Introducing EQ-Plex by Competitive Edge Labs

Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last

  1. Very informative first post here at AM.

    I am considering a similar recomp cycle myself.

    Quote Originally Posted by igoriginal View Post
    Because EQ-PLEX (1, 4 Androstadiene-3, 17- Dione....a.k.a. "Boldione") is a Boldenone-conversion precursor hormone, (ex: veterinary brands like "Equipose"), it is a MYOGENIC compound (similar to the 4-Chloro and Epi compounds. ex: "Hemadrol, Epidrol, Halodrol, Epistane, Havoc)....meaning it has a high ANABOLIC-to-ANDROGENIC ratio.

    Being as such, the effects are more a cutting / leaning-type effect, similar to Anavar, rather than the "wet" heavy-bulking prohormones that directly convert to Testosterone (like M1T).

    Therefor, this compound being anabolic-dominant (as opposed to androgenic-dominant) does not convert / up-regulate heavily to DHT and associated receptors that lead to hair-loss, prostate enlargement, etc.

    It is dry, lean, and subtle. It's perfect for refining, shaping and contest prep toning to help maintain (or even build) muscle while dieting....as an alternative to Anavar, which is obviously illegal to obtain without a prescription.

    I am experimenting with it right now, by stacking it with Havoc, essentially combining TWO myogenic compounds, to see if the leaning / muscle-sparing effect can be synergistically accentuated.

    Finally, this is NOT to say that "Boldione" (1, 4 Androstadiene-3, 17- Dione) does not build muscle size or strength. It does it quite well, actually, but it's more subtler, drier, and gradual than the "wetter" heavy hitters that are also ROUGHER on the liver and your Testosterone / GH Axis.

    Preliminary results show that muscle that is gained on the Boldiene prohormone, just like its Boldenone (Equipose) big-brother, are more permanent and of a higher quality.

    In a nutshell, the muscle you gain with Boldione, though subtle and not as dramatic, is PERMANENT, HIGH-QUALITY, LEAN muscle. Without the hair-loss, bloating, water-retention, and prostate enlargement that comes with ANDROGENIC-dominent prohormones.

    First thing I noticed, even on the first few days, is a RAVENOUS appetite! This makes sense, as your intra-muscular amino acid demand sky-rockets and shunts extra protein into muscle tissue. (myogenic = Muscle-Fiber Genesis).

    If you can gather enough will-power, and not eat everything in sight, you should rip up like a MOFO, and STILL keep or build new muscle. Even before a contest!

    I will report back, after my little experiment with the EQ-Plex / Havoc stack.


  2. Quote Originally Posted by CompEdgeLabs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rabican View Post
    so how many bottles would you need for "Beginner/Mild Cycle" suggestion @ 32$?
    2 bottles
    Why do you guys package it this way? It's the same way with h-drol, you really can't do much with one bottle, but if you buy two bottles you're going to end up with a lot of extra caps if you use it at the recommended dose.

    Do other companies do this? I've only done one cycle but everything else (cort blocker, test booster, PCS, etc.) have enough in one bottle for complete cycle support or PCT.
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by LAGear View Post
    Why do you guys package it this way? It's the same way with h-drol, you really can't do much with one bottle, but if you buy two bottles you're going to end up with a lot of extra caps if you use it at the recommended dose.

    Do other companies do this? I've only done one cycle but everything else (cort blocker, test booster, PCS, etc.) have enough in one bottle for complete cycle support or PCT.

    I would assume the following reasons behind your inquiry.

    1. Larger bottles (with a greater quantity of pills) means that it might take longer until the bottle is used up, therefor prolonging the content's exposure to oxygen and moisture every time they are open and dispensed. Smaller bottles may create more lose odds and ends, but overall they go faster, and therefor are more likely to be fresher.

    Personally, I would rather have 2 bottles of 60 capsules, than 1 bottle of 120, because of the prolonged and continual exposure to air every time the lid is opened and closed. Merchants prefer more efficient "turn over" rates. The consumers benefit from this too.


    2. If you were able to take a look at what some of the pros are doing....one of the "lesser-known" secrets of the Olympia contenders...shhhh ..... they don't keep their supplements in their original packaging. The bottles are just the marketing and pretty pictures sitting on the shelf, before the initial purchase is made. But if you want to be smart and economical, while preserving your supplements for longer periods, you'll follow the lead of the pros and empty out the entire bottle the first time you open it and partition your "stacks" ahead of time, while repackaging the unused pills using "vacumm sealing" tools to suck the air out of them and keeping them in specialized "sucked-up" bags.

    No self-respecting pro keeps hundreds of unused supplements in their original bottles, once the tamper-lid is cracked open.

    Even so, lets say you go the "refrigeration" route: Because some prefer to refrigerate the bottles that they stockpile for the future, try to see how easy it is to shove jumbo bottles of 200 pills around the fridge compartments, versus small and stackable little bottles with managable dimensions.

    3. Finally, shipping and travel can be a nuasance for bulky and awkward containers as well. Let's not mention when you travel, and need a "travel-sized" and managable way to discretely tuck away your sups amid your clothing. Especially ones that are still unopened, but will be needed in the near future.

    Do you want to lug around a conspicuous, 200+ unit bottle of Winnie in your briefcase?
  4. COMPARING Boldione (EQ-Plex) to Boldenone (Equipoise)


    Quote Originally Posted by djbombsquad View Post
    How does this compare to real EQ?


    COMPARING Boldione (EQ-Plex) to Boldenone (Equipoise)
    -----------------------------------------------------

    First and formost, let's review how the parent steroid (Boldenone) acts, before comparing it to its little "pre-cousin" Boldione.

    Boldenone was initially synthesized as a veterinary drug for the treatment of equestrian animals (horses, mules, donkeys, etc), such as the healing of injuries to connective tissues and ligaments or muscular strains and tears that are sustained from racing, or working / farming duties. Of course, they filtered down to OTHER "lifestock" in the process (read: "humans).

