymore.

 

[Doughie99]

I'm a synthetic chemist, my PhD was synthesizing these long-term metabolites and confirm or correct the proposed molecular structures.
I'd like to think I have a solid grasp on metabolism and biochemistry in general though.

OK one quick question for you : the detected concentration of the M3 metabolite of the Oral Turinabol ingested was reported as being varied amounts between approx 20picograms and 50picograms per ml. Is that the concentration per ml of the urine samples (as it's a urine test) ? or is that somehow extrapolated back to give a pg/ml concentration in the subjects blood? And would drinking large amounts of water in the prior hour or two of providing the urine sample dilute affect the resulting concentration levels?

Also... you're synthesizing organic molecules?? I didnt think that was possible. But hey....i dunno.

 

[true_fan]

Dude, Jones has erectile disfunction so his metabolites take longer to pulse!

 

[Nueman43]

Dunning Kruger to the maxxxxxxxx

I find Dunning Kruger to be highly unlikely. Are you aware of how low your IQ has to be for that to be possible? Also, have you ever read anything written by people in that range.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

 

[Nicolas Kratena]

OK one quick question for you : the detected concentration of the M3 metabolite of the Oral Turinabol ingested was reported as being varied amounts between approx 20picograms and 50picograms per ml. Is that the concentration per ml of the urine samples (as it's a urine test) ? or is that somehow extrapolated back to give a pg/ml concentration in the subjects blood? And would drinking large amounts of water in the prior hour or two of providing the urine sample dilute affect the resulting concentration levels?

Also... you're synthesizing organic molecules?? I didnt think that was possible. But hey....i dunno.

I am not familiar with the Doping code of NSAC or other North American agencies but according to this WADA technical document: https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/td2018mrpl_v1_finaleng.pdf
Threshold levels (concentration) is measured in the sample matrix so... urine. You can see the MRPL for DHCMT is 2ng/mL aka 2000 pg/mL. So while diluting urine may or may not be a valuable strategy (not gonna research this right now, gotta be honest with you)
to lower effective concentration, I think looking at these minimum levels you will realise how little 20 picogram/mL actually is. Diluting down to 1% of original concentration is certainly not feasible just by drinking a bit of water before testing.
From my point of view it would be interesting to test without sample preparation directly for M3 metabolite conjugates, but this is very complex and may take years until it's developed.

And yes, I build with atoms as my legos. It's very much something we can do

 

[John41285]

Didnt read the article but the quote you posted says estimated time. Not defending Jones at all but it's just an estimation. I'd love nothing more than for him to be gone from the UFC but is there hard proof about the time it stays in your system and not just an estimate? Asking because I haven't looked into it.

 

[UsernameLOL]

Hey guys, sorry to bump this dead thread but I'm one of the guys who worked on confirmation of the M3 metabolite so I hope I can shed some light here. ask me anything.

The detection window timeframes you guys throw around were determined from one individual who took a SINGLE very small dose (typically 5-10 mg). Furthermore excretion studies are generally performed for only about 30 days.
Athletes abusing DHCMT are suspected to ingest around 40-70 mg per day. This big bolus may lead to incorporation of metabolites into fatty tissue which is again liberated when the fat is cut finding it's way into the urine.
All these factors paint a plausible picture as to how M3 could be detected almost 500 days after the last ingestion. Additionally, DHCMT metabolism shows great inter-individual variability, meaning the amount of M3 produced by Jones'
specific enzyme cocktail might be higher than that of other people.

With all due respect.....how can “great inter-individual variability” be concluded from extremely limited excretory data? By your own admission it seems that the only instance peer reviewed excretory data is from a sample size n=1.

Apologies if I’m mistaken.

 

[Nicolas Kratena]

With all due respect.....how can “great inter-individual variability” be concluded from extremely limited excretory data?

You have to realise a lot of the research on this has not been published, there is no real incentive to do so. WADA and other agencies have a lot of data that they collected during the years.
From the few controlled excretion studies that have been performed and the positive samples on DHCMT in the last 10 years you get quite a dataset.
Also if Rodchenkov, the guy who helped run the russian doping scheme says this I assume it must come from a well reasoned position.
I agree that it's frustating to have these vague assertions but sometimes scientists have no other way to convey some information.

