Prohormone vs. Injectable
- 07-29-2012, 10:01 AM
Ph= minor league
Lots of dudes on here get great results off of ph's. Less of a risk with a really good reward. AAS comes along w a bigger risk in acquiring and possessing but the results are better. Personally, if I am going to mess w the homeostasis of my body, I'd rather be all in w AAS. It's just a personal decision.
On this site at least, ph's seem to be much more popular.
- 07-29-2012, 10:46 AM
07-29-2012, 10:46 AM
07-29-2012, 10:52 AM
07-29-2012, 10:54 AM
I did havoc with nolva pct last year, boodwork just a few days after last 10mg nolva. Liver values where perfect... I even had a few drinks during the end of pct. Nolva is a drug they put people on for years, less toxic than ibuprofen.
Btw. High doses of painkillers will show up on liver values...
A friend had on cycle bloodwork on test cyp, deca, sust. And anadrol as kickstart.. His bp was in high normal range, blood values where not too good. Liver however was fine, even after 2 weeks of abombs...50-100mg a day! So some people migjt have better livers;-)
07-29-2012, 11:25 AM
I'm not from the us I'm from the uk and I do have access I just choose not to.
When I get get a ph legally and it will work and I know what pct to run for it why do I need to risk aas.
I'm sure lots will agree that epistane is safer and a better compound than winstrol.
Also hdrol is amazing need I say more.
I think designer pro hormones are brilliant if they wasent they wouldn't be so popular is real injectable test king yes of course it is does it make phs crap and people idiots for taking them no it doesn't.
07-29-2012, 11:36 AM
Of course are people NOT stupid when they take phs. I say that with the us because phs are more popular there then here in Europe. There are many ways two reach the goal....Originally Posted by Gym4Life
07-29-2012, 11:39 AM
A point to consider is maybe that you have to rely on some supp company. There were not just one case were the **** was mixed in you don't even know. Pharmacy industry got very tight controls, they sell 100%.
07-29-2012, 03:40 PM
07-29-2012, 03:43 PM
07-29-2012, 03:44 PM
07-29-2012, 03:46 PM
07-29-2012, 03:48 PM
07-29-2012, 03:50 PM
test was so good, chemist didn't need to mess with it to improve it's performance. oh wait, they did.
07-29-2012, 03:59 PM
even if it was you have compounds such as methyl 1-androstenediol, which can bind with and interact with the androgen receptor, and though it's not as potent or harmful as it's parent compound (which it has a possibility of some conversion too) methyl 1-testosterone (5a reduced methyl dianabol)
only real benifit of injectable steroids is the ability to inject massive amounts of androgens into your system..
and I do believe injectables to be a healthier way to get supraphysiological dosages of androgens into your system, im not so sure one how much safer it is though.
but methylated steroids such as di methyl nandrolone (cheque drops) methylated trenbolone, di methyl dht (superdrol) and even methyl boldenone (dianabol) have a big impact on ones health, most def in the short term, long term, that is a debate that could go on forever.
07-29-2012, 04:00 PM
Poor argument. Chemist always looking for improvements its their ***** job. They work for companys who want to make profit. And they can make the most profit if they work in grey areas so everybody can buy it. How many stupid guys think oh its legal what can happen?Originally Posted by jbryand101b
07-29-2012, 04:08 PM
So you would run a 6 week cycle of methyl testosteron, give your liver stress, gain your "solid muscles" (almost impossible in six weeks) and loose most of your gains no matter how good your pct is instead of a 15 week enanthat cycle wich is not liver toxic and make more solid gains because you got time to build muscles?Originally Posted by jbryand101b
07-29-2012, 04:12 PM
07-29-2012, 04:12 PM
07-29-2012, 04:16 PM
man ur changing the topic, first it is injectables are "stronger" which u still haven't defined than any oral. now it is injectables are more liver safe, Know it is which is stronger than test thats an oral(we both said mehtly test and cheque drop) now it is which is better for a 15 week cyccle for gains and liver values, like come on dude, just admuit u are an idiot and move on.
07-29-2012, 04:16 PM
you fail to realize how ester's work, or have an understanding of cycle length.
you can run a 6 week of methyl test at a dosage appropriate for 6 weeks.
you can run non methylated androgens longer, and if injected, get more into your system.
but if you were to make a cycle of methyl test, with dosages that will be equal to the potency of say, 500mg of test e, regardless, after 6-8 weeks, your cycle is over any more time, and you are just delaying the inevitable.
but mg for mg, methyl test is much more potent than test, so if you were to equate the dosages to be similar in potency mg for mg, you'd have a pretty low dose of methyl test. and prob feel great.
07-29-2012, 04:17 PM
07-29-2012, 04:20 PM
07-29-2012, 04:21 PM
yo foxpharma, everyone here loves injectable test obviously, but you saying that it is (first it was ALL injectables now it is just test) better than any oral is just wrong. Take test e for 3 weeks and superdrol for 3 weeks and tell me how much stronger you got on sd than on test. They are both better and different things for different goals, but to say all injectables are "stronger" stilll undefined than all orals is just stupid and wrong.
07-29-2012, 04:21 PM
07-29-2012, 04:26 PM
Why?Originally Posted by jbryand101b
Because butenandt and ruzicka isolate testosteron 1935 and make through synthesis methyl testosteron? What is your point bro? Germans invented testosteron aqeus suspension 1939. If someone say methyl testosteron is better then testosteron enanthat then this person is just stupid. Or sacred or needles.
07-29-2012, 04:32 PM
Lmfao you built an alliance against me? I don't say all injectables are better. You both don't get my point. I said in a post before, there are many ways to reach the goal. In long term injectable test is better.Originally Posted by Husker89
07-29-2012, 04:46 PM
aa ratio: 100/100
half life: 4 hours
oral bioavailability: poor
aa ratio: 115-150/94-130 (hey, it's better!)
half life: 6-8 hours (hey, this is better too!)
oral bioavailability: good (hey, better!)
injectable non esterfied versions of both? yes.
scared of needles, funny.
i wonder how often you inject test suspension for 6-8 week cycles. which, just like an oral, is all you want to run it. why? because there is no time to build up active steroid in the body by removal of the ester.
so, like an oral, it begins working immediately, and unfortunately most retards who dont read data, wont realize 6-8 weeks is as long as you can go on androgens.
can you choose to stay on? yes, but you are just delaying the post cycle crash, and if you stay on supraphysiological dosages, increasing you health risk.
test is great, no cycle should be without it. but the best is debatable. some might like boldenone better.
test was so great, they didn't need to modify it structurally to enhance/change the properties, via a 1-ene group, causing less aromatization, less androgenicity, and more anabolic effect, while also increasing the half life.
oh wait, they did do that, they made boldenone, because test does aromatize, and have negative androgenic effects.
07-29-2012, 04:52 PM
if you mean you can run the cycle longer, and this is better, then you should take this to patrick arnold and tell him how stupid you think he is.
07-29-2012, 05:22 PM
You still don't understand me. Don't nail me on my words, I say suspension bla bla because I don't understand what you mean with read the history. I try it again. I would prefer most injectable steroids over orals and phs. Yes they modified test to boldenone, a injectable too. Jesus I can't wait what's next, I started a roid war....Originally Posted by jbryand101b
Similar Forum Threads
- By daveydoodle in forum AnabolicsReplies: 11Last Post: 01-08-2010, 12:33 PM
- By escher007 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 08-08-2005, 08:17 AM
- By mixedup in forum AnabolicsReplies: 7Last Post: 11-19-2003, 06:13 PM