• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Rasagiline Gene Induction Pevents Cell Death - What does this Mean for Longevity?

rasagiline selegiline deprenyl life extension gene induction mao inhibitors bdnf

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 LexLux

  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 23 February 2014 - 02:51 PM


Does this new study demonstrate that rasagiline could have life extension benefits comparable to what is theorized for deprenyl?

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/23739004

Revelation in the neuroprotective functions of rasagiline and selegiline: the induction of distinct genes by different mechanisms.

In Parkinson's disease, cell death of dopamine neurons in the substantia nigra progresses and neuroprotective therapy is required to halt neuronal loss. In cellular and animal models, selegiline [(-)deprenyl] and rasagiline, inhibitors of type B monoamine oxidase (MAO)-B, protect neuronal cells from programmed cell death. In this paper, the authors review their recent results on the molecular mechanisms by which MAO inhibitors prevent the cell death through the induction of antiapoptotic, prosurvival genes. MAO-A mediates the induction of antiapoptotic bcl-2 and mao-a itself by rasagiline, whereas a different mechanism is associated with selegiline. Rasagiline and selegiline preferentially increase GDNF and BDNF in nonhuman primates and Parkinsonian patients, respectively. Enhanced neurotrophic factors might be applicable to monitor the neurorescuing activity of neuroprotection.

Edited by LexLux, 23 February 2014 - 03:18 PM.

  • like x 1

#2 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 23 February 2014 - 03:15 PM

the BDNF which is mentioned above is discussed in this study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/627

BDNF brain-derived neurotrophic factor [ Homo sapiens (human) ]

The protein encoded by this gene is a member of the nerve growth factor family. It is induced by cortical neurons, and is necessary for survival of striatal neurons in the brain. Expression of this gene is reduced in both Alzheimer's and Huntington disease patients. This gene may play a role in the regulation of stress response and in the biology of mood disorders. Multiple transcript variants encoding distinct isoforms have been described for this gene.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 23 February 2014 - 04:07 PM

Also just so we have everything in one place for good measure:

2013 Study - Switch from selegiline to rasagiline is beneficial in patients with Parkinson's disease http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23196982

"The objective of this study is to demonstrate that application of rasagiline instead of selegiline with concomitant determination of L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine in plasma is safe and well tolerated and influences sleep, mood, and motor behavior in patients with Parkinson's disease on a stable drug therapy. 30 patients, who took 7.5 mg selegiline daily for at least 3 months, were switched to 1 mg rasagiline. Then they were followed over an interval of 4 months. The remaining drug therapy remained stable. This changeover was safe and well tolerated. L-Amphetamine and L-methamphetamine only appeared during selegiline treatment. Motor behavior, motor complications, mood and sleep improved during rasagiline administration. Amphetamine-like derivatives of selegiline could contribute to sleep disturbances, which may be involved in worsening of mood. Motor behavior and motor complications probably became better due to the additional glutamate receptor antagonizing properties of rasagiline in this open label study.

Rasagiline meta-analysis: a spotlight on clinical safety and adverse events when treating Parkinson's disease. http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/23634791

"Among the most frequently reported adverse effects for rasagiline as monotherapy are headache, dizziness, and insomnia. Depression, dizziness, somnolence, and other sleep disorders are reported when used in combination therapy. Our analysis demonstrates that the most frequently reported adverse effects in trials did not occur more often with rasagiline than placebo. In conclusion, rasagiline is a well-tolerated MAO-B inhibitor that may help to achieve the desired level of clinical benefit in Parkinson's disease."

#4 xks201

  • Guest
  • 839 posts
  • 25
  • Location:USA

Posted 27 February 2014 - 02:57 PM

Has anyone here tried rasagiline and compared it to deprenyl? Deprenyl made me sleepy at even low doses. Probably because I already have underactive MAO and COMT enzymes.

#5 NeuroNootropic

  • Guest
  • 239 posts
  • 25
  • Location:Canada

Posted 27 February 2014 - 10:23 PM

I have tried both Selegiline and Rasagiline and I am still on Rasagiline. Selegiline only made me sleepy for the first week and then gave me energy whereas Rasagiline made me less sleepy from the first week and has continued to maintain that effect. Both Selegiine and Rasagiline are of the oral formulation, 5 mg for Selegiline and 1 mg for Rasagiline. I personally think Selegiline is better as it's also a CAE (Catecholamine activity enhancer) while Rasagiline is not:

N-methylpropargylamine-1-aminoindane' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18771016']N-methylpropargylamine-1-aminoindane (J-508), a strong releaser of catecholamines was described 30 years ago as a more potent selective inhibitor of MAO-B than (-)-deprenyl (Knoll 1978). In 2007 the desmethyl-analogue of J-508 (rasagiline) was registered as a new selective inhibitor of MAO-B and a possible substitute for (-)-deprenyl in therapy. The discovery of the enhancer regulation, the realization that catecholaminergic and serotonergic neurons in the brain stem are enhancer-sensitive neurons, phenylethylamine (PEA) and triptamine are endogenous enhancer substances, (-)-deprenyl is a PEA-derived synthetic enhancer substance, and finally the development of (-)-BPAP, a tryptamine-derived, 100 times more potent synthetic enhancer substance than (-)-deprenyl, made it clear that the enhancer effect of (-)-deprenyl is primarily responsible for the therapeutic benefits of this drug. To compare the pharmacological spectrum of (-)-deprenyl and rasagiline was the aim of this study. The ability of rats to acquire a two way conditioned avoidance response (CAR) in the shuttle box was analyzed during 5 consecutive days. Tetrabenazine treatment (1 mg/kg, s.c.) depletes from their stores the transmitters of the catecholaminergic neurons of the brain stem. Since the activation of the cortical neurons via the noradrenergic neurons in the brain stem is sine qua non for the acquisition for a CAR, rats treated with tetrabenazine are unable to learn in the shuttle box. To block the activity of MAO-A (clorgyline) or to treat rats with an enhancer substance [(-)-BPAP] are the two possibilities to antagonize the learning deficit caused by tetrabenazine. We compared in shuttle box experiments the effect of (-)-deprenyl, (-)-desmethyl-deprenyl, J-508 and desmethyl-J-508 (rasagiline) on the learning ability of rats pretreated with tetrabenazine. We used as a reference substance clorgyline to demonstrate the effect of a selective MAO-A inhibitor, and (-)-BPAP to demonstrate the effect of a selective enhancer substance. (-)-Deprenyl and (-)-desmethyl-deprenyl acted, like (-)-BPAP, in low doses as enhancer substances and in very high doses as MAO-A inhibitors. J-508 and rasagiline proved to be devoid of the enhancer property and in doses which are known to block MAO-A, they antagonized the effect of tetrabenazine, like clorgyline. Thus, rasagiline can not be a substitute for (-)-deprenyl in therapy.

