Oral only cycle,what would be my best options?
- 02-12-2004, 07:05 PM
Oral only cycle,what would be my best options?
Well i have searched a little before posting my question but could not find a definitive answer.I have been lifting for six years and this last maonth i started mit(first ever ph)and had great results in strength gains.Now i would like to try out some "real stuff" in oral form to see how far i can get.
I really want to shy away from injectables as i would have a hard time explaining to my wife and two children,so orals are in.I still have to find a legit source but i am going to Tijuana soon and will see the vet shops there.My question is what would be a good quality steroid available in oral that would not thin out my wallet?Thanks!
- 02-12-2004, 07:10 PM
Your not going to find many orals more powerful than M1T. Also, M1T is not a prohormone it is a steroid.
If M1T didn't put size on ya, I suggest you try M1,4add. The aromatization will help a lot for putting on muscle, glycogen, and water weight.
Just more weight in general.
But if you insist on going to Tijuana, then I suggest you stock up on Nolva and Anadrol
- 02-12-2004, 07:15 PM
The problem is 4 ad is illegal here in California.Geez i i'm going to stockpile on this stuff that way i can run around three cycles a year for a while.Hmm,i wonder if i can find 4 ad in tj?
02-12-2004, 07:19 PM
I would not even attempt an all oral cycle on traditional types of gear, you will more than likely NOT keep your gains. Also before you jump off into the deep end, do some research and know what you are about to get into. Any of this gear or PH is not something to take lightly...
02-12-2004, 07:25 PM
I didn't say Methyl 4ad
I'm talking about Methyl 1,4add the precursor to dianabol
I'm pretty sure it hasn't been banned in California, yet.
02-12-2004, 07:35 PM
Thanks for pointing that out,i always research first and make sure i have all the basics covered before putting anything into my body.Since the general consensus? is mit is as potent as most orals i am probably going to stick with just that.Thank you.
I'm going to search around but i'm pretty sure it's banned in cali.I'll post back later on when i find out.Thank you gentlemen.
02-12-2004, 07:37 PM
Castro, I just didn't want you to be disappointed because you had a good cycle then turn right around and lose everything PC..
02-12-2004, 07:41 PM
No prob Matt,i appreciate your honesty.I wish other boards had the same guidelines.Originally Posted by Matthew D
02-12-2004, 08:25 PM
I would have to aggree with above that M 1-T is the best oral available really. Especially since it's still legal in the states (unike here in canada).
As for you use of injectibles, well i have a family as well. My wife knows about my plans for a near future cycle and we have just aggreed that I keep all of the "paraphenalia" out of the house so that there is no risk of my kids finding anything. That and she doesn't want to have to watch or help with injections. She doesn't really aggree but doesn't have a problem with it either.
02-12-2004, 08:28 PM
I personally would not run an oral only cycle. Gains will be really hard to keep, wait til you can run some test...just my 2cc
02-12-2004, 10:10 PM
Thanks guys.I guess if i'm going orals i will stay with the methyls for now.I appreciate the feedback from you guys.Cheers!
Last edited by castro; 02-12-2004 at 10:10 PM. Reason: spelling
02-13-2004, 12:46 AM
you could also try an oral transdermal cycle test base in a transdermal seem sto work well.
02-13-2004, 02:28 AM
It doesnt matter if its banned in cali anyways, im in cali and every company ive ordered with sends to me anyways. PHs are banned in cali but they sell 1-ad and 4-ad at gnc's and max muscle here, and at my gym for $60 bucks. So obviously no one cares.
02-13-2004, 09:00 AM
You do know about possible liver toxicity from methylated oral compounds, right??Originally Posted by castro
IMO oral only steroid cycles are not a good idea.
M-1-T might be an exception
Also I wouldn't recommend stacking methylated orals
02-13-2004, 09:39 AM
You could try andriol, probably the first time i have ever recommended that.
If you live in a country where AAS are illegal then you should not possess them if you are worried aobut your family
Last edited by size; 02-13-2004 at 01:12 PM.
02-13-2004, 12:43 PM
I have nothing nice to say so I won't say anything Hold on that wouldn't very fun. If your concerned about your family like you claim, how is potentially ****ing your liver showing that. If you want to be there for your family then how is taking unecessary chances with your body helping. Don't use the family as a scapegoat for your fear of pinning.
02-13-2004, 05:13 PM
Nicely said, even if a little harsh.
My comment would simply be. Every bathroom has a lock, and an excuse.