    As mentioned earlier, Boldenone (the steroid with the effective marketing name: "Equipoise") is very active anabolically, while exerting only a mild androgenic response. This makes sense, because in order for a drug to focus on HEALING / CREATING new muscle and connective tissue while reducing inflammatory responses, it has to focus more directly on the myo-structures of muscle bundles themselves, rather than throwing the entire hormone-producing system into a madenning ruckus (such as "heavy" and "wetter" steroids that are centered around WATER RETENTION rather than myosin integrity).

    If you want to heal tissue more accutely, and as quickly as possible, you need to bring down "swelling" and "inflammation" first. For this reason, a water-retaining steroid may actually AGGREVATE rather than help heal the injury! In fact, water-retention-based steroids also increase the formation of Arachidonic Acid....which, although builds bulk like the hulk by stimulating more cholesterol production (hence testosterone)....also increases the inflammatory response.

    See for yourself: Do a Google search for Arachidonic Acid. (an Omega 6 fatty acid). As opposed to the the beneficial Omega 3's.

    (On a side note, this is the precise physiology behind why "wetter" bulking steroids create BAD lipid profiles....BAD CHOLESTEROL / TRIGLYCERIDE COUNTS.....to be exact. It is due to an up-regulation of Arachidonic Acid!).

    Omega 3's, on the other hand, DOWN-regulate cholesterol / lipid sythesis, while REDUCING inflammation. This is why it's so important to consume a higher ratio of 3's over 6's!

    Now, back on the subject.....

    So, with Boldenone: Enter a MYOgenic (rather than an ANDROgenic) compound to do the job! While this steroid won't make your neighbors wonder overnight if you're eating Miracle Grow for dinner, (NO MASSIVE MUSCLE OVERNIGHT), the one thing Boldenone DOES do, and do it WELL, is help add VERY DRY AND LEAN MUSCLE MASS over a more prolonged period without extreme side effects. Those who prefer a short-term "SHOCK & AWE" firecraker show should look elsewhere. This one is for the more patient, refined folks. But the end result is that YOU KEEP WHAT YOU GET!!!!

    Boldenone also stimulates appetite, as I have just discovered for myself. Tee hee. (BURP!!!!! BELCH!!!!!) And as I also theorized, this makes too much sense, since Boldenone acts to more directly channel nutrients to muscle structures themselves. More precisely, the appetite increase is due to the fact that because you're building more SOLID tissue (as opposed to WET), your body is going to be hungrier for SOLID FOOD (rather than an elevated thirst for WATER, as it the case of heavy bulking compounds).

    Makes sense....so far. No?

    As one laboratory document states: "The gains from Boldenone are very stable, easy to maintain after use, and of a very high quality."

    Another source states the following: Boldenone has been shown to enhance the function of insulin, which leads to an elevated ability to maintain and stimulate the manufacture and retention of Nitrogen."


    AH HAH! In layman's terms...Didn't I just say that I was craving protein like the dickens?!

    To finish this up, and move on to EQ-Plex, and how it stacks up to the parent steroid, I would also like to add that because of Boldenone's excellent track record in the use of healing / repairing connective tissue / muscle in horses.....one would deduce that it might make an outstanding drug for the therapeutic treatment of muscle wasting and disfunctions (burn victims, AIDS patients, CANCER, Multiple Sclerosis, etc).

    It is any coincidence that ANOTHER myogenic compound....ANAVAR....was mass-produced for a short time for the same types of treatments?!?! (Before the FDA shut it down?! Why, because it actually worked very well?! And VERY SAFELY...I might add?!).

    COUGH...conspiracy...COUGH.


    Now, on to the little cousin Boldione (1, 4 Androstadiene-3, 17- Dione), otherwise under the CEL Marketing name "EQ-PLEX."

    And I am not even their representative, mind you. (Hey, you representative dudes, are you gonna hire me?). Hehehhe.


    Initial annecdotal reports state that Boldione has a conversion rate anywhere from roughly 5% to 15%, depending on who you talk to. Even at the low end, this would deem a highly-successful "prohormone."

    (COUGH.....STOCKPILE......COUG H......BEFORE FDA......COUGH).

    It is beyond my scope to analyze or state HOW or HOW NOT Boldione works in relation to its parent steroid Boldenone, besides the fact that it would obviously take a relatively HIGH DOSAGE rate to yield results similar to the parent compound. But since this is not possible without risking some potentially unforseen ramifications, the dosage suggestions on the EQ-PLEX bottle seem fairly reasonable.

    I've been on EQ for a few days, just running 400 mg (2 capsules), along with 2 Havoc capsules of 10 mg (2a,3a-epithio-17a-methyl-5a-androstan-17b-ol).

    I also STAGGER them, technically, rather than actually STACK them. This means that if I take my first EQ capsule at 7 am after breakfast, I'll then take my first Havoc two hours later after my next meal. Then I'll take my second EQ after my third meal, and my second Havoc after my fourth meal. And so on, if one desires to move up to the next dosage level (600 mg EQ, 30 mg Havoc).


    The one thing I COULD say with certainty, in regards with how Boldione compares to its parent Boldenone, as quoted from a source:

    "Boldione contains a double-bond between the first and second Carbon atom, just as its parent steroid Boldenone. This gives the prohormone Boldione a natural ability to bypass the liver....just like the steroid Boldenone....at a much higher rate, WITHOUT THE NEED FOR METHYLATION!!! (Or, more technically, 17-alpha alkalated).

    In fact, the prohormone Boldione is one of the FEW KNOWN IN EXISTANCE that can do this, and still be biologically viable, without the need to molecularly alter the 17th position on the chain like OTHER prohormones!

    This means Boldione works rather well, for something that needs no liver-enzyme / first-pass protection! Again, it does this because the double-bond between the first and second Carbon atom renders it "under the radar", so to speak....that is, it doesn't get completely destroyed by the liver because the liver largly doesn't even RECOGNIZE it for what it is!

    CONCLUSION: Indeed, the dosages required for effective gains with Boldione add up to a rather EXPENSIVE cycle....BUT....it sure beats the expense of sitting in the slammer by partaking in "illegal activities."

