zootreeves
New member
- Awards
- 0
I'm not sure if this topic has been discussed before, apologies if it has.
Pre Ban 2005 pro hormones seem to come in all sorts of delivery systems cyclodextrins, transdermal, ether-gels and even sterile vials for injection (although of course they were advertised as orals).
It seems nowadays the new generation of PH's only only come 17 alpha-alkylated. Personally (I don't have any experience with other methods) but this seems like the worst method possible. Why make the product more harmful than it already? Don't they have enough sides as it is without all that extra liver toxicity?
Possible reasons it thought why..
1) I've read that the FDA doesn't like companies selling transdermals and certainly not injectables. Are the new companies trying to avoid another ban?
2) Supplement companies really don't give a Sh*t about the health of their users. They know people will buy their product if it works and they know a lot of their market is un-educated about the possible side effects.
3) People won't pay the extra cost. I know HPCD for cyclodextrins are expensive, but surely transdermal costs warrant the extra benefit?
4) Todays Pro-Steroids/PH's are only potent enough when they are methylated. I understand Methylating some compounds can make them stronger (e.g. M1T compared to 1-T). Are todays PH's simply not strong enough without the the methyl group?
I'm not saying that companies shouldn't sell methyl's, but it would be really nice to see some alternatives. I'm sure some others would agree?
Wouldn't it be really nice to run a Epistane cycle 6 Weeks+ transdermal without worrying about your liver? Or Having a superdrol cyclo as a pre workout stim?
I know there are a few board Reps who make some current PH's, i'd be interested in seeing your take on this.
Pre Ban 2005 pro hormones seem to come in all sorts of delivery systems cyclodextrins, transdermal, ether-gels and even sterile vials for injection (although of course they were advertised as orals).
It seems nowadays the new generation of PH's only only come 17 alpha-alkylated. Personally (I don't have any experience with other methods) but this seems like the worst method possible. Why make the product more harmful than it already? Don't they have enough sides as it is without all that extra liver toxicity?
Possible reasons it thought why..
1) I've read that the FDA doesn't like companies selling transdermals and certainly not injectables. Are the new companies trying to avoid another ban?
2) Supplement companies really don't give a Sh*t about the health of their users. They know people will buy their product if it works and they know a lot of their market is un-educated about the possible side effects.
3) People won't pay the extra cost. I know HPCD for cyclodextrins are expensive, but surely transdermal costs warrant the extra benefit?
4) Todays Pro-Steroids/PH's are only potent enough when they are methylated. I understand Methylating some compounds can make them stronger (e.g. M1T compared to 1-T). Are todays PH's simply not strong enough without the the methyl group?
I'm not saying that companies shouldn't sell methyl's, but it would be really nice to see some alternatives. I'm sure some others would agree?
Wouldn't it be really nice to run a Epistane cycle 6 Weeks+ transdermal without worrying about your liver? Or Having a superdrol cyclo as a pre workout stim?
I know there are a few board Reps who make some current PH's, i'd be interested in seeing your take on this.