Basically, pinning can't be a bad influence if your kids can't see it. And if anyone's gonna ask you "What are you doing in there" you can always just say your taking a ****.
02-13-2004, 05:47 PM
No offense taken.I'm not using the family as a scapegoat as i am a grown man 31yoa and take responsabilty for my actions.I was going for a one time cycle but i've changed my mind.
Did not mean to start any **** forgive me if i came on like an idiot.Thanks guys.
02-13-2004, 08:40 PM
Nah man, don't let these guys discourage you.
Most of the guys who diss oral only cycles, have LOGS and ONLINE JOURNALS.. of what?
M1,4add cycles, M1T cycles, 4ad and 1-test cycles, etc... in either pill form or liquid.
They have online-documented oral only cycles. Yet next thing you know they will preach otherwise.
Sounds pretty damn ignorant/hypocritical to me, but whatever.
02-14-2004, 01:23 AM
The only reason it may sound harsh is because it's reality and reality is harsh. Thetom no one I know that knows there **** would or will be doing and all oral cycle. Castro, you want to be there for your family that's important. Why risk it because of a little discomfort. I don't like pinning but I do it because for one it's safer and two is the way to get the job done. Honestly if I could take a pill i would but it doesn't work that way. You just can't keep abusing your liver and expect no harm to be done.
02-14-2004, 03:33 AM
Hey Jergo and Sifu both did oral only cycles.
Goto the cycle info section and you'll see, they even shared the same log. Your basically saying they don't know their ****. But many here will disagree.
Any reply to this post you make will not deny the fact. You said people who participate in oral only cycles don't know ****, and those 2 respected board members have done just that.
Like I said. Whatever.
It's all elite-ism bull**** anyway.
Last edited by TheTom; 02-14-2004 at 03:50 AM.
02-14-2004, 03:50 AM
Among Jergo and Sifu. I've seen oral only cycle logs from Prolangtum, Old Guy, NO MERCY, and Lean One.
Even more respected board members.
02-14-2004, 03:54 AM
Hey look what I found? It's a cycle log of Jminis doing a 2 weeker of M1T.
I guess going by your logic, you don't know your ****.
Practice what you preach.
02-14-2004, 10:27 AM
Thetom your just not getting the point. When I refer to all oral cycles I mean when someone goes on a cycle with 2 or more methylated products to get results. That's why I'm bringing in that pinning will be safer because it is in that case. And yes that is my m1t cycle log, it's when it first came out. I took it alone for 2 weeks to see like everyone else how well it worked. Once I established it worked, I ran another cycle with it (not another methylated compound) but instead with test prop for a cutting cycle and got much better results. And why bring sifu and all them into this, I guarentee they'll back me up 100% on the methylated issue and how pinning is safer.
Overall thetom if whoever wants to run a methylated compound and another compund like 1,4 orally that's not methylated I have no problem with it. Go ahead and have at it. I'm concerned with adding more then 1 methylated compound. And with castro he wants to do this with steroids so most likely he will get 2 methylated compounds. Later J
02-14-2004, 10:41 AM
Alright, well Jiminis. Try try to be specific next time man. When you make comments like, "Thetom no one I know that knows there **** would or will be doing and all oral cycle" without any specifics, it'll piss a lot of people off.
I have my own cycle logs on various boards of me using various oral-only compounds, as well as transdermal and pinned compounds. I plan on doing a few oral-only specific logs in the future, and I think I know my ****.
But I also agree you made a good point. More than one methyl at a time is never a good thing.
02-14-2004, 11:16 AM
Why is it that everybody is still saying gains are hard to keep from oral only cycles. What is the diffrence between muscle tissue that is built with test and muscle tissue that is built with anadrol or dbol. I'm still wondering what is the reason behind everybody saying that oral only cycles aren't effective or that gains can't be kept. I myself have done oral only cycles of dbol and anadrol, a few injectable only cycels and a frew mixed. I can honestly say that oral only cycles work just fine and I had no problem keeping the my gains. Actualy when I ran anadrol at 100mgs ed it was just as effective as running test at 1000mgs ed. I can't remeber the exact amount of gain because its been awhile but I will say the gains in size was compbarable but the strength gains from anadrol was unreal.
02-14-2004, 11:16 AM
I have included M-1-T in my current cycle, but it also includes injectables.Originally Posted by TheTom
M-1-T is the only methylated compound I've used. I had planned on running M5-AA the last part of my cycle, but changed it to 5-AA cyp.