→ source (external link)


#6 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 27 February 2014 - 10:49 PM

I have tried both Selegiline and Rasagiline and I am still on Rasagiline. Selegiline only made me sleepy for the first week and then gave me energy whereas Rasagiline made me less sleepy from the first week and has continued to maintain that effect. Both Selegiine and Rasagiline are of the oral formulation, 5 mg for Selegiline and 1 mg for Rasagiline. I personally think Selegiline is better as it's also a CAE (Catecholamine activity enhancer) while Rasagiline is not:

are the two possibilities to antagonize the learning deficit caused by tetrabenazine. We compared in shuttle box experiments the effect of (-)-deprenyl, (-)-desmethyl-deprenyl, J-508 and desmethyl-J-508 (rasagiline) on the learning ability of rats pretreated with tetrabenazine. We used as a reference substance clorgyline to demonstrate the effect of a selective MAO-A inhibitor, and (-)-BPAP to demonstrate the effect of a selective enhancer substance. (-)-Deprenyl and (-)-desmethyl-deprenyl acted, like (-)-BPAP, in low doses as enhancer substances and in very high doses as MAO-A inhibitors. J-508 and rasagiline proved to be devoid of the enhancer property and in doses which are known to block MAO-A, they antagonized the effect of tetrabenazine, like clorgyline. Thus, rasagiline can not be a substitute for (-)-deprenyl in therapy.

→ source (external link)


L-Amphetamine and L-methamphetamine from Selegiline can be neurotoxic though right?

Edited by LexLux, 27 February 2014 - 10:49 PM.


#7 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 28 February 2014 - 07:34 PM

The study in my first post showed that rasagiline increases GDNF and not BDNF. This difference is interesting, but could be more beneficial for rasagiline than selegiline!

This study on miceis very interesting and showed that GDNF was significantly more effective than BDNF for both correcting behavioral deficits and protecting nigrostriatal dopaminergic neurons. Expression of both neurotrophic factors was no more effective than expression of only GDNF. These results suggest that GDNF is more effective than BDNF for correcting the rat model of PD, and that there are no detectable benefits from expressing both of these neurotrophic factors.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/16018990

Abstract
  • Both glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) can protect nigrostriatal dopaminergic neurons from neurotoxins in rodent and monkey models of Parkinson's disease (PD). These two neurotrophic factors are usually tested individually. This study was designed to compare GDNF, BDNF, or both, for their capabilities to correct behavioral deficits and protect nigrostriatal dopaminergic neurons in a rat model of PD. Gene transfer used a helper virus-free Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV-1) vector system and a modified neurofilament heavy gene promoter that supports long-term expression in forebrain neurons. Rats received unilateral intrastriatal injections of HSV-1 vectors that express either GDNF or BDNF, or both vectors, followed by intrastriatal injections of 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA). Recombinant GDNF or BDNF was detected in striatal neurons in rats sacrificed at 7 months after gene transfer. Of note, GDNF was significantly more effective than BDNF for both correcting behavioral deficits and protecting nigrostriatal dopaminergic neurons. Expression of both neurotrophic factors was no more effective than expression of only GDNF. These results suggest that GDNF is more effective than BDNF for correcting the rat model of PD, and that there are no detectable benefits from expressing both of these neurotrophic factors.

I have tried both Selegiline and Rasagiline and I am still on Rasagiline. Selegiline only made me sleepy for the first week and then gave me energy whereas Rasagiline made me less sleepy from the first week and has continued to maintain that effect. Both Selegiine and Rasagiline are of the oral formulation, 5 mg for Selegiline and 1 mg for Rasagiline. I personally think Selegiline is better as it's also a CAE (Catecholamine activity enhancer) while Rasagiline is not:

are the two possibilities to antagonize the learning deficit caused by tetrabenazine. We compared in shuttle box experiments the effect of (-)-deprenyl, (-)-desmethyl-deprenyl, J-508 and desmethyl-J-508 (rasagiline) on the learning ability of rats pretreated with tetrabenazine. We used as a reference substance clorgyline to demonstrate the effect of a selective MAO-A inhibitor, and (-)-BPAP to demonstrate the effect of a selective enhancer substance. (-)-Deprenyl and (-)-desmethyl-deprenyl acted, like (-)-BPAP, in low doses as enhancer substances and in very high doses as MAO-A inhibitors. J-508 and rasagiline proved to be devoid of the enhancer property and in doses which are known to block MAO-A, they antagonized the effect of tetrabenazine, like clorgyline. Thus, rasagiline can not be a substitute for (-)-deprenyl in therapy.

