equipose @ 300mg/ml
- 04-30-2006, 05:39 PM
equipose @ 300mg/ml
I have 20ml of eq at 300mg/ml but i will be measuring/using 400mg a week, i can get a 3cc syringe but its not very accurate as 1ml is 10 notches so it would be 1ml (300mg eq) + 4 or 5 more notches wich comes to 90 or 120mg eq.... so i would either get 390mg or 420mg eq end result..
is there a better syringe for the job?
- 05-01-2006, 03:00 AM
That is close enough guy, I doubt that the gear is 400mg/ml excatly, you lose some in the syringe, and the loss or gain of 10mg a week is not worth worrying about. Enjoy
- 05-01-2006, 05:02 AM
05-01-2006, 07:04 AM
yeah i wouldnt worry about it too much. are you using the eq for appetite stimulation? if so, you may want to play around with it a bit, as I had to go upwards of 600+mg per week to notice any effect on my appetite. Everyone is different, but keep an eye on it and see.
ADVANCED MUSCLE SCIENCE STRONGEST ON THE MARKET
05-01-2006, 04:48 PM
yeah the appepetite is an added bonus for sure as ive always had trouble getting enough calories, but i was also hoping to put on 5-10 retainable lbsOriginally Posted by tattoopierced1
was just messing around with the weekly dosages last night and come up with this:
i have a total of 6000mcg
05-01-2006, 05:08 PM
Im assuming you mean 6000mg.Originally Posted by bodysculpt
05-01-2006, 05:57 PM
run that longer than 12 weeks if that's what you're insinuating.
I start to geniunely notice EQ's effects around week 10, and so do others that I have spoke to. It is doing it's job before then to an extent, but I think 16 weeks is the minimum length to run Undecylenate compounds. Keep in mind it takes 3-4 weeks for the hormone to clear after cessation, due to the long ester.
I would venture to say that TattooPierced1's playing around with dosages had more to do with the length of time on, regarding noticing increased appetite, than the dosage. Did that make any sense? I say this because I noticed no difference between 400mg/week and 800mg/week.. It is such a mild anabolic.
Just my humble opinion. Run it longer, and don't taper it like you have outlined.
05-01-2006, 06:04 PM
Opps yeah 6000mgOriginally Posted by idunk42
so do you reckon frontload of 600 for 2 weeks then 400mg/week all the way?
taking into cosideration i only have 300mg/ml @ 20ml
05-01-2006, 06:18 PM
get more EQ.. no frontload.
05-02-2006, 01:09 AM
go read this http://www.chemicalfitness.com/forum...30&postcount=1 it will explain everthing and how to front load and what your options are
BTW EQ is only aobut half as strong as test so 400mg a week is much at all. I like 600 to 800mg a week. that isn't that much if your remember the differnce in strength.
05-02-2006, 02:31 AM
Thanks again oh Master AlchemistOriginally Posted by Skye
so your saying that if one does a high dosage frontload that it will kick in a lot quicker? so instead of 8 weeks to kick in it would more likely be 2 weeks? which sounds logical of course.
you mentioned a dosage of 306mg dosed 4 times in the first week then each week after that only 320mg, 331mg, 338mg and so on.. am i right?
I'm assuming this is in the perfect world? as i cant even come close to measuring that accurate with a 3cc syringe? only in increments of 30mg
but you also say you like 600 to 800mg a week? I think ive got myself confused.. 600 to 800mg a week is a big difference to 320mg, 331mg, 338mg and so on..
am i right or have i just made a twat of myself??