As I said earlier M-1-T appears to give good results when used in shorter cycles. Methyldienolone is looking pretty good also and hopefully will have less sides than M-1-T.
I don't think a couple of four week oral cycles will kill you (but then again I don't know) but I don't think anyone can safely do this long term. And, I still say don't stack methylated orals.
02-14-2004, 12:30 PM
TheTom........you are wrong. The orals you mention are all readily available and LEGAL. If you want to stay legal then use all the oral prohormones/grey market steroids your heart desires.
However, this is the AAS section where discussion on ILLEGAL substances occurs. Consequently, if one is willing to take the step to obtain illegal substances they should use them currently to maximize gains.
02-14-2004, 12:39 PM
Methyl-1-test is a steroid it is not a precursor to any hormone. It is perfectly relevant in the steroid forum, regardless of legality issues. So although my opinion was somewhat flawed from a legal standpoint, yours is still flawed also.
Besides the term steroid doesn't mean "illegal growth substances." And not everyone lives in a country where it's illegal. A matter of fact, countries which have illegalized steroids are in the MINORITY.
02-14-2004, 12:53 PM
Originally Posted by TheTom
The majority of members on this board are residents in the USA. I never knew AAS were legal in some countries. I thought the pharmacist was just always being nice.
My opinion is NOT flawed, I included a comment about grey market steroids. They should be and can be openly discussed in the prohormone section.
If one chooses to use "illegal" AAS, then one should choose to use TESTOSTERONE.
02-14-2004, 01:30 PM
Thetom I shouldn't need to be all that specific because this is the steroid section of the board and there aren't to many AAS that can be taken orally that aren't methylated especially compounds that a newb can get. Basically what Size is saying is what I'm saying. If your going to use steroids use them wisely, effectively, and efficiently. Safety comes first always and as Castro say's he's concerned about his family. If he wants to run a dbol or drol only cycle go ahead but the gains will mostly be pissed out.
Jstrong if your running 1000mg/ed of Test god bless you. I'm not going to get into the discussion with you of why injectables are far superior and safer then oral only cycles. Waste of my time.
Back to Castro, bro your best bet here to get nice KEEPABLE gains is Test cyp or enan for 10-12 weeks @500mg with some dbol or drol for weeks 1-4. Nice little cycle that will yeild nice gains granted DIET and training are in order. If you don't want to inject then I suggest m1t and 4ad or even run a test base transdermal.
Last edited by jminis; 02-14-2004 at 01:45 PM.
02-15-2004, 12:45 PM
So you're saying M1T is not a prohormone and it's as strong as Dbol and anadrol? OK then.Originally Posted by TheTom
02-15-2004, 12:50 PM
Casto, don't be offended by this question, but...are your children present when you and your wife are intimate? Or, is your wife present when you sit down in the bathroom?Originally Posted by castro
My point is not to be offensive, but to show that even in family setting some things are sacred and not meant to be shared with anyone else.
02-15-2004, 12:54 PM
That is...or at least should be a dead myth.Originally Posted by Old Guy
It's a lie.
Hepatoxicty: Fact or Fiction
by Roy Harper
We all know that the alpha alkylated steroids are hepatotoxic, right….. But, is there actually any truth to this? We’ve been told for years that if you take 17 alpha-alkylated steroids, you will eventually run into liver problems. Never combine 17 aa’s, never go beyond 50mg day, never go longer than 4 weeks, etc. All of this is crap! As I we walk you through some studies, today, you’ll see 17 alpha-alkylated steroids can be hepatotoxic but not to the degree you would think.
To make a steroid hepatotoxic, you need only a small change to a steroid molecule; A strong bond that cannot readily be down broken by enzymes in the liver. This may be a bond at the 17th position, or even at the 1st position (as in methenolone or proviron). Because the liver cannot easily break the steroid down before it is released in to the blood stream, this also results in the steroid to becoming more orally bio-available.
We can see that the liver has to work harder to break down these steroids. Enzymes in the blood and tissue easily metabolize other steroids such as Testosterone. Commonly, this increase in liver activity has been viewed as a harmful process, but as you will see, this increase is, in and of itself, irrelevant. The liver is THE filter of the human body -- it can figure out what to do with just about anything. The only real problem comes in when one keeps their liver at full blast for long periods of time.