→ source (external link)


GDNF plays a role in maintaining catecholaminergic central neurons:

http://jme.endocrino.../46/3/R83.short

Abstract
  • Neurotrophic factors are small proteins necessary for neuron survival and maintenance of phenotype. They are considered as promising therapeutic tools for neurodegenerative diseases. The glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) protects catecholaminergic cells from toxic insults; thus, its potential therapeutic applicability in Parkinson's disease has been intensely investigated. In recent years, there have been major advances in the analysis of GDNF signaling pathways in peripheral neurons and embryonic dopamine mesencephalic cells. However, the actual physiological role of GDNF in maintaining catecholaminergic central neurons during adulthood is only starting to be unraveled, and the mechanisms whereby GDNF protects central brain neurons are poorly known. In this study, we review the current knowledge of GDNF expression, signaling, and function in adult brain, with special emphasis on the genetic animal models with deficiency in the GDNF-dependent pathways.

Edited by LexLux, 28 February 2014 - 08:15 PM.


#8 FW900

  • Guest
  • 341 posts
  • 131
  • Location:VMAT2
  • NO

Posted 01 March 2014 - 02:01 AM

L-Amphetamine and L-methamphetamine from Selegiline can be neurotoxic though right?


No. Both L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine have extremely low affinity for dopamine ligands to begin with. As Dopamine Releasing Agents (DRA), they are extremely insignificant in terms of toxicity induced by extracellular dopamine. I'd argue that in terms of dopaminergic neurotoxicity, they will do less damage than methylphenidate. L-Methamphetamine is even found in nasal decongestants (e.g. Vicks). L-Amph and L-MeAmph could be cardiotoxic over time (due to higher NE release).

Since I cannot attach a table, please see this link for a table containing affinities for various releasing agents: http://en.wikipedia....ent#Selectivity Compare (D) and (L)-Methamphetamine and you'll find that the levo isomer possesses (around) 200x less the affinity than the dextro isomer for dopamine as a releasing agent.

One paper wrote the small concentration of extracellular dopamine was more caused by the action of deprenyl (AKA Selegilne) itself (I assume as an MAO-B-I) than from it's metabolites:

http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/9918585
"Collectively, these results suggest that the acute increases in extracellular dopamine observed after deprenyl are not due uniquely to metabolically generated l-MeAmp but also to other actions of deprenyl at the dopamine terminal."


One could argue that L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine contribute toward deprenyl's effect as a nootropic. There is plenty of research which shows evidence that L-amphetamine is both beneficial for attention and memory. The last paper even indicates that L-methamphetamine could be a nootropic.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC2265273/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3086861/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21561956

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/19368765

These results suggest that l-amphetamine and l-methamphetamine are potent memory enhancers in rats and may ultimately be useful for treating memory disorders in humans.


One paper even attributes Deprenyl's nootropic effect NOT to it's MAO-B inhibition but rather L-amphetamine. http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8115427 :

Moreover, the improved cognitive performance produced by L-deprenyl may not be due to its ability to inhibit MAO-B, but rather to some other effect such as the activation of growth factors.



#9 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 01 March 2014 - 02:11 AM

L-Amphetamine and L-methamphetamine from Selegiline can be neurotoxic though right?


No. Both L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine have extremely low affinity for dopamine ligands to begin with. As Dopamine Releasing Agents (DRA), they are extremely insignificant in terms of toxicity induced by extracellular dopamine. I'd argue that in terms of dopaminergic neurotoxicity, they will do less damage than methylphenidate. L-Methamphetamine is even found in nasal decongestants (e.g. Vicks). L-Amph and L-MeAmph could be cardiotoxic over time (due to higher NE release).

Since I cannot attach a table, please see this link for a table containing affinities for various releasing agents: http://en.wikipedia....ent#Selectivity Compare (D) and (L)-Methamphetamine and you'll find that the levo isomer possesses (around) 200x less the affinity than the dextro isomer for dopamine as a releasing agent.

One paper wrote the small concentration of extracellular dopamine was more caused by the action of deprenyl (AKA Selegilne) itself (I assume as an MAO-B-I) than from it's metabolites:

http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/9918585
"Collectively, these results suggest that the acute increases in extracellular dopamine observed after deprenyl are not due uniquely to metabolically generated l-MeAmp but also to other actions of deprenyl at the dopamine terminal."


One could argue that L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine contribute toward deprenyl's effect as a nootropic. There is plenty of research which shows evidence that L-amphetamine is both beneficial for attention and memory. The last paper even indicates that L-methamphetamine could be a nootropic.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC2265273/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3086861/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21561956

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/19368765

These results suggest that l-amphetamine and l-methamphetamine are potent memory enhancers in rats and may ultimately be useful for treating memory disorders in humans.


One paper even attributes Deprenyl's nootropic effect NOT to it's MAO-B inhibition but rather L-amphetamine. http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8115427 :

Moreover, the improved cognitive performance produced by L-deprenyl may not be due to its ability to inhibit MAO-B, but rather to some other effect such as the activation of growth factors.


thanks for the info, have you taken selegiline tablets sublingually? Wouldn't that reduce L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine for better or worse?

Edited by LexLux, 01 March 2014 - 02:11 AM.


#10 FW900

  • Guest
  • 341 posts
  • 131
  • Location:VMAT2
  • NO

Posted 01 March 2014 - 02:29 AM

L-Amphetamine and L-methamphetamine from Selegiline can be neurotoxic though right?


No. Both L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine have extremely low affinity for dopamine ligands to begin with. As Dopamine Releasing Agents (DRA), they are extremely insignificant in terms of toxicity induced by extracellular dopamine. I'd argue that in terms of dopaminergic neurotoxicity, they will do less damage than methylphenidate. L-Methamphetamine is even found in nasal decongestants (e.g. Vicks). L-Amph and L-MeAmph could be cardiotoxic over time (due to higher NE release).

Since I cannot attach a table, please see this link for a table containing affinities for various releasing agents: http://en.wikipedia....ent#Selectivity Compare (D) and (L)-Methamphetamine and you'll find that the levo isomer possesses (around) 200x less the affinity than the dextro isomer for dopamine as a releasing agent.

