Original AX SD D.S. vs M-Drol, and the bunches
- 11-18-2008, 12:40 AM
Original AX SD D.S. vs M-Drol, and the bunches
I'm still pretty set on a p-plex-epi layout whether it be bridged or stacked. But, Superdrol is still itching me behind the ear. I really really want to try this thing but I've been reading tons of threads on delayed gyno. The consensus as everyone knows is that gynodrol is has yet to be understood. So many people react in so many different ways.
However, I've noticed that there are WAY less threads threads reporting gyno with the orignial AX D.S. It seems that tons of people are getting nastier sides, gyno, and instances of non-response to the current day clones.
What are your opinions on the correlation between the clones & side effects (such as gyno) and the what seems to be lesser negatives of the orignial D.S.??? Is it truly a safer bet to spend 100 bucks on sourcing somone's original ax bottle? Or is it the now extremely popular usage of SD clones in which we see a small number of problems, which simply seem greater, in proportion to the original days.
- 11-18-2008, 12:51 AM
They are claimed to be the exact same. I think the disparity is caused by the fact that not many people have tried the original and a lot more people have tried clones. More trying clones means more cases of gyno even if the compound is exactly the same.
I could be way off, though.
11-18-2008, 12:51 AM
Well, on paper, superdrol should not cause gyno according to its chemical make up. However, it is synthesized from oxymetholone, better known as Anadrol. I'm not knocking any clone companies, but there is a chance that if the production methods are sub par, the final product could contain some left over anadrol. This could be a possible theory as to why there are more gyno threads as of late. A simpler notion, however, could be the compounds rise in popularity. Since its been around for a while, and has gained notoriety, obviously more people are using it. It could just be a proportionality relationship between the compound and the user population, e.g. more people are using it than ever before, which gives rise to more adverse reaction cases.
11-18-2008, 01:09 AM
good info so far...so what do you guys BELIEVE....dirty anadrolish clones, or popularity of the compound leading to more cases?
11-18-2008, 04:28 AM
In my opinion, there is a direct correlation between it's increasing popularity and the insane amount of ignorance being spread around with it...
11-18-2008, 05:24 AM
I dont know if it is more popular now then when it first came out. Remember this was readily available on bb.com which is no doubt the biggest forum out there in terms of members and customers on their shopping site. I was close to buying some as well. At least now a lot of people are aware of the dangers of it and would stear clear unlike a few years back when we were told to run it for 6 weeks with AX post cycle product. I wouldn't be suprised if it was due to crappy quality controls when it comes to cloning.
11-18-2008, 10:15 AM
11-18-2008, 10:20 AM
11-18-2008, 10:24 AM
11-18-2008, 10:27 AM
11-18-2008, 10:38 AM
i already did when i announced i had 6! keeping these 3 for now though even though il get 3 cycles out of each bottle....
11-18-2008, 11:08 AM
11-18-2008, 11:12 AM
11-18-2008, 11:13 AM
11-18-2008, 11:17 AM
Share, share, share,... they say what goes around, comes around!!!
Think training's hard,. try losing!
11-20-2008, 11:58 AM
11-20-2008, 01:09 PM
You know, this is interesting... I wonder if it DOES have something to do with cloning differences. For example, when I did my PP/SD bridge, i was taking what I thought was 45mg a day. Which is extremely high when compared to the old AX Phera cycles. In reality, according to the COA I was actually taking 57.6mg as I later found out. Thats equivilant to almost 6 caps a day of original Phera. Wouldn't a person think I would have suffered more side effects, and outright EFFECTS? Just food for thought, I think it might have something to do with cloning problems...
11-20-2008, 02:17 PM
11-20-2008, 03:06 PM
Mostly answered PM's
Don't post on my profile, I don't read that stuff, PM me instead
<------ Hard to believe, but I wasn't on any anabolics in the avatar shot
11-20-2008, 03:10 PM
my personal belief is that when the original was out, alot of people were not logging it or keeping track of their progress to the public so we were left in the dark. as it got banned and companies started putting out clones i think everybody wanted to report their gains to see if all of them matched up to each other(the clones) or even the original, thus more of a public display.
11-20-2008, 03:43 PM
somone correct me if Im wrong, but I think alot of these gyno concerns w/ the drol could be alleviated if you ran some test with your superdrol. If SD is a progestin then you must have test in there anyway right? I mean you wouldnt run tren or deca by itself would you. With test in the mix you have androgen and estrogen present which will antagonize progesterone, that is good because estrogen is much more easily managable.
11-20-2008, 06:20 PM
Oh and as far as the expiration dates, Im betting that two years after is about the max I would expect full potency, might see some diminished potency before or after that but still worth hanging onto, especially something like the original ax sd or sns md.
Just my 2 cents.
11-20-2008, 06:29 PM
11-20-2008, 08:31 PM
I have a couple of the 60ct. with expirations of 08/08, and a few of the 01/09 bottles already stored away.
Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
11-22-2008, 07:59 AM
Similar Forum Threads
- By adil in forum AnabolicsReplies: 11Last Post: 11-26-2015, 01:58 AM
- By Lukass in forum AnabolicsReplies: 120Last Post: 11-14-2007, 02:53 PM
- By EdgeCobra in forum SupplementsReplies: 0Last Post: 08-11-2007, 01:15 PM
- By EasyEJL in forum AnabolicsReplies: 28Last Post: 07-29-2007, 09:14 AM