Let’s look at some studies showing the hepatotoxicity of steroids. Here's one of my favorites, a study published in 1979. Essentially, researches did a study of deaths caused by hepatic angiosarcoma (a malignant tumor of vascular tissue in the liver) between 1964 and 1974. Researchers found 131 reported cases of death from hepatic angiosarcoma. Out of the 131 cases, 3.1% (4 cases) were reported to be at all related to the use of androgenic-anabolic steroids. Keep in mind that these 4 people could have liver complications before any steroids were used, aka a genetic disposition. In fact there is no proof, in this study at least, that the anabolic-androgenic steroids even caused the hepatic angiosarcoma.
This is the classic case of associating a cause with an effect, without any evidence, aside from both existing. Furthermore, based on the above numbers, there are only 0.4 cases of hepatic angiosarcoma reported each year, by those using AAS. Now consider the number of people on steroids at this time. Now factor in all the people that don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to using AAS, properly. Clearly, this is very week evidence. Lastly there has not been a real increase in hepatic angiosarcoma since the early seventies. Meanwhile, there has been a huge, almost exponential, increase in steroid use during this period.
Another study, that somewhat supports the previous hepatotoxicity case, showed the possibilities of hepatic adenomas(cysts in the liver) caused by androgenic-anabolic steroids. In this study, a Japanese girl was found to have multiple liver lesions after the use of the drug oxymetholone (aka Anadrol). Most everyone “knows” that Anadrol is linked with liver problems, but a closer inspection into this study shows more.
Apparently, this girl, starting at the age of 14, was diagnosed with aplastic anemia. She was prescribed oxymetholone at 30mg per day. This continued for 6 years until the lesions first appeared. Assuming that the girl was most likely around 100 lbs., this was a pretty heavy dosage. If you extrapolated this data out to a 200 - 250lbs. male, that would be taking approximately 60 - 90mg of anadrol per day for 6 years. Ouch!
The researchers also stated that there were only 17 other cases of hepatic adenomas, found in English literature between 1975 and 1998. They failed to mention the causes of these 17 cases, but there is no reason to believe they were all using 17-AA androgens and 17 is certainly miniscule compared to the number of people who have used them. The authors’ finish off the study by saying the following: "This report may be helpful in identifying the population who is at risk of developing hepatic sex hormone-related tumors." So remember, if you're a small 14-year-old girl taking 30mg of Anadrol per day for 6 years, you may be at risk!
Let's move on to some more useful studies. Take for example a 1995 study that showed the toxic effects of anabolic-androgenic steroids in primary rat hepatic cell cultures. In this study the researchers used the following drugs and dosages:
As proof of the hepatoxicity they used Lactate dehydrogenase release, neutral red retention, and glutathione depletion to determine plasma membrane damage, cell viability, and possible oxidative injury, respectively.
What they showed was that the 17 alpha-alkylated steroids, methyltestosterone, stanozolol and oxymetholone, significantly increased Lactate dehydrogenase release and decreased neutral red retention at the 1x10^-4M dosage for 24h. Both methyltestosterone and oxymetholone also showed depleted glutathione at the 1x10^-4M dosage after 2h, 6h and 8h treatments. In other words they increased liver activity. You may also note that the other, non-alkylated steroids showed no significant difference in any levels. All in all this not only shows that 17 alpha-alkylated steroids are directly “hepatotoxic”, but also non-alkylated steroids are note hepatotoxic at all. But is this a real measure of hepatotoxicity? There is yet to be any correlation between the increase of the above-mentioned measurement and “hepatotoxicity”. Obviously, high dosages of the 17 alpha-alkylated steroids are potentially dangerous, but upon closer inspection, the study reveals more.
Take a look, the researchers took cell cultures from the liversse of 60-day-old Sprague-Dawley rats. Not only are rat livers much smaller than human livers, but these were merely cultures. Furthermore, it was the 1x10^-4M concentrations that caused the most changes, but these are approximately 1 to a 1/3 of a full, daily human dosage -- at least for the 17 alpha-alkylated steroids. Even at the 1x10^-6M concentration, there were no significant changes observed. It's apparent that the levels of 17 alpha-alkylated steroids used were potentially toxic, but for a human to take the same amount would be insane. I'm guessing this could translate to maybe 4 grams every 24 hours or 28 grams a week if not more.