One paper wrote the small concentration of extracellular dopamine was more caused by the action of deprenyl (AKA Selegilne) itself (I assume as an MAO-B-I) than from it's metabolites:

http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/9918585
"Collectively, these results suggest that the acute increases in extracellular dopamine observed after deprenyl are not due uniquely to metabolically generated l-MeAmp but also to other actions of deprenyl at the dopamine terminal."


One could argue that L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine contribute toward deprenyl's effect as a nootropic. There is plenty of research which shows evidence that L-amphetamine is both beneficial for attention and memory. The last paper even indicates that L-methamphetamine could be a nootropic.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC2265273/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3086861/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21561956

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/19368765

These results suggest that l-amphetamine and l-methamphetamine are potent memory enhancers in rats and may ultimately be useful for treating memory disorders in humans.


One paper even attributes Deprenyl's nootropic effect NOT to it's MAO-B inhibition but rather L-amphetamine. http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8115427 :

Moreover, the improved cognitive performance produced by L-deprenyl may not be due to its ability to inhibit MAO-B, but rather to some other effect such as the activation of growth factors.


thanks for the info, have you taken selegiline tablets sublingually? Wouldn't that reduce L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine for better or worse?


I have not taken it sublingually. In theory it would be absorbed better and you would lesson the gastrointestional and immediate hepatic inhbiition of MAO (which are both good things). I cannot comment on how selegiline is metabolized into L-amphetamine and l-methamphetamine; so I do not know whether or not sublingual administration will reduce metabolites.

LexLux, if I may ask, what is your reason for wanting to avoid the levo amphetamine metabolites?

#11 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 03 March 2014 - 01:49 PM

L-Amphetamine and L-methamphetamine from Selegiline can be neurotoxic though right?


No. Both L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine have extremely low affinity for dopamine ligands to begin with. As Dopamine Releasing Agents (DRA), they are extremely insignificant in terms of toxicity induced by extracellular dopamine. I'd argue that in terms of dopaminergic neurotoxicity, they will do less damage than methylphenidate. L-Methamphetamine is even found in nasal decongestants (e.g. Vicks). L-Amph and L-MeAmph could be cardiotoxic over time (due to higher NE release).

Since I cannot attach a table, please see this link for a table containing affinities for various releasing agents: http://en.wikipedia....ent#Selectivity Compare (D) and (L)-Methamphetamine and you'll find that the levo isomer possesses (around) 200x less the affinity than the dextro isomer for dopamine as a releasing agent.

One paper wrote the small concentration of extracellular dopamine was more caused by the action of deprenyl (AKA Selegilne) itself (I assume as an MAO-B-I) than from it's metabolites:

http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/9918585
"Collectively, these results suggest that the acute increases in extracellular dopamine observed after deprenyl are not due uniquely to metabolically generated l-MeAmp but also to other actions of deprenyl at the dopamine terminal."


One could argue that L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine contribute toward deprenyl's effect as a nootropic. There is plenty of research which shows evidence that L-amphetamine is both beneficial for attention and memory. The last paper even indicates that L-methamphetamine could be a nootropic.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC2265273/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3086861/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21561956

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/19368765

These results suggest that l-amphetamine and l-methamphetamine are potent memory enhancers in rats and may ultimately be useful for treating memory disorders in humans.


One paper even attributes Deprenyl's nootropic effect NOT to it's MAO-B inhibition but rather L-amphetamine. http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8115427 :

Moreover, the improved cognitive performance produced by L-deprenyl may not be due to its ability to inhibit MAO-B, but rather to some other effect such as the activation of growth factors.


thanks for the info, have you taken selegiline tablets sublingually? Wouldn't that reduce L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine for better or worse?


I have not taken it sublingually. In theory it would be absorbed better and you would lesson the gastrointestional and immediate hepatic inhbiition of MAO (which are both good things). I cannot comment on how selegiline is metabolized into L-amphetamine and l-methamphetamine; so I do not know whether or not sublingual administration will reduce metabolites.

LexLux, if I may ask, what is your reason for wanting to avoid the levo amphetamine metabolites?


I've seen people freaking out on the forums about them, saying they don't trust them. Out of curiosity, a friend wants to get selegiline hydrochloride from alldaychemist. any experience with it?

#12 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:57 PM

http://www.longecity...wned-upon-here/

#13 FW900

  • Guest
  • 341 posts
  • 131
  • Location:VMAT2
  • NO

Posted 04 March 2014 - 01:07 AM

L-Amphetamine and L-methamphetamine from Selegiline can be neurotoxic though right?


No. Both L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine have extremely low affinity for dopamine ligands to begin with. As Dopamine Releasing Agents (DRA), they are extremely insignificant in terms of toxicity induced by extracellular dopamine. I'd argue that in terms of dopaminergic neurotoxicity, they will do less damage than methylphenidate. L-Methamphetamine is even found in nasal decongestants (e.g. Vicks). L-Amph and L-MeAmph could be cardiotoxic over time (due to higher NE release).

Since I cannot attach a table, please see this link for a table containing affinities for various releasing agents: http://en.wikipedia....ent#Selectivity Compare (D) and (L)-Methamphetamine and you'll find that the levo isomer possesses (around) 200x less the affinity than the dextro isomer for dopamine as a releasing agent.

One paper wrote the small concentration of extracellular dopamine was more caused by the action of deprenyl (AKA Selegilne) itself (I assume as an MAO-B-I) than from it's metabolites:

http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/9918585
"Collectively, these results suggest that the acute increases in extracellular dopamine observed after deprenyl are not due uniquely to metabolically generated l-MeAmp but also to other actions of deprenyl at the dopamine terminal."


