Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.
// request.cf · coarse context
A page that knows where it met you.
Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 1-Testosterone article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
It was never an approved drug for anything, so it's dubious to say it was withdrawn; it was reclassified as schedule III together with many other "prohormones". It was considered a nutritional supplement before because it occurs in minute quantities in nature somewhere (can't find a paper to say where right now). Xasodfuih (talk) 18:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This should probably include a reference to the original research in the Journal of Organic Chemistry where its discovery was announced and the first classification of the effects were determined. Off the top of my head, I believe they found it several times more potent than the baseline anabolically, but only as androgenic. Some mention of oral availability and different types, esters, etc, would be interesting. An undecanoate soy-oil based version was developed that surprisingly tested higher bioavailablity when oral than normal test soy. 1-test was injectable, but reportedly caused burning sensations. Speaking of that last point, I'd also like to see a mention of the offshoot chemicals that were based on this one that lacked many of these traits. There were even more exotic steroids developed from the 1-test "path" that were even more potent and less problematic to the liver, too. What ever happened to that research? -Reticuli 66.178.144.182 (talk) 08:33, 23 April 2011 (UTC)Reply