What is common so far is we can only prove that any steroid, that is believed to be hepatotoxic, only increases liver activity. I’ll say it again, where is the correlation to hepatotoxicity? We know that if the liver is running at 100% for long periods this may cause complications, but this is akin to any other chemical, which is metabolized by the liver. Ever noticed that liver cancer due to alcoholism takes decades of constant alcohol abuse? It’s apparent that the possibility for hepatotoxicity is there, but for the smart steroid user this is nearly an impossible task.
Another study done in 1999, attempted to show the acute and chronic effects of stanozolol on the liver. In acute treatments of stanozolol, dosages not mentioned, both cytochrome P456 and b5 (microsomal enzymes) levels dropped after 48 hours, and then at 72 hours, levels significant increased. On the other hand, with chronic treatments, time or dosage not mentioned, these microsomal enzymes showed a decrease in levels. Researchers showed that both acute and chronic treatments resulted in "slight to moderate inflammatory or degenerative lesions in centrilobular hepatocytes", but the authors did not note true hepatotoxicity.
How about we look at the other side of the story, the good studies. For instance, in a 1999 study, which looked at the effects of an 8-week cycle of 17 alpha-alkylated steroids. The researchers used fluoxymesterone, methylandrostanolone, or stanozolol on rats at 2mg/kg-body weight, five times a week for 8 weeks. That's 182mg per dosage, for a 200lb man, or 910mg per week. Half of the rats were sedentary and the other were trained on a treadmill.
Levels of NADH-cytochrome c reductase, succinate cytochrome c reductase, and cytochrome oxidase (showing liver activity), increased in the steroid-administered rats, while citrate synthase showed no change. Comparatively, in vitro, the "cytochrome oxidase and citrate synthase activities were insensitive to the AAS, whereas NADH-cytochrome c reductase and succinate cytochrome c reductase activities were partly inhibited."
Furthermore, in vivo, each rat had liver enzyme levels that were within normal range. From this, the researchers determined that the steroid-administered rats, trained or sedentary, did not show "...classical serum indicators of hepatic function". Extrapolating this, 910mg a week for 8 weeks could potentially have little to no effect on the liver in humans.
As for human studies, in 1999 researchers tried to prove that the hepatotoxicity of steroids is overstated. In this study, 15 of the participants were bodybuilders using self-administered steroid dosages and 10 were non-steroid bodybuilders. Serum data was compared to 49 patients with viral hepatitis, and 592 exercising and non-exercising medical students. [
All of the bodybuilders showed increases in aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and creatine kinase (CK) while gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase (GGT) levels were in the normal range. In comparison, hepatitis patients showed increased ALT, AST, and GGT levels while the control exercising medical students showed increased CK levels. From this, the researchers suggested that it is the correlation between AST, ALT and GGT that shows true liver dysfunction. Keep in mind, we can only guess that the 15 steroid users were using 17 alpha-alkylated steroids, and we do not know what the dosages that were used., but common sense tells us the results are likely relevant.
Last but not least, a simple study done in 1996, showed the long term benefits after taking a 3 month break from steroids. 16 bodybuilders using steroids were compared to 12 bodybuilders that were not. After a three-month drug withdrawal, the researchers showed that levels of liver enzymes, types not mentioned, returned to the same as the non users. Again the dosages are left to the reader’s imagination and we can only guess that the 16 steroid users were using 17 alpha-alkylated steroids.
So what can we conclude from all of this? First off, 17 alpha-alkylated steroids are hepatotoxic in high dosages taken for a long time. On the other hand, short cycles and small dosages appear to be perfectly safe. I suggest that maximum dosages should be 500mg to 900mg per day. They should be cycled for perhaps 8 weeks at a time, and if needed a 3-month break from them should be used. Using the above-mentioned techniques, your liver can be healthy for a long time. Simply put, the hysteria surrounding “hepatoxic” steroids, is based mainly on folk lore.
 Lancet 1979 Nov 24;2(8152):1120-3, Hepatic angiosarcoma associated with androgenic-anabolic steroids. Falk H, Thomas LB, Popper H, Ishak KG.
 J Gastroenterol 2000;35(7):557-62, Multiple hepatic adenomas caused by long-term administration of androgenic steroids for aplastic anemia in association with familial adenomatous polyposis. Nakao A, Sakagami K, Nakata Y, Komazawa K, Amimoto T, Nakashima K, Isozaki H, Takakura N, Tanaka N.
 J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 1995 Aug;33(4):187-95, Toxic effects of anabolic-androgenic steroids in primary rat hepatic cell cultures. Welder AA, Robertson JW, Melchert RB.
