Stacking Methyls: A+B=???

[stxnas]

I didn't want to hijack another thread, so I brought the conversation here. I am admittedly not well versed in this sort of biology and all of my knowledge of the topic is from this board. I would like to hear what those who are versed in biology have to say about the conversation below.

Good Luck, 383. I'll watch with interest.
I really wanna know if this stuff has the same libido boosting/lethargy fighting effects as original 4-AD. (I wanna stack it with Superdrol.)
Keep us informed...

Not to be an a$$, but stacking this with superdrol would just be insane. Superdrol is the most toxic designer available. Stacking it with a multiple methyl coumpound would certainly do some damage to your body on some level.

People make that argument all the time. But I feel that 10mg MethylX + 10mg MethylY = 20mg MethylZ, as far as toxicity is concerned. (This is an over-simplification, but you get the point.)

Over simplification...and more importantly, probably not accurate...do some searching and you'll see what I mean...I don't want to hijack this thread, but this seems appropriate in lieu of what has been said:

Stacking two methyls is not that bad, as long as people dont get excessive with the dosages. Its when I see a log with someone stacking 30mg superdrol with 80mg PP, that I start to worry for them a little. With products like these, I would rather try them on their own first, before stacking them, just so I know how I react to each of them. After that, I would stack away.

This is completely untrue...
...If people actually attempted to find out how the liver works, they would know what the difference is.
The majority of the damage is not even done by the parent hormone but intermediate metabolites and by using two different subsntances you are greatly increasing the risk of buildup with intermediate metabolites creating a bad situation (metabolite buildup) with different stages of breaking said parent hormones down.

There are intermediate stages in which sometimes the metabolite produced is harsher than than the parent hormone. Dbol is a great example because 17 methyl estradiol is much more potent than dbol itself. THe problem is that with the majority of the new substances the metabolites are unknown and you could very easily being introducing a fairly potent metabolite even though the paretn hormone is relatively weak/less toxic.

Its not really about one parent hormone or one enzyme. ITs about mutiple horones and multiple enzymes at various stages. At varisou time the the conversion of hormones into less and/or more substances causes the production of free radicals. YOu also have to understnad htat the liver does numerous tasks (packagin of HDL/LDL/ etc..., serves as the main glucose buffer, converst lactic acid to an important fule rather than a toxic substance, etc...the list goes on and on) so by stressing the liver can easily effect other areas. I remember many people reporting a feeling of hypoglycemia on M1T and Sdrol and this easily could be a results of its effects on the liver and its functioning as being the main glucose buffer (preventing to high or too low glucose levels).

So in the process's of oxidation, reduction, and hydrolysis which converts toxic checmicals into less toxic chemicals the risk of increased free adical products which can easily damage hepatocytes is raised. THis in turn can cause a host of problem with the above mentioned tasks that the liver can perform.

What you are describing specifically is caused induction, where one pathway is overloaded and you can have a buildup of toxins occur. The problem with this is that the majority of those toxins are fat soluble and will accumulate in fatty parts of the body, the main being the brain and hormonal glands. Accumulatin in these areas can cause brain dysfunction and hormonal inbalances in the long run.

Sorry to have made such a long post, but I wanted to be clear on this subject.

Good luck 383. I'll be watching this one.

It's anything but clear to me. But that's probably my fault -- I'm no friggin scientist. And I'm no expert on "intermediate metabolites," but if Bobo says "jump," I say "how high?"
I tend to trust my instincts on "common sense" stuff like this, and I still lean towards the legitamacy of stacking 2 methyls at half strength. But I will entertain thoughtful opinions to the contrary...

So let me try to make some sense of this argument...
If Superdrol and this Methyl Extreme stuff happen to metabolize into compounds that require similar "pathways" of attention by the liver, then these particular pathways will be overloaded, causing a buildup of toxins, and over-stressing the liver.
[Be careful before you agree with this explanation, because there's an obvious flaw in its logic. But this really seems to be what you're saying.]

 

[drksun]

a+b=liver failure

 

[ImJ2x]

I'm in the middle of moving, so I'll be brief, but let me restate my opinion. (And I'm very open-minded about this, and willing to listen to any differing opinions.)
I don't see how stacking 2 methyls at half strength is any more liver-toxic than taking one or the other solo at full strength. (In fact, I could make an argument that it would be less toxic -- if the liver happens to process the 2 compounds differently.)
Let the games begin...

 

[TripDog]

b-squad sub.......

 

[RisingAgainst]

I'm in the middle of moving, so I'll be brief, but let me restate my opinion. (And I'm very open-minded about this, and willing to listen to any differing opinions.)
I don't see how stacking 2 methyls at half strength is any more liver-toxic than taking one or the other solo at full strength. (In fact, I could make an argument that it would be less toxic -- if the liver happens to process the 2 compounds differently.)
Let the games begin...