Concerning your edit: I believe there was an excretion study in the mid 90s published by Schänzer and recently there was a chinese group. But yeah, ideally there would be more subjects, longer observation periods etc.

 

[Doughie99]

I am not familiar with the Doping code of NSAC or other North American agencies but according to this WADA technical document: https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/td2018mrpl_v1_finaleng.pdf
Threshold levels (concentration) is measured in the sample matrix so... urine. You can see the MRPL for DHCMT is 2ng/mL aka 2000 pg/mL. So while diluting urine may or may not be a valuable strategy (not gonna research this right now, gotta be honest with you)
to lower effective concentration, I think looking at these minimum levels you will realise how little 20 picogram/mL actually is. Diluting down to 1% of original concentration is certainly not feasible just by drinking a bit of water before testing.
From my point of view it would be interesting to test without sample preparation directly for M3 metabolite conjugates, but this is very complex and may take years until it's developed.

And yes, I build with atoms as my legos. It's very much something we can do

ok thanks for the info, I appreciate it. I've read quite a lot about it, so always interesting to get more input from folks who do this for a living etc.

 

[UsernameLOL]

You have to realise a lot of the research on this has not been published, there is no real incentive to do so. WADA and other agencies have a lot of data that they collected during the years.
From the few controlled excretion studies that have been performed and the positive samples on DHCMT in the last 10 years you get quite a dataset.
Also if Rodchenkov, the guy who helped run the russian doping scheme says this I assume it must come from a well reasoned position.
I agree that it's frustating to have these vague assertions but sometimes scientists have no other way to convey some information.

Concerning your edit: I believe there was an excretion study in the mid 90s published by Schänzer and recently there was a chinese group. But yeah, ideally there would be more subjects, longer observation periods etc.

Research as in uncontrolled case studies? Seems a bit unreliable.

That Schanzer study was one person. Still not enough to conclude “great inter-individual variability”. I can’t find the Chinese study maybe that coupled with the Schanzer study supports great inter-individual variability.

Also, thanks for taking time to post on these forums.

 

[Summoning]

"Our study has shown that the metabolite M3 and, to a lesser extent, its epimer and M4 are the most long-term metabolites of DHCMT. Taking into account that I and II are reportedly detectable up to 22 days post administration [3,9] and that the relative concentration of M3 in DHCMT post administration urines is normally higher compared to I and II, the detection window of M3 could be estimated as 40–50 days, while M1, M2 and M4 are at least as valuable as I and II."

https://vdocuments.site/detection-a...ong-term-dehydrochloromethyltestosterone.html

The alleged number of days between Jones' last ingestion of Turinabol? 496 days.

Translation:

Spoiler

Jones ingested Turinabol in the last 40-50 days.

40-50?... Let´s say 400-500 days..

 

[kflo]

Research as in uncontrolled case studies? Seems a bit unreliable.

That Schanzer study was one person. Still not enough to conclude “great inter-individual variability”. I can’t find the Chinese study maybe that coupled with the Schanzer study supports great inter-individual variability.

Also, thanks for taking time to post on these forums.

I think again there is data that doesn’t come from controlled studies. Maybe unreliable, but better to evaluate it than just ignoring it. Particularly for an exercise like this.

 

[Hirashin]

What about pulsing though?

 

[UsernameLOL]

I think again there is data that doesn’t come from controlled studies. Maybe unreliable, but better to evaluate it than just ignoring it. Particularly for an exercise like this.

Meh for all we know the great inter-individual variability is because athletes are administering different doses (or taking them unintentionally which is less likely).

 

[kflo]

Meh for all we know the great inter-individual variability is because athletes are administering different doses (or taking them unintentionally which is less likely).

Or it’s actually inter-individual variability....

Again, no one is even aware of these low dose protocols so why do people presume it’s more likely?

 

[Brass]

This has been debunked literally dozens of times dumbo lol

 

[UsernameLOL]

Or it’s actually inter-individual variability....

Again, no one is even aware of these low dose protocols so why do people presume it’s more likely?

Or it’s not......hard to know when we don’t know what the athletes are taking in what dosages and for what duration.......or if it was an accidental ingestion.

Again no one is aware of what dosagse/durations result in what excretory patterns. The arbitration report says as much. Or at least the data is extremely limited.

Edit: I never said micro-dosing was more likely.