05-02-2006, 05:22 AM
Ok, the example I used was taking 400mg of EQ a week. the numbers your quoting is the amount that would be released from the depot for that week. I didn't bother taking in the ester wieght or anything else just the ramp up and ramp down of the build up in your body.Originally Posted by bodysculpt
______Total _____actual ______%of dosage
______depot ____dosage _____released
Wks. _in body ___weekly ______from depot
1 ____400 ______102 ________25.48%
2 ____686 ______175 ________43.68%
3 ____890 ______227 ________56.69%
4 ___1036 ______264 ________65.99%
5 ___1140 ______291 ________72.63%
6 ___1215 ______310 ________77.38%
7 ___1268 ______323 ________80.77%
8 ___1306 ______333 ________83.19%
in the above if you take 400mg the first week then by the end of the first week you will have actually used 102 mg with 298mg still locked up in the depot. this is one of the reasons it takes EQ so long to start working. it isn't unitl week 6 that your actually getting a good dose of the stuff. That is because you have to have 1215mg in the depot to have enough of it decay to give 310mg of the hormone released to the body for use in a week. That is also why Ubiquitous is tell you to run it for 16 weeks, the first 6 nothing much is going on.
So if you want to frontload EQ you have two options, take 3 times your normal dosage the first week or double the dosage for the first two weeks. both would get your depot level up enough to allow 70-80% of your intended dosage to be released in a week.
all that info is approximate though, in the real world as you put it there is a 10 to 20% varance on a bunch of differnt factors. The method I used is not that accurate ether, doing it in logs would be better but its unnecessary give the margen of error.
So if you were going to do a run of EQ at 600mg and you wanted to frontload you would do something like this
1800mg EQ week one or
1200mg EQ weeks one and two
600mg EQ weeks one or two to week 12 to 16.
wait two weeks then start pct.
But that is only if your impatant, EQ is good for the long haul and there is nothing wrong with a nice long slow cycle IMO.
05-02-2006, 06:11 AM
Thanks again for the explanation Skye, I think I'll do it for the long haul as i dont have much to play with, might be able to get another 15mls tho, and after 14 years of lifting Im in no hurry whatsoever.. :s would just be stoked to retain that muscle.
05-02-2006, 01:30 PM
Good for you my manOriginally Posted by bodysculpt
Skye, what are your thoughts on the possibility that Frontloading raises SHGB levels in an attempt to reach homeostasis? If SHGB really does raise along with the sudden influx of hormone from a Frontload, this would be detrimental to the rest of the cycle. Something with a high affinity for SHBG would have to be incorporated I think..
I've never been a fan of the Frontload, it never worked for me, and I would rather use the extra gear on the back end.
05-02-2006, 02:44 PM
Haven't given that a lot of thought really. (good question) But it this case I don't think it even really come into play as there is nothing that sudden about the EQ frontload. Even doing the 3X in the first week is still more gradual then starting with test prop or using an oral. your reach an equilibrium with test prop with in a couple of weeks, EQ with frontloading will still take more and it still takes a while longer for the EQ itself to take full effect (even the base takes a couple of weeks before the full effects are seen, not sure why.) Even at 800mg your talking about 600mg for the first week with EQ being about half as strong as test. About the equivalent of 300mg of test. If you compare that to a short ester cycle that really is not bad at all.Originally Posted by Ubiquitous
It is however a lot for your body to handle in terms of oils and solvents. Sort ester cycles have the same problem, on avg you have to take around 2.5 times as much in volume of oils and solvents.
I do like the long and slow cycles though. In fact EQ is what I did last time I hurt my back. I went on 600mg a week EQ alone. The doctor was amazed at my speed of recovery. It is a shame that that there really hasn't been any medical research into some of these steroids as I suspect that the medical community has never really used them to their full potential.
I do however recomend front loading where the cycles are less then 12 weeks for obvous reasons, the cycles just aren't long enough to take advantage of the eq otherwise. One of these days I am going to try to get some more info on the shorter esters of boldonone and see how that works out. I just really can't find any info on them right now.
Similar Forum Threads
- By Blatalian in forum AnabolicsReplies: 31Last Post: 04-11-2011, 05:58 PM
- By spoofy in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 10-01-2003, 11:41 PM
- By gizmocaca25 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 2Last Post: 08-26-2003, 06:41 PM
- By goes4ever in forum AnabolicsReplies: 10Last Post: 05-07-2003, 11:04 PM
- By Bean in forum AnabolicsReplies: 2Last Post: 02-01-2003, 10:49 PM