One could argue that L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine contribute toward deprenyl's effect as a nootropic. There is plenty of research which shows evidence that L-amphetamine is both beneficial for attention and memory. The last paper even indicates that L-methamphetamine could be a nootropic.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC2265273/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3086861/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21561956

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/19368765

These results suggest that l-amphetamine and l-methamphetamine are potent memory enhancers in rats and may ultimately be useful for treating memory disorders in humans.


One paper even attributes Deprenyl's nootropic effect NOT to it's MAO-B inhibition but rather L-amphetamine. http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8115427 :

Moreover, the improved cognitive performance produced by L-deprenyl may not be due to its ability to inhibit MAO-B, but rather to some other effect such as the activation of growth factors.


thanks for the info, have you taken selegiline tablets sublingually? Wouldn't that reduce L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine for better or worse?


I have not taken it sublingually. In theory it would be absorbed better and you would lesson the gastrointestional and immediate hepatic inhbiition of MAO (which are both good things). I cannot comment on how selegiline is metabolized into L-amphetamine and l-methamphetamine; so I do not know whether or not sublingual administration will reduce metabolites.

LexLux, if I may ask, what is your reason for wanting to avoid the levo amphetamine metabolites?


I've seen people freaking out on the forums about them, saying they don't trust them. Out of curiosity, a friend wants to get selegiline hydrochloride from alldaychemist. any experience with it?


ADC has decent prices just make sure you use a prepaid debit card to order from them. I believe 3Alarm pointed out that ADC's credit processing system may be compromised.

They were freaking out because they probably assumed L-metabolites were on par with the dangers of dextrorotatory amphetamines. D-Methamphetamine's profile for neurotoxicity is scary and most people here know that; unfortunately, this leads to the incorrect assumption that there must be some sort of danger with the levo isomer. As I pointed out, the levo isomer is essentially void of neurotoxicity. Their fears about the levo-amphetamine metabolites in regards to blood pressure may be a concern but if the dose is low it should be a non-issue.

#14 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 04 March 2014 - 12:48 PM

L-Amphetamine and L-methamphetamine from Selegiline can be neurotoxic though right?


No. Both L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine have extremely low affinity for dopamine ligands to begin with. As Dopamine Releasing Agents (DRA), they are extremely insignificant in terms of toxicity induced by extracellular dopamine. I'd argue that in terms of dopaminergic neurotoxicity, they will do less damage than methylphenidate. L-Methamphetamine is even found in nasal decongestants (e.g. Vicks). L-Amph and L-MeAmph could be cardiotoxic over time (due to higher NE release).

Since I cannot attach a table, please see this link for a table containing affinities for various releasing agents: http://en.wikipedia....ent#Selectivity Compare (D) and (L)-Methamphetamine and you'll find that the levo isomer possesses (around) 200x less the affinity than the dextro isomer for dopamine as a releasing agent.

One paper wrote the small concentration of extracellular dopamine was more caused by the action of deprenyl (AKA Selegilne) itself (I assume as an MAO-B-I) than from it's metabolites:

http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/9918585
"Collectively, these results suggest that the acute increases in extracellular dopamine observed after deprenyl are not due uniquely to metabolically generated l-MeAmp but also to other actions of deprenyl at the dopamine terminal."


One could argue that L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine contribute toward deprenyl's effect as a nootropic. There is plenty of research which shows evidence that L-amphetamine is both beneficial for attention and memory. The last paper even indicates that L-methamphetamine could be a nootropic.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC2265273/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3086861/
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21561956

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/19368765

These results suggest that l-amphetamine and l-methamphetamine are potent memory enhancers in rats and may ultimately be useful for treating memory disorders in humans.


One paper even attributes Deprenyl's nootropic effect NOT to it's MAO-B inhibition but rather L-amphetamine. http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8115427 :

Moreover, the improved cognitive performance produced by L-deprenyl may not be due to its ability to inhibit MAO-B, but rather to some other effect such as the activation of growth factors.


thanks for the info, have you taken selegiline tablets sublingually? Wouldn't that reduce L-amphetamine and L-methamphetamine for better or worse?


I have not taken it sublingually. In theory it would be absorbed better and you would lesson the gastrointestional and immediate hepatic inhbiition of MAO (which are both good things). I cannot comment on how selegiline is metabolized into L-amphetamine and l-methamphetamine; so I do not know whether or not sublingual administration will reduce metabolites.

LexLux, if I may ask, what is your reason for wanting to avoid the levo amphetamine metabolites?


I've seen people freaking out on the forums about them, saying they don't trust them. Out of curiosity, a friend wants to get selegiline hydrochloride from alldaychemist. any experience with it?


ADC has decent prices just make sure you use a prepaid debit card to order from them. I believe 3Alarm pointed out that ADC's credit processing system may be compromised.

They were freaking out because they probably assumed L-metabolites were on par with the dangers of dextrorotatory amphetamines. D-Methamphetamine's profile for neurotoxicity is scary and most people here know that; unfortunately, this leads to the incorrect assumption that there must be some sort of danger with the levo isomer. As I pointed out, the levo isomer is essentially void of neurotoxicity. Their fears about the levo-amphetamine metabolites in regards to blood pressure may be a concern but if the dose is low it should be a non-issue.


So you are using rasagiline and have not noticed mood improvement or any nootropic benefits? It does boost GDNF as noted above and we all know its an MAO B inhibitor

Edited by LexLux, 04 March 2014 - 12:49 PM.


#15 FW900

  • Guest
  • 341 posts
  • 131
  • Location:VMAT2
  • NO

Posted 04 March 2014 - 10:51 PM

So you are using rasagiline and have not noticed mood improvement or any nootropic benefits? It does boost GDNF as noted above and we all know its an MAO B inhibitor



No I am not using and never have even ingested rasagiline. I'm stating that there is not enough evidence (both empirical and anecdotal) to speak for it's efficacy as a nootropic in terms of being advantageous over selegiline.