Allow me to clarify on everything in here:

Superdrol is a di-methyl compound, (does this mean 2 times the toxicity? NO) but alas, every compound has a different effect on liver enzymes and liver enzymatic panels may not be the best way to test for hepatoxicity.

I have had PM's from people over the last couple years of kids running 150mgs of halo stacked with acetaminophen... so as far as liver toxicity vs death goes.. STFU, you're ignorant.

Now on a more serious level, your liver is very resiliant and can definitely handle some abuse, however, you need to weigh gains vs sides vs efficacy vs total cost (medical bills may be inclusive here)

I have ran two double methyl cycles and know several others who have ran much more potent cycles than myself. Back before the ban, people constantly stacked methyls, and they didn't even use proper post cycle therapy, just Milk Thistle and 6-oxo... hmmm..

SAMe + 1.4grams of NAC + ~1gram of Silymarin = protected liver. that simple. (Also note I take my hepaprotectants during post cycle therapy not on cycle)

I'm definitely not going to argue the fact that double methyl cycles arent for everyone, that's certaintly true, however, I feel at a certain point, with the proper precautions, it's VERY possible to run double methyl cycles without any long term damaging effects whatsoever. Once again, I implore you to weigh this out in your own mind and use your own good judgement.

Also note that not all compounds are created equal, some are more harsh on "liver values" than others. (Does this make them more hepatoxic? possibly.) Just changing a simple hydrogen atom on a compound will affect it's metabolization. IMHO there's some compounds (methyls) that are decent for stacking other methyls and some that arent.

Also note that if somebody asks me for bloodwork on my cycles to prove they were effective, I'm going to bîtch slap you into next week. Blood work doesn't prove JACK in terms of liver values (as I stated above)

 

[nelix]

a+b=liver failure

When I read the thread title, that is the reply I was fixing to write... haha

 

[RisingAgainst]

When I read the thread title, that is the reply I was fixing to write... haha

read my reply.

 

[nelix]

read my reply.

Sure, it's a good reply. Everyone has different priorities.

 

[milwood]

Where safety is a legit concern, just use your head! Do research, listen to warnings and experiences of others, and make intelligent decisions. It's your brain and body, ostensibly things you wish to continue to develop. These substances have potential for use as well as abuse, and I'm going to assume that if you are engaged in ongoing dialogue here, that you are interested in the former.

 

[ImJ2x]

RA -- a couple observations:
First of all, your liver supps mirror mine (great minds think alike?) -- I run the same SAMe+NAC+MT stack (but at lower doses, as I'm not on-cycle or recovering from a cycle right now). But that brings up a point: Why do you only use them for post cycle therapy? Do you feel they reduce the efficacy of the AS/PH's? (I believe this argument has been made regarding milk thistle, but what about the other two?) Wouldn't you want to "protect" the liver on-cycle, thereby reducing the need for liver recovery in post cycle therapy?
Also, as I always state, all the theory in the world means nothing unless it's supported by real world results. So I will always be more interested in the fact that you and your friends survived multi-methyl cycles than all this scientific mumbo-jumbo about intermediate metabolites and overloaded pathways. [I'm not necessarily saying you're wrong, Bobo -- I'm just saying it doesn't make sense to a layman like me.]
Anyway, thanks for the supporting evidence.

 

[bombBoogie]

a+b=c

 

[RisingAgainst]

RA -- a couple observations:
First of all, your liver supps mirror mine (great minds think alike?) -- I run the same SAMe+NAC+MT stack (but at lower doses, as I'm not on-cycle or recovering from a cycle right now). But that brings up a point: Why do you only use them for post cycle therapy? Do you feel they reduce the efficacy of the AS/PH's? (I believe this argument has been made regarding milk thistle, but what about the other two?) Wouldn't you want to "protect" the liver on-cycle, thereby reducing the need for liver recovery in post cycle therapy?
Also, as I always state, all the theory in the world means nothing unless it's supported by real world results. So I will always be more interested in the fact that you and your friends survived multi-methyl cycles than all this scientific mumbo-jumbo about intermediate metabolites and overloaded pathways. [I'm not necessarily saying you're wrong, Bobo -- I'm just saying it doesn't make sense to a layman like me.]
Anyway, thanks for the supporting evidence.

I, DO, feel that the efficacy of a PH/PS/AAS/DS w/e may be hampered by SAMe, maybe not Silymarin/NAC but I know that the 4, possibly 6 weeks that I'm on cycle vs recovery time, will be sufficient enough to be successful without inlcuding them during my "on" time.

 

[LakeMountD]

I'm definitely not going to argue the fact that double methyl cycles arent for everyone, that's certaintly true, however, I feel at a certain point, with the proper precautions, it's VERY possible to run double methyl cycles without any