 Arch Toxicol 1999 Nov;73(8-9):465-72, Evaluation of acute and chronic hepatotoxic effects exerted by anabolic-androgenic steroid stanozolol in adult male rats. Boada LD, Zumbado M, Torres S, Lopez A, Diaz-Chico BN, Cabrera JJ, Luzardo OP.
 Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999 Feb;31(2):243-50, Rat liver lysosomal and mitochondrial activities are modified by anabolic-androgenic steroids. Molano F, Saborido A, Delgado J, Moran M, Megias A.
 Clin J Sport Med 1999 Jan;9(1):34-9, Anabolic steroid-induced hepatotoxicity: is it overstated? Dickerman RD, Pertusi RM, Zachariah NY, Dufour DR, McConathy WJ.
 Int J Sports Med 1996 Aug;17(6):429-33, Body composition, cardiovascular risk factors and liver function in long-term androgenic-anabolic steroids using bodybuilders three months after drug withdrawal. Hartgens F, Kuipers H, Wijnen JA, Keizer HA.
02-15-2004, 07:13 PM
I remember reading on Avant's board that one of their members was prescribed a low dose of Anadrol for 3 years for some medical reason. His liver values and liver health did not get any worse during this time.
I think it was Ergoman500, I am not 100% sure though.
I'm glad someone is posting something scientific and not just regurgitating things they heard other smarter people say.
Also I remember the Superstar Billy Graham admitting in his steroid trial against Vince McMahon that some wrestlers would take up to 25-100 dbol tabs a day without any intent of cessation of usage.
02-16-2004, 09:23 AM
Originally Posted by lwb357
Note the word "possible".
Yes its a long debated topic.
The following is for Oxandrin, considered the weakest/mildest oral.
Precautions and Warnings
Oxandrin® is in a class of agents known as Anabolic Androgenic Steroids. All drugs in this group are derivatives of testosterone and carries the following class label:
In patients receiving androgenic anabolic steroid therapy, 1) peliosis hepatis, a condition in which the liver and sometimes splenic tissue is replaced with blood-filled cysts, has been reported; 2) liver cell tumors are also reported; 3) blood lipid changes that are known to be associated with increased risk of atherosclerosis are seen.
Pretty much anything has "possible" side effects.
Is it likely, well maybe, maybe not. Maybe 20-30 years down the road??
However IMO stacking orals just increases the chances, and is not wise.
02-16-2004, 09:31 AM
There is always more than one scientific study.Originally Posted by TheTom
My opinion will be based on personal observations or one of the many scientific studies, not something I heard some smarter people say.
02-16-2004, 09:42 AM
- 6'1" 221 lbs.
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Rep Power
Originally Posted by lwb357
Roy has commented on how stacking methyls is a dumb idea. That article was to show that using ONE oral for a 4-6 week cycle does not damage your liver as long as your smart and responsible. He's already said that if he wrote that article again he would change some things as it gives people the wrong idea. Just because it might not cause trouble with ONE oral doesn't mean it won't.
It was bascially written for those that said oral steroids were toxic. People seems to think it was a black and white issue when it clearly was not. In any case M1T has been labled as bad as Halo on your liver by Pat Arnold, therefore stacking methyl is a bad idea.
For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
02-16-2004, 09:44 AM
- 6'1" 221 lbs.
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Rep Power
It was a study on a 14yr old Japanese girl with anemia. The dosage was only 30mg/day and hepatic ademonas were found after 6 years although liver function appeared to be normal. In any case the use of anadrol in that case was discontinued.Originally Posted by TheTom
For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
02-16-2004, 06:19 PM
Damn this thread got big !Well i appreciate all the replies though i did not mean to stir **** up.Well i went to tj but the pharmacies we went to had nothing?****,i was going to go down further to Rosarito but my idiot friend got wasted and sick as fuk!We left my car on this side and walked trough,bot they don't search for **** on foot!Just a metal detector and what are you brining back questions.
Geez does anyone here know their way around tj?Yeah if i take the
'plunge" it is test cyp.We"ll see.Thank you gentleman you have all been a great help.
Similar Forum Threads
- By Kevin519 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 18Last Post: 01-29-2012, 12:53 PM
- By bankshotbanks in forum Post Cycle TherapyReplies: 1Last Post: 01-18-2010, 12:32 AM
- By bslick69b in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 10-07-2008, 03:29 PM
- By newbstartingear in forum AnabolicsReplies: 5Last Post: 12-06-2004, 10:18 PM