    Not to mention, as I've said, that you can theoretically heighten the myogenic effect by stacking it with OTHER myogenics (such as Havoc), which I am experimenting on right now.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by LAGear View Post
    Why do you guys package it this way? It's the same way with h-drol, you really can't do much with one bottle, but if you buy two bottles you're going to end up with a lot of extra caps if you use it at the recommended dose.

    Do other companies do this? I've only done one cycle but everything else (cort blocker, test booster, PCS, etc.) have enough in one bottle for complete cycle support or PCT.
    To keep the cost down per bottle, and so that people can design their own stacks. Lets say we did a 120 count bottle, what if you only needed 180 caps? Then you are stuck with half a bottle. Being a 60 count makes it easier to customize your cycle to your own needs. Plus, some people can only afford one bottle at a time.

    With H-Drol recomendations, you either use one bottle or two bottles.
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by igoriginal View Post
    And I am not even their representative, mind you. (Hey, you representative dudes, are you gonna hire me?). Hehehhe.

    All I can say is damn, great posting. Very nice way to get started here at AM.

    I appreciate you taking the time to do that and be so technical.

    I look very forward to seeing how your stack goes.

  7. looking for a tester or so to log this either solo or stacked with stuff?

  8. Quote Originally Posted by nycste View Post
    looking for a tester or so to log this either solo or stacked with stuff?
    Not sure yet. Some things here are being worked on for some possible upcoming tester opportunities, but nothing concrete so far.

  9. i'm loking to do eq-plex and h-drol . my last was extreme tren and p-plex ,i got good gains and kept it all with no sides. i'm hoping to get the same out of this one any thoughts

  10. Quote Originally Posted by trucks18 View Post
    i'm loking to do eq-plex and h-drol . my last was extreme tren and p-plex ,i got good gains and kept it all with no sides. i'm hoping to get the same out of this one any thoughts
    Should be a nice stack for lean muscle and fat loss. I would do the EQ-Plex for 8 weeks and the H-Drol for the last 6 weeks of it if were me.

    I would do the EQ-Plex at 8 weeks at 600 to 800 mg per day. The H-Drol I would start the first week at 50 mg then up it to 75 mg per day.

    My personal PCT would be Inhibit-E and Liver Assist XT by SNS along with PCT Assist and Suppress-C by us.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by CompEdgeLabs View Post
    Should be a nice stack for lean muscle and fat loss. I would do the EQ-Plex for 8 weeks and the H-Drol for the last 6 weeks of it if were me.

    I would do the EQ-Plex at 8 weeks at 600 to 800 mg per day. The H-Drol I would start the first week at 50 mg then up it to 75 mg per day.

    My personal PCT would be Inhibit-E and Liver Assist XT by SNS along with PCT Assist and Suppress-C by us.
    i was planning on doing something similar in a month or so
    any idea when eqplex will be available at NP

  12. Quote Originally Posted by CompEdgeLabs View Post
    Should be a nice stack for lean muscle and fat loss. I would do the EQ-Plex for 8 weeks and the H-Drol for the last 6 weeks of it if were me.

    I would do the EQ-Plex at 8 weeks at 600 to 800 mg per day. The H-Drol I would start the first week at 50 mg then up it to 75 mg per day.

    My personal PCT would be Inhibit-E and Liver Assist XT by SNS along with PCT Assist and Suppress-C by us.


    About the idea of doing H-Drol for 6 weeks, and then topping it out at 75 mg....DANGEROUS, DANGEROUS idea.

    H-Drol is built around a "4-Chloro" compound, which is considered by many lab chemists to be one of the more toxic alkalated compounds in terms of your liver. If you look at the original dosage requirements of the PIONEER 4-Chloro pro-steroid makers (Gaspari's original Halodrol-50) and others such as EST's Hemadrol, their recommendations were to NEVER, EVER exceed 30 days on-cycle, or ingest more than a maximum of 50 mg / day!

    When it comes to ingesting 4-Chloro pro-steroids, MORE is NOT better. In fact, recent studies suggest that even at 25 mg per day (a typical "half dose"), the effects have been shown to exhibit 85 to 90% efficacy of the 50 mg / day dose! Why? Because apprently, the liver cannot process much more than 30 to 35 mg of 4-Chloro within a 24 hour period! While 50 mg will top out (and slightly OVERFLOW) your liver's conversion "reservoir", a 75 mg / day intake is not only a waste of money, but a gamble with your health....and LIFE!

    4-Chloro's, when taken above the liver's dosage capabilities, accelerate liver damage 3-fold, and start affecting the actions of peripheral organs! (such as your kidneys). I know this from a personal experience, by the way, when I did blood work, and the analysis indicated that my kidneys were under traumatic / chronic overuse stress, along with my liver. And I haven't even gotten into what a 4-Chloro does to the blood itself (increases clotting / thrombosis, raises bad Cholesterol / Triglyceride count, etc).

    Some bodybuilders argue: "Well, I dose higher because I am a big dude. I weigh over 250 pounds, so I need more."

    Then, I say to them: "Do you suppose that just because your muscles have grown over the years, that your liver got buffed up too? I've got news for you: The liver of a 250 pound bodybuilder, and a 130 pound petite woman are still the same size, and can STILL only handle the same workload. Your organs don't get larger, just because your body does. This is why many of the LARGER pro bodybuilders have heart problems later on in life, because their hearts had to work harder to support a larger musculature."

    That usually leaves them dumb-founded.

    Again, MORE is NOT better. You are, of course, free to do what you want to do...BUT...I thought I'd chime in because I care about not seeing a fellow brother of the iron get hurt.

    Be sensible, be responsible, be successful.

  13. oknppl he makes sense... some1 argue it.... i bumped mine upto 150mg and dindt notice any sides (pplex killed me though - this cycle was 7months after the hdrol)

  14. Sick.

    How about a PCT consisting of drive by AN, fromadrol by lg sciences, liv-52 and neo-var?