#16 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 04 March 2014 - 11:09 PM

So you are using rasagiline and have not noticed mood improvement or any nootropic benefits? It does boost GDNF as noted above and we all know its an MAO B inhibitor



No I am not using and never have even ingested rasagiline. I'm stating that there is not enough evidence (both empirical and anecdotal) to speak for it's efficacy as a nootropic in terms of being advantageous over selegiline.


oh I got you mixed up with someone else who posted, my friend told me he has selegiline but is hesitant to take it since he has some rasagiline coming in the post soon. Will have to ask him how he likes it. Do the nootropic effects of selegiline come from L-metabolites?

Edited by LexLux, 04 March 2014 - 11:12 PM.


#17 FW900

  • Guest
  • 341 posts
  • 131
  • Location:VMAT2
  • NO

Posted 05 March 2014 - 02:20 AM

So you are using rasagiline and have not noticed mood improvement or any nootropic benefits? It does boost GDNF as noted above and we all know its an MAO B inhibitor



No I am not using and never have even ingested rasagiline. I'm stating that there is not enough evidence (both empirical and anecdotal) to speak for it's efficacy as a nootropic in terms of being advantageous over selegiline.


oh I got you mixed up with someone else who posted, my friend told me he has selegiline but is hesitant to take it since he has some rasagiline coming in the post soon. Will have to ask him how he likes it. Do the nootropic effects of selegiline come from L-metabolites?


As suggested by some (mentioned above), yes. Plus it act's as a (weak) Catecholaminergic Activity Enhancer (see link) (CAE) much like BPAP/PPAP (but Selegiline to a much lesser extent), which may contribute toward it's nootropic effect. I personally think the nootropic effects come as the result of a combination of the MAO-B inhibition, the metabolites, and from it being a slight CAE.

http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/9498233

#18 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 13 March 2014 - 09:39 PM

do you guys cary around Nifedipine in case of hypertension?

#19 NeuroNootropic

  • Guest
  • 239 posts
  • 25
  • Location:Canada

Posted 14 March 2014 - 12:32 AM

do you guys cary around Nifedipine in case of hypertension?


No, I wouldn't worry about that. Hypertensive reactions are rare enough with the nonselective, irreversible MAOIs, but MAO-B inhibitors like Rasagiline and Selegiline pose almost no risk if taken at MAO-B inhibiting doses. Further, tyramine is mainly metabolized by MAO-A, not MAO-B. Even Moclobemide, a reversible MAO-A inhibitor poses very little risk in causing a hypertensive reaction.

I have taken Moclobemide (150 mg 2x a day) and Selegiline (5 mg once a day) together and didn't have any blood pressure issues. You are more likely to suffer a hypertensive reaction from drug-drug interaction than from dietary tyramine.

That said, be careful when taking any agents that increase adrenergic activity. This includes OTC cold medication.
  • like x 1

#20 Phoenicis

  • Guest
  • 339 posts
  • 80
  • Location:-
  • NO

Posted 14 March 2014 - 01:16 AM

do you guys cary around Nifedipine in case of hypertension?


No, I wouldn't worry about that. Hypertensive reactions are rare enough with the nonselective, irreversible MAOIs, but MAO-B inhibitors like Rasagiline and Selegiline pose almost no risk if taken at MAO-B inhibiting doses. Further, tyramine is mainly metabolized by MAO-A, not MAO-B. Even Moclobemide, a reversible MAO-A inhibitor poses very little risk in causing a hypertensive reaction.

I have taken Moclobemide (150 mg 2x a day) and Selegiline (5 mg once a day) together and didn't have any blood pressure issues. You are more likely to suffer a hypertensive reaction from drug-drug interaction than from dietary tyramine.

That said, be careful when taking any agents that increase adrenergic activity. This includes OTC cold medication.


I actually just gave up on selegiline after my first week. I got headaches with alcohol consumption and the same thing happened recently with my supplements.

Supplements I'm on:

50mg rhodiola rosea (Veridian), 500mg ashwagandha (NOW), 1200mg aniracetam twice a day, turmeric w/black pepper, resveratrol, bacopa, amla (indian gooseberry)

If you look up the drug interactions, they're so extensive - so who knows? Rasagiline probably has just as many interactions but it is more selective MAO B inhibitor and interacts with GDNF well as being a selective mood enhancer.

This might be an interesting study for to check out (full version required) : Role of BDNF and GDNF in drug reward and relapse: A review

Edited by Phoenicis, 14 March 2014 - 01:37 AM.


#21 Phoenicis

  • Guest
  • 339 posts
  • 80
  • Location:-
  • NO

Posted 14 March 2014 - 01:53 AM

GDNF family receptor complexes are emerging drug targets :"GDNF protects and repairs dopamine-containing neurons, which degenerate in Parkinson's disease, and motoneurons"

and this sounds very good for me considering I'm trying to reverse damages to my dopamine pathways induced by nicotine addiction.

Alcohol Reward, Dopamine Depletion, and GDNF:

"Barak et al. (2011), rats were given intermittent 24 h access to alcohol solutions three times a week for 7 weeks to develop alcohol dependence. Then NAc extracellular dopamine levels and its response to VTA GDNF injections were measured. The authors showed that NAc dopamine levels in alcohol-dependent rats were significantly decreased after 1 h of withdrawal and remained low 24 h later. VTA GDNF injections (10 μg/side) in 24-h-withdrawn rats restored NAc dopamine to control (normal) levels.

Next, the authors demonstrated that VTA GDNF injections have functional consequences on behavior. Injections of GDNF into VTA 10 min before pairing one chamber of a CPP apparatus with 0.5 g/kg alcohol (i.p.) during two conditioning sessions [interspersed with two pairings of saline (i.p.) in a contextually distinct chamber on the opposite side of the apparatus] prevented the development of CPP in alcohol-dependent rats. VTA GDNF injections given 10 min before a CPP test prevented the expression of CPP. Importantly, VTA injections of GDNF alone caused no preference or aversion. Finally, in alcohol-dependent rats trained to press a lever to receive alcohol (2.5–40%), VTA GDNF injections produced a downward shift in the dose–response curve. The rats made fewer responses and received fewer alcohol deliveries at each concentration tested on days when the rats received GDNF compared with days in which they received vehicle injections. Such downward shifts in the dose–response curve are usually interpreted as a decrease in the rewarding effect of the drug.

These results have several important implications for our understanding of GDNF's role in alcohol reward. First, these results extend the authors' previous results showing that VTA GDNF decreases alcohol intake and that heterozygous genetic knock-out of the GDNF gene increases rewarding effects of alcohol (Carnicella et al., 2009). The CPP findings extend the previous work with knock-out mice by showing that the role of GDNF in alcohol reward is localized, at least in part, to the VTA. Second, these findings demonstrate a role for GDNF both in acquisition and expression of the CPP memory.

Most relevant to the dopamine-depletion hypothesis is the finding that VTA GDNF injections normalized the decreased NAc dopamine levels during alcohol withdrawal and also decreased alcohol reward. This dual effect of GDNF injections provides one plausible explanation for the role of VTA GDNF in decreasing alcohol reward—reversing the dopamine depleted dysphoric state. However, these are correlative findings that are open to alternative interpretations. One such possibility is that GDNF acts in the VTA to decrease the rewarding effects of alcohol in a dopamine-independent manner. In this regard, there is evidence for dopamine-independent reward mechanisms in the VTA (Nader and van der Kooy, 1997; Ikemoto et al., 1998)."


Role for GDNF in Biochemical and Behavioral Adaptations to Drugs of Abuse:

"Abstract

The present study examined a role for GDNF in adaptations to drugs of abuse. Infusion of GDNF into the ventral tegmental area (VTA), a dopaminergic brain region important for addiction, blocks certain biochemical adaptations to chronic cocaine or morphine as well as the rewarding effects of cocaine. Conversely, responses to cocaine are enhanced in rats by intra-VTA infusion of an anti-GDNF antibody and in mice heterozygous for a null mutation in the GDNF gene. Chronic morphine or cocaine exposure decreases levels of phosphoRet, the protein kinase that mediates GDNF signaling, in the VTA. Together, these results suggest a feedback loop, whereby drugs of abuse decrease signaling through endogenous GDNF pathways in the VTA, which then increases the behavioral sensitivity to subsequent drug exposure.
[...]
The major objective of the present study was to assess such a role for one particular neurotrophic factor, GDNF (glial cell line–derived neurotrophic factor). We focused on GDNF for several reasons. First, GDNF enhances the survival and maintains the differentiated properties of dopaminergic neurons in cell culture and does so far more potently compared to BDNF and other neurotrophins (Lin et al. 1993). Second, GDNF dramatically enhances the survival of midbrain dopamine neurons in vivo after challenge with dopaminergic neurotoxins such as 6-hydroxydopamine or MPTP (2 and 23). GDNF also protects animals from the behavioral deficits associated with such lesions. Strikingly, a single injection of GDNF into the midbrain can exert such protective effects for at least one month (23 and 61). Third, signaling proteins for GDNF, GFRα1 and the associated protein tyrosine kinase Ret, are both highly enriched in midbrain dopamine neurons (55, 56, 57 and 58). The binding of GDNF to its receptor complex causes the phosphorylation and activation of Ret, which then mediates the physiological effects of the neurotrophic factor.

[...]
Discussion [MUST READ]

The major findings of this study are that exogenous GDNF, administered directly into the rat VTA, blunts both biochemical and behavioral adaptations to repeated administration of drugs of abuse. The study also establishes that endogenous GDNF systems are required for normal biochemical and behavioral responses to drug exposure: infusion of anti-GDNF antibody directly into the VTA increases a rat's sensitivity to drug effects, and mice that lack one copy of the GDNF gene show a similar increase in drug sensitivity. This is a particularly important observation because it extends what we know about the role of GDNF in the regulation of dopaminergic neurotransmission. Thus, research to date has only shown the pharmacological ability of exogenously applied GDNF to protect dopamine neurons in the adult brain in vivo from neurotoxic injury (see Introduction). The results of the present study implicate endogenous GDNF systems in regulating the function of adult dopamine neurons, in particular, regulating their responses to drugs of abuse. Moreover, based on our findings that chronic drug exposure decreases the phosphorylation of the GDNF signaling protein Ret in the VTA, we hypothesize further that some of the long-term effects of morphine and cocaine on the mesolimbic dopamine system are achieved via perturbation of endogenous GDNF signaling pathways.

[...] the fact that GDNF blocks behavioral responses to drug exposure means that the net effect of the neurotrophic factor must involve biochemical changes that oppose drug action.

The contrast between the effects of GDNF and BDNF on actions of drugs of abuse is interesting. Intra-VTA infusions of BDNF, like those of GDNF, in rats block some of the biochemical adaptations to morphine and cocaine, for example, induction of tyrosine hydroxylase in the VTA and of protein kinase A in the NAc (Berhow et al. 1995). Yet, a recent study showed that BDNF dramatically augments an animal's responses to the locomotor and rewarding properties of cocaine ( Horger et al. 1999). Such augmented behavioral responses would make sense if the biochemical adaptations blocked by BDNF are homeostatic; that is, they serve to reduce further drug effects. Presumably, these findings indicate that the net effect of BDNF, in contrast to that of GDNF, involves biochemical changes that increase behavioral responses to drug exposure. Consistent with this interpretation is the finding that BDNF knockout mice, in contrast to GDNF knockout mice, show reduced behavioral plasticity to repeated cocaine administration ( Horger et al. 1999). The biochemical endpoints examined in the present study and in the earlier studies of BDNF likely represent only a small portion of the adaptations that chronic drug administration causes in the VTA and NAc. Therefore, a major goal of future research is to further characterize the influence of GDNF and BDNF on the mesolimbic dopamine system, with the objective of finding differences in the molecular and cellular actions of the two neurotrophic factors that explain their opposite behavioral effects.
[...]
To conclude, the results of the present study establish a functional interaction between GDNF and drugs of abuse at the level of the mesolimbic dopamine system. The findings highlight the complex types of mechanisms that are likely induced in the brain by chronic exposure to a drug of abuse. The involvement of GDNF and perhaps other neurotrophic factor systems in drug-induced neural and behavioral plasticity could be particularly important for the very long-lived changes in brain function associated with addiction. These results also raise the interesting possibility that medications targeted to GDNF or to its signaling pathway could be useful as novel treatment agents for addictive disorders in humans."

Edited by Phoenicis, 14 March 2014 - 02:44 AM.


#22 Phoenicis

  • Guest
  • 339 posts
  • 80
  • Location:-
  • NO

Posted 14 March 2014 - 02:33 AM

do people trying to tackle addictions want GDNF, BDNF, or both? Since noopept raises BDNF, could that be used with rasagiline for GDNF? Also found this on rasagiline : Sparing by rasagiline (TVP-1012) of cholinergic functions and behavior in the postnatal anoxia rat(improved memory)

and the Rasagiline website says this:

"Both selegiline and rasagiline are neuroprotective via multiple mechanisms that are poorly understood. However, their role in stabilising mitochondrial membrane potential is critical. The propargylamine moiety rather than MAO inhibition per se apparently holds the key to their neuroprotective action: the S isomer of rasagiline is some 1000 times less potent as an MAO inhibitor, but it's still protective against neurotoxic insults. Rasagiline inhibits activation of the apoptotic cascade triggered by dopamine neurotoxins and oxidative stress. Apoptosis is an active process of programmed cell-death induced by exposure to neurotoxins. Rasagiline and other propargylamines can rescue deteriorating dopaminergic neurons by inhibiting the "death signal" transduction-mechanism of mitochondrial permeability transition. Current evidence suggests that rasagiline may be more effective than selegiline in salvaging dopamine nerve cells from the usual neurological carnage of later life.
Chronic rasagiline use increases the activity of the antioxidative enzymes superoxide dismutase (SOD) and catalase (CAT), both in the dopaminergic systems of the brain and also in the heart and kidneys. Professor Youdim speculates that one day rasagiline will be used not just as a prophylactic against neurodegenerative disease but as a cardioprotectant."

Edited by Phoenicis, 14 March 2014 - 03:22 AM.


#23 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 17 March 2014 - 03:00 AM

but does this mean that rasagiline will only induce these neurotrophic factors at or above MAO A inhibiting doses?

"Rasagiline and selegiline, inhibitors of type B monoamine oxidase (MAO-B), protect neuronal cells in animal and cellular models of neurodegenerative disorders. Molecular mechanism behind their neuroprotective action has been clarified to be the regulation of mitochondrial death signal pathway and the induction of pro-protective anti-apoptotic Bcl-2 and neurotrophic factors (NTFs). Type A MAO (MAO-A) was found to mediate the induction of Bcl-2 by these MAO-B inhibitors in MAO-A-expressing neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells. Rasagiline and selegiline increased the mRNA and protein levels of glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) and neurotrophins [brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), nerve growth factor (NGF), neurotrophin 3 (NT-3)] in SH-SY5Y cells. Rasagiline increased GDNF more markedly than neurotrophins, and vice versa selegiline increased neurotrophins. The distinct induction of GDNF and neurotrophins by MAO inhibitors was also confirmed in non-human primates. Rasagiline was systematically administered in Japanese monkeys (n=4) for 4 weeks by daily subcutaneous injection, and the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) was taken once a week. The NTF levels were quantified by the EIA assay. Rasagiline at 0.25 mg/day increased GDNF significantly, followed by BDNF, NGF and NT-3. On the contrary, selegiline increased BDNF in the CSF from parkinsonian patients treated with selegiline. The role of MAO-A and MAO-B in the induction of neurotrophins was investigated in wild SH-SY5Y cells and MAO-B-expressing glioblastoma U118MG cells. The effects of these MAO-B inhibitors on mRNA levels of neurotrophins were measured by use of real-time RT-PCR method. Rasagiline increased BDNF mRNA in wild SH-SY5Y cells, which was suppressed by treatment with siRNA against MAO-A, whereas selegiline increased BDNF mRNA in wild and siRNA treated cells. Selegiline and rasagiline induced BDNF mRNA in U118MG cells, and selegiline was more potent than rasagiline. These results suggest that NTF gene induction of rasagiline may depend on MAO-A, whereas selegiline may not in SH-SY5Y cells. In U118MG cells, these MAO-B inhibitors induce prosurvival NTFs through different signal pathway. The distinct signal pathway activated by rasagiline and selegiline may account for the preferential induction of GDNF and neurotrophins in animal and human experiments. The molecular mechanisms of the signal pathways should be further investigated to clarify the selective induction of these two NTF classes by rasagiline and selegiline."

source:
http://www.abstracts...a2-eebfa14cd9f1

Edited by LexLux, 17 March 2014 - 03:03 AM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#24 LexLux

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 265 posts
  • 88
  • Location:London, UK
  • NO

Posted 19 March 2014 - 02:03 PM

dosage being discussed here: http://www.longecity...508#entry650508





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: rasagiline, selegiline, deprenyl, life extension, gene induction, mao inhibitors, bdnf

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users