  15. Quote Originally Posted by jay21 View Post
    oknppl he makes sense... some1 argue it.... i bumped mine upto 150mg and dindt notice any sides (pplex killed me though - this cycle was 7months after the hdrol)
    I am sure MANY PEOPLE have gone over the 50 mg / day "safety" dose without initially noticing any short-term "side effects."

    However, speaking about "side effects"...there are a lot of people in the world who are morbidly obese, with ARTERIOSCLEROSIS, HYPERTENSION, BAD CHOLESTEROL PROFILES, etc, etc, without any VISIBLE "sides."

    I see fat f--ks choking down greasy, oil-splatted, trans-fat riddled fried chicken for 30 years without any INITIAL "sides."

    Have you ever heard the popular catch-phrase "the silent killer"?

    That's one of the nicknames of Hypertension.

    What am I getting at? Just because your left nut isn't exploding, or your right eyeball doesn't pop out of its socket, doesn't mean you aren't doing LONG-TERM damage to your body!

    Heck, I can swallow small doses of arsenic for 5 years without any immediate or significant "side effects"....or take small inhalations of lead fumes....or suck on asbestos dust for 10 years....but the damage won't show up until later, because it takes time to bio-accumulate and run its course.

    "I DIDN'T NOTICE ANY SIDES."

    Neither do most of America's 30 millions smokers, for the first 15 to 20 years of smoking notice any "sides."

    Please, folks....let's come down from your fantasy world of "I'm bullet-proof and impenetrable" delusions.

    Not really trying to be condescending, here. Trying to put some REASON and RATIONALITY into the profound LONG-TERM damage you guys are doing....even though you claim that you see no "sides".....at the moment.

    Of course, everyone always seem to fall into the trap of "it cant happen to me, only to someone else."

  16. Quote Originally Posted by igoriginal View Post
    About the idea of doing H-Drol for 6 weeks, and then topping it out at 75 mg....DANGEROUS, DANGEROUS idea.

    H-Drol is built around a "4-Chloro" compound, which is considered by many lab chemists to be one of the more toxic alkalated compounds in terms of your liver. If you look at the original dosage requirements of the PIONEER 4-Chloro pro-steroid makers (Gaspari's original Halodrol-50) and others such as EST's Hemadrol, their recommendations were to NEVER, EVER exceed 30 days on-cycle, or ingest more than a maximum of 50 mg / day!

    When it comes to ingesting 4-Chloro pro-steroids, MORE is NOT better. In fact, recent studies suggest that even at 25 mg per day (a typical "half dose"), the effects have been shown to exhibit 85 to 90% efficacy of the 50 mg / day dose! Why? Because apprently, the liver cannot process much more than 30 to 35 mg of 4-Chloro within a 24 hour period! While 50 mg will top out (and slightly OVERFLOW) your liver's conversion "reservoir", a 75 mg / day intake is not only a waste of money, but a gamble with your health....and LIFE!

    4-Chloro's, when taken above the liver's dosage capabilities, accelerate liver damage 3-fold, and start affecting the actions of peripheral organs! (such as your kidneys). I know this from a personal experience, by the way, when I did blood work, and the analysis indicated that my kidneys were under traumatic / chronic overuse stress, along with my liver. And I haven't even gotten into what a 4-Chloro does to the blood itself (increases clotting / thrombosis, raises bad Cholesterol / Triglyceride count, etc).

    Some bodybuilders argue: "Well, I dose higher because I am a big dude. I weigh over 250 pounds, so I need more."

    Then, I say to them: "Do you suppose that just because your muscles have grown over the years, that your liver got buffed up too? I've got news for you: The liver of a 250 pound bodybuilder, and a 130 pound petite woman are still the same size, and can STILL only handle the same workload. Your organs don't get larger, just because your body does. This is why many of the LARGER pro bodybuilders have heart problems later on in life, because their hearts had to work harder to support a larger musculature."

    That usually leaves them dumb-founded.

    Again, MORE is NOT better. You are, of course, free to do what you want to do...BUT...I thought I'd chime in because I care about not seeing a fellow brother of the iron get hurt.

    Be sensible, be responsible, be successful.
    H-Drol has been being ran for several years now at the common dosing of 50/75/75/75/75/75 and the incidence of sides reported havent been anything signicificant and the results that people have seen have been far better. You are definately entitled to your opinion, but you can look at a huge amount of logs for the real world feedback on it.

    4-chloro items including H-Drol and P-Mag are also regarded by most people as some of the milder ph's on the liver. As for company recomendations, Gaspari recomended 50 because they were the first, and as with most companies, when you are the first introducing something, you err on the side of caution. Plus, theirs were 50 mg caps, so there wasnt a 75 mg per day option. As for EST, they simply copied gaspari's recomendation.

    As for what you are saying about 25 mg being close to results with 50; you can clearly look at user feedback on 50 compared to 75 mg and see that there is a huge difference in the feedback reported.

    We originally recomended 50 mg per day, but after everyone starting running higher dosages, we changed our dosage recomendations to reflect what was working for people better, and to keep them from wanting to go even higher than 75 mg.

    Quote Originally Posted by igoriginal View Post
    I am sure MANY PEOPLE have gone over the 50 mg / day "safety" dose without initially noticing any short-term "side effects."

    However, speaking about "side effects"...there are a lot of people in the world who are morbidly obese, with ARTERIOSCLEROSIS, HYPERTENSION, BAD CHOLESTEROL PROFILES, etc, etc, without any VISIBLE "sides."

    I see fat f--ks choking down greasy, oil-splatted, trans-fat riddled fried chicken for 30 years without any INITIAL "sides."

    Have you ever heard the popular catch-phrase "the silent killer"?

    That's one of the nicknames of Hypertension.

    What am I getting at? Just because your left nut isn't exploding, or your right eyeball doesn't pop out of its socket, doesn't mean you aren't doing LONG-TERM damage to your body!

    Heck, I can swallow small doses of arsenic for 5 years without any immediate or significant "side effects"....or take small inhalations of lead fumes....or suck on asbestos dust for 10 years....but the damage won't show up until later, because it takes time to bio-accumulate and run its course.

    "I DIDN'T NOTICE ANY SIDES."

    Neither do most of America's 30 millions smokers, for the first 15 to 20 years of smoking notice any "sides."

    Please, folks....let's come down from your fantasy world of "I'm bullet-proof and impenetrable" delusions.

    Not really trying to be condescending, here. Trying to put some REASON and RATIONALITY into the profound LONG-TERM damage you guys are doing....even though you claim that you see no "sides".....at the moment.

    Of course, everyone always seem to fall into the trap of "it cant happen to me, only to someone else."
    Alot of your analogy really doesnt apply to H-Drol or any ph usage. There is definately a profound difference between looking at anything in terms of short term vs long term sides, but with ph's for example, if pre and post usage bloodwork is done and BP and Liver Enzymes are back to normal, then I think the picture you are painting is a bit overblown.

    BTW... you have had some really intelligent posts, so dont take me as being overly negative of you. You are entitled to your opinion, I just dont agree with it.

  17. Quote Originally Posted by CompEdgeLabs View Post
    you have had some really intelligent posts, so dont take me as being overly negative of you. You are entitled to your opinion, I just dont agree with it.
    Yes sir, indeed, I completely and whole-heartedly agree with you about everyone being entitled to their opinions, and certainly my opinion does not hold the "gospel truth" any more than others. Nor do my posts mean that I am any more right than others. I surely have much to learn, just as anyone else. In that regard, I have no conflict with you, or any one else for that matter. I come here with the notion of good will, and constructive debate.

    However, if you and others reading this thread do not mind...and if I haven't already overstayed my welcome, haha, please allow me to elaborate and explain in greater detail why I wrote the things I did regarding the 4-Chloro hormones.

    Quote Originally Posted by CompEdgeLabs View Post

    There is definately a profound difference between looking at anything in terms of short term vs long term sides, but with ph's for example, if pre and post usage bloodwork is done and BP and Liver Enzymes are back to normal, then I think the picture you are painting is a bit overblow.
    ISSUE #1: The problem with this first point is that...in the real world...VERY FEW PEOPLE who use prohormones and other supplements actually get blood work done. Sure, a good deal of folks talk the talk..."I do this"..."I do that"...but if you really are honest with yourself, you KNOW that hardly ANYONE bothers with regular blood work / monitoring. Heck, most folks aren't even strict with eating clean, training stricly, or staying disciplined on other parameters, let alone bother with blood work. The sobering reality is that a good deal of the guys playing around with these prohormones today are 20-something dudes who jump at every thing that's shoved at them, without any serious consideration for their health. Some of these kids don't even have a clue about proper TRAINING, let alone proper prohormone use.

    If we were to actually conduct a research project and create a poll to see how many individuals TRULY do their blood work, I garantee you that the percentages would be rather troublesome...likely only 1 % or less of all prohormone users. This leaves 99% of all the other "guinea pigs" going hog wild and popping pills like madmen, and not really having a concise picture of what their bodies are doing on a typical cycle. This also leaves 99 % of prohormone users with undocumented and unforseen medical consequences.

    ISSUE #2: We have to also take I look at the fact that posts themselves have a great deal of bias on the side of "good news" over bad news. What are the percentages of posters who go on here to say "I am dying from testicular cancer" versus "dude, this sh-t got me big!" The dilema is that nobody likes talking about their problems, only their good luck. So what we usally hear is the GOOD side of prohormone use, not the bad side. Those who react badly to prohormones..wether short-term or long-term...we never really hear from them very often. Hence the bias that PH's are mild, only because of the ratio of "good news" posters over the "I'm screwed" posters.

    And you also have to admit that the dead and gravely ill surely are in no position to post. There's a bias that can't be easily changed.


    Quote Originally Posted by CompEdgeLabs View Post
    H-Drol has been being ran for several years now at the common dosing of 50/75/75/75/75/75 and the incidence of sides reported havent been anything signicificant and the results that people have seen have been far better. You are definately entitled to your opinion, but you can look at a huge amount of logs for the real world feedback on it.


    ISSUE #3: I certainly never said that an individual could NOT run more than 50 mg. I simply stated that 50 mg / day is what I term the "safety" cap. This is not to say that those who bump up to 75 mg / day are going to drop like flies.

    But the main reason I am a big pusher of "LESS IS MORE", is another sobering reality that MOST PROHORMONE USERS are very sloppy with with other areas of their lives. They also consume alcohol, or partake in other activities / compounds that have already placed a great deal of stress on their livers LONG BEFORE they ever started doing Alkalated ("Methylated") prohormones such as the 4-Chloro group.

    Can you safely use more than 50 mg / day over a short period? Of course you can....but ONLY if you are STRICT and CLEAN with other areas of your life. This means minimizing or avoiding other compounds that stress the liver, and not using them until your prohormone cycle is complete.

    Problem is...most folks WILL NOT GIVE UP THEIR WEEKEND BEER, just to name a few popular pastimes.

    And so, the 50 mg / day "safety" cap is based on REALITY, not BEST-CASE SCENARIO.

    We can certainly go on and on about this, but I believe both of our points hold some validity. My main philosophy has always been to "err" on the safe side, because there is no substitute for clean living / nutrition, and strict training.

    Again, the reality is that most folks go far over the "safety" caps because they are trying to make up for their sloppy lifestyles.

    Anyway, regardless, I greatly appreciate our discussions and sharing of ideas. Thank you so much for your input, and your criticisms alike. I have no negative feelings, and quite the opposite, welcome future dialogue and discussions.

  18. Igoriginal: I was gona quote your post, but it was so long, so I just gut to the issues to respond to.

    Your Issue 1: You are correct, very few people do have bloodwork done, but if the ones that do have virtually no problems, then that is the best indicator of the larger group as a whole. And actually, by working for the company, I have seen alot of people that really do. Percentage wise to the number of bottles sold, the % is fairly low, but overall, its still enough to get a fairly good guess. The point I am trying to make is that there are alot of people that have used the 4-chloro compounds with very few sides, and you speak in hypotheticals, which is fine, but they dont seem to carry over to real world sides.

    Your Issue #2: I completely disagree with. Look around, there are many people that will chime in on a thread and say, oh yeah, I used H-Drol 6 months ago and had great results; but at the same time, if anyone has a bad experience, they are posting and raising hell the same day. As for your statement that ph's are mild, I think 4-chloro ones are mild to be methylated ph's, but they are still methylated ph's. As for your statement that dead or ill people rarely post, I think you are really exagerating things there because I have never once seen any as you put it 'grave illness' related to a 4-chloro ph.

    Your Issue 3: 50 mg per day is YOUR safety recomendation, but most others disagree at this point. When the compounds first came out, they started at 50 and many companies followed suit at that dosing, us included. However, as more feedback came about and more people started upping the dosages, it became pretty well agreed upon that 75 was the norm. Hell, there are people that dose 100 to 125 mg per day, which in my opinion is overkill, but even then, sides are rarely reported.

    I myself am not a proponent of the 'more the better' philosophy. I never recomend going over 75 mg per day, but in all honesty, I would myslef because I really dont see a problem with it. But then again, what I do with my body I am a little more riskier than what I tell others to do with theirs.

    And yes, most people are sloppy with their lifestyles, but that is a personal responsibility issue. As a company, we provide what we feel are the safest dosages that will deliver the best results. We cannot control that a person is wreckless in their own life. I am a huge fan of personal responsibility not just in lifestyle, but in life in general.

    We do recomend our Cycle Assist while on any ph cycle for overall support purposes, and I beat the issue to death with recomending people take Liver Assist XT by SNS for support and detox when their cycle is done.

    I agree with err'ing on the safe side, I just happen to think the safe side is 75 mg whereas you think it is 50. I go off my personal experience, along with seeing the logs and hearing from people daily that have had their bloodwork done. (and to make it clear, I'm not a forum rep, I work for the company, so I see this much more than most do).

    There is no substitute fro clean living and nutrition, just as there is no substitute for diet and proper training, but fact is, most people arent going to do things to a tee, so our guidelines on the product are based around that. I truly think people could go higher than 75 mg per day if they did have the perfect lifestyle, but hardly anyone does, hence the 75 mg per day recomendation.

    I think that if you look at our products, you will see that our dosages are well thought out, and our recomendations are more thorough than most, if not all ph companies. In my honest opinion, some of our products can be taken well higher than the bottles say, but we do always err on the side of caution with things.

    I have no negativity towards you either. I like the way you handle yourself in being able to have professional conversation. It is very enlightening in an industry where most people would rather argue and not respect each others rights to have different opinions.

  19. Thanks again, sir, for being up-front and honest with your views and convictions. I appreciate your professionalism and candidness more than anything.

    Of course, given that you have had more direct contact with customers and their use of products, I would have to ultimately hand you the hat, and take the lower ground, because your experiences no doubt have given you better overall insight than my own.

    My limitations stem from actual LAB / CHEM work. But LAB / CHEM work does not always translate to real-world drug interractions, and chemistry on paper does not always account for unforseen variables that could not be anticipated.

    Humanity and its response to therapeutics / pharmaceuticals will always be far more dynamic and unpredictable then the "on paper" chem / lab results, because laboratory work is isolated and under more stringent control. This control proves to be a double-edged sword, as although it provided for workable compounds that are certified "pure", and less likely to create inconsistencies in batches, this same quality-control also weeds out the dynamism of human interaction.

    This, of course, is why the need for human "test trials" (PHASES II and III) exist in the world of targeted pharmaceuticals, once chem / lab work (PHASE I) has been cleared.

    To that end, I once again tip off my hat to you, because your line of work sits at the far end of PHASE III, as well as "PHASE IV" (after-market) responses.

    I hope we do have more discussions, because I believe that only when both IN-LAB and IN-THE-FIELD work are COMBINED, do we get the best insight. As they say..."two views..." or, "two heads..." are better than one.

    Thanks much, again, sir!

    P.S. - I suppose I also haven't considered that the 4-Chloro compounds I've worked with are "pure" batches, whereas the market / after-market commercial compounds are mandated to include fillers and other ingredients to help extend shelf-life and improve the rate of product decay, but would simultaneously mean that less of the active compound is present per volume of delivery.

    In that regard, we could theorize that the drug action of a pure lab batch of "50 mg" 4-Chloro is roughly equivalent to the drug action of a filler / preservative commecial grade of 75 mg.

    Perhaps, this is an issue we have not realized, and so, would BOTH be right, from our own personal experiences.

    If that is the case, then this might also explain why so many commercial versions of an active compound may slightly be underdosed, because their dosage requirements are passed down from the LAB! After all, with no initial "FIELD" dosage data available, LAB DOSAGES are all that the supplement companies have to go on in the early release of their products!

    I may be on to something, here.

  20. Quote Originally Posted by igoriginal View Post
    Thanks again, sir, for being up-front and honest with your views and convictions. I appreciate your professionalism and candidness more than anything.

    Of course, given that you have had more direct contact with customers and their use of products, I would have to ultimately hand you the hat, and take the lower ground, because your experiences no doubt have given you better overall insight than my own.

    My limitations stem from actual LAB / CHEM work. But LAB / CHEM work does not always translate to real-world drug interractions, and chemistry on paper does not always account for unforseen variables that could not be anticipated.

    Humanity and its response to therapeutics / pharmaceuticals will always be far more dynamic and unpredictable then the "on paper" chem / lab results, because laboratory work is isolated and under more stringent control. This control proves to be a double-edged sword, as although it provided for workable compounds that are certified "pure", and less likely to create inconsistencies in batches, this same quality-control also weeds out the dynamism of human interaction.

    This, of course, is why the need for human "test trials" (PHASES II and III) exist in the world of targeted pharmaceuticals, once chem / lab work (PHASE I) has been cleared.

    To that end, I once again tip off my hat to you, because your line of work sits at the far end of PHASE III, as well as "PHASE IV" (after-market) responses.

    I hope we do have more discussions, because I believe that only when both IN-LAB and IN-THE-FIELD work are COMBINED, do we get the best insight. As they say..."two views..." or, "two heads..." are better than one.

    Thanks much, again, sir!

    P.S. - I suppose I also haven't considered that the 4-Chloro compounds I've worked with are "pure" batches, whereas the market / after-market commercial compounds are mandated to include fillers and other ingredients to help extend shelf-life and improve the rate of product decay, but would simultaneously mean that less of the active compound is present per volume of delivery.

    In that regard, we could theorize that the drug action of a pure lab batch of "50 mg" 4-Chloro is roughly equivalent to the drug action of a filler / preservative commecial grade of 75 mg.

    Perhaps, this is an issue we have not realized, and so, would BOTH be right, from our own personal experiences.

    If that is the case, then this might also explain why so many commercial versions of an active compound may slightly be underdosed, because their dosage requirements are passed down from the LAB! After all, with no initial "FIELD" dosage data available, LAB DOSAGES are all that the supplement companies have to go on in the early release of their products!

    I may be on to something, here.
    I appreciate your professionalism and insight.

    As for comparing lab grade to commercial, all of our 4-chloro compounds always test above 98% pure.

    And you are correct, two viewpoints are always better and more subjective than one.

  21. Quote Originally Posted by CompEdgeLabs View Post
    I appreciate your professionalism and insight.

    As for comparing lab grade to commercial, all of our 4-chloro compounds always test above 98% pure.

    And you are correct, two viewpoints are always better and more subjective than one.
    Indeed, but please let me elaborate. When I refer to "purity", I am not only speaking of what percentage of the entire sample contains the active compound. Pharmaceutical "purity" also is dependent on several other attributes:

    1. The average homogenous size of the particulates of active compound, as measured in "microns" (micrometers), "angstroms" (angstrometers), or even "nanons" (nanometers).

    Variations in individual particulate size change the density, and hence the cell-membrane permiability / cross-flow of the active compound, and can make or break that compound's effectiveness in real-world applications. This actually has a higher impact on bioavailability than the whole-solution percentage of the active compound itself.

    2. The specifically-designed or chemically-arranged medium of the active compound: Ex. Liquid suspensions, crystaline suspensions, mist-particulate inhalation suspensions (respiratory delivery), transdermal suspensions, injectable suspensions, etc.

    3. The chemical / electrostatic environment of the active compound's production. Lab / Pharmaceutical-grade compounds are RARELY exposed to plain air...and instead are stingently assembled or bio-engineered in more stable gaseous / aqueous environments (super-cooled and inert nitrogen-based environments, for example...rather than some cheap, everyday assembly-line sweat shop), or sometimes even near-vacuum containment.
    They also use de-charging (electric-current dissipating) mechanisms, to bring the instances of compound oxidation / free-radical exposure to near 0.

    I understand that you are a representative of CEL, but if you are honest, then you'll admit that in order for CEL (or virtually any other "supplement company") to be cost-effective, and thus have a remote chance of ensuring the financial survival of a product's initial launch, the active compound is almost ALWAYS mixed with relatively inferior properties...usually a cheap, coarse powder / crystalline compound, mixed will inexpensive fillers/ delivery compounds.

    This is not an exception, but rather the norm for the supplement industry. It is not a cynism of the supplement industry, but rather just stating the unbiased facts. It's a neccessary marketing reality that cannot be avoided in order to keep costs down, both for the producer AND the consumer alike. After all, there is a reason why true pharmaceutical-grade compounds cost a fortune, when stacked against your everyday off-the-shelf supplements. This cannot be denied. But it IS usually not spoken of.

    Even a TABLET form of a compound is marginally yet significantly superior to its free-flowing, powered capsule form. After all, look at Culver Concept's version of 4-Chloro...called "Chlorodrol-50." It's tableted and packed individually in blister packs. This elimitates two variables that dramatically increase the
    4-Chloro's shelf-life and overall quality: 1. Because of the tablet form, only the "skin" or outer-most part of the compound is ever exposed to air. The rest of the tablet is virtually "air-tight" simply because of its more solid structure held together by resins (as opposed to free-flowing powder in a capsule). 2. The individual packaging in "blister packs" further decreases the degradation of the active compounds, because capsules that sit inside a bottle and bump up repeatedly against each other can even cause reactions with ONE ANOTHER! (Sticking and clumping together when exposed to moisture...melting of the capsule gelatinous material itself, etc).

    There's no coincidence that Chlorodrol-50 is flying off the shelves, and is getting VERY DIFFICULT to secure, or even FIND. Most distributors are often sold out, or on back-order. This is usually the case for MOST tableted versions of supplements. Either they are being hoarded up like crazy, or are being pushed into "discontinuation" by various organizations, because their quality rivals true pharma.

    However, the downside to tableted versions is their HIGH COST, which again, NOT EVERYONE can afford. And some companies are making tablets, but the compound itself is crap to begin with, so tablets don't neccesarily garantee that the business itself is not scrupulous.

    CEL, on the other hand, has had independent lab confirmations of their compound quality, and this I say in the highest esteem!

    Hence, supplements are a GODSEND for most of us who CANNOT EVER afford real pharmaceutical-grade versions of the same compounds, legal OR illegal.

    Therefor, "purity" is a loaded word, and one that involves MANY variables and components which I have no desire to get into detail over. Certainly many more variables than just the "percentage of the active compound" in your average, everyday, cheaply-produced crystalline-powder capsule.

    And THIS is what I was refering to.

    P.S. - I am personally VERY HAPPY and SATISFIED with CEL, by the way, and have nothing but GOOD PRAISE for it. Pound for pound, FEW OTHER companies have provided such high-quality compounds in capsule form. As a measure of cost-per-unit, I would argue that CEL stands head and shoulders above many others.

  22. Wow!!! That was ALLOT of great reading!!!! Thanks for the debate guys. I love that I can now objectivly look at two sides of something( both of which where presented well) and the make a more informed choice for myself.

  23. I was going to run a PPlex/Estane 20/30 cycle to try and gain some strenghth and harden up. I don't want to put on allot of mass. One of the apealing things about this cycle was the appetite supressing qualities that come with PPlex. what do you think? Stick with the PPlex/Estane or try the EQPlex/Esatne for vascularity, hardness and slight strength?

  24. Honestly this thread has raised my IQ EQ-Plex looks great, and I am starting to see some logs now(like outsidebackers)

  25. Quote Originally Posted by igoriginal View Post
    I understand that you are a representative of CEL, but if you are honest, then you'll admit that in order for CEL (or virtually any other "supplement company") to be cost-effective, and thus have a remote chance of ensuring the financial survival of a product's initial launch, the active compound is almost ALWAYS mixed with relatively inferior properties...usually a cheap, coarse powder / crystalline compound, mixed will inexpensive fillers/ delivery compounds.

    This is not an exception, but rather the norm for the supplement industry. It is not a cynism of the supplement industry, but rather just stating the unbiased facts. It's a neccessary marketing reality that cannot be avoided in order to keep costs down, both for the producer AND the consumer alike. After all, there is a reason why true pharmaceutical-grade compounds cost a fortune, when stacked against your everyday off-the-shelf supplements. This cannot be denied. But it IS usually not spoken of.

    Even a TABLET form of a compound is marginally yet significantly superior to its free-flowing, powered capsule form. After all, look at Culver Concept's version of 4-Chloro...called "Chlorodrol-50." It's tableted and packed individually in blister packs. This elimitates two variables that dramatically increase the
    4-Chloro's shelf-life and overall quality: 1. Because of the tablet form, only the "skin" or outer-most part of the compound is ever exposed to air. The rest of the tablet is virtually "air-tight" simply because of its more solid structure held together by resins (as opposed to free-flowing powder in a capsule). 2. The individual packaging in "blister packs" further decreases the degradation of the active compounds, because capsules that sit inside a bottle and bump up repeatedly against each other can even cause reactions with ONE ANOTHER! (Sticking and clumping together when exposed to moisture...melting of the capsule gelatinous material itself, etc).

    There's no coincidence that Chlorodrol-50 is flying off the shelves, and is getting VERY DIFFICULT to secure, or even FIND. Most distributors are often sold out, or on back-order. This is usually the case for MOST tableted versions of supplements. Either they are being hoarded up like crazy, or are being pushed into "discontinuation" by various organizations, because their quality rivals true pharma.

    However, the downside to tableted versions is their HIGH COST, which again, NOT EVERYONE can afford. And some companies are making tablets, but the compound itself is crap to begin with, so tablets don't neccesarily garantee that the business itself is not scrupulous.

    CEL, on the other hand, has had independent lab confirmations of their compound quality, and this I say in the highest esteem!

    Hence, supplements are a GODSEND for most of us who CANNOT EVER afford real pharmaceutical-grade versions of the same compounds, legal OR illegal.

    Therefor, "purity" is a loaded word, and one that involves MANY variables and components which I have no desire to get into detail over. Certainly many more variables than just the "percentage of the active compound" in your average, everyday, cheaply-produced crystalline-powder capsule.

    And THIS is what I was refering to.

    P.S. - I am personally VERY HAPPY and SATISFIED with CEL, by the way, and have nothing but GOOD PRAISE for it. Pound for pound, FEW OTHER companies have provided such high-quality compounds in capsule form. As a measure of cost-per-unit, I would argue that CEL stands head and shoulders above many others.
    I cut out certain parts of your post due to the length of it and left the parts I wanted to reply to.

    When I speak of quality, I am referring to each batch of raw materials being sent for quality testing before they are encapsulated and the finished product made. Once the quality is confirmed, they are sent to be encapsulated, where of course there are other ingredients added because they must fill up the capsule space. Then the product is sent for testing again to reconfirm the percentage of purity of the active ingredient to make sure there was no mistake in encapsulation and for correct mg per capsule.

    I could also strongly disagree with you as to tableted forms being the best for this type of product. Even most manufacturing facilities, whom would love to have the extra money paid to them for tableting state that it isnt ideal for these types of products. Also, the raw materials are exposed to air in the capsulating/tableting/raw material shipping portions of production enough to where if degredation would occur due to air, it would already be done.

    Again, appreciate you ending there on kind words. As far as my paragraph above, I think we may just have to agree to disagree on that.

    Quote Originally Posted by caliphotog View Post
    I was going to run a PPlex/Estane 20/30 cycle to try and gain some strenghth and harden up. I don't want to put on allot of mass. One of the apealing things about this cycle was the appetite supressing qualities that come with PPlex. what do you think? Stick with the PPlex/Estane or try the EQPlex/Esatne for vascularity, hardness and slight strength?
    P-Plex isnt going to suppress appetite. That would be more of gaining stack.

    If you are looking to harden up, some options would be:
    - EQ-Plex & E-Stane
    - H-Drol & EQ-Plex
    - H-Drol & Topical Formestane

    For hardening, I would definately add Suppress-C into your PCT.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. EPI-PLEX BY COMPETITIVE EDGE LABS [CEL]
    By thebigt in forum Supplement Logs
    Replies: 328
    Last Post: 07-01-2015, 04:31 PM
  2. Introducing Topical Formestane by Competitive Edge Labs
    By CompEdgeLabs in forum Company Promotions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-18-2009, 04:20 PM
  3. Introducing P-Mag - Promagnon Clone by Competitive Edge Labs
    By CompEdgeLabs in forum Company Promotions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-10-2009, 10:12 PM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-01-2009, 07:27 PM
  5. Introducing X-Tren by Competitive Edge Labs
    By CompEdgeLabs in forum Company Promotions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-01-2009, 06:51 PM
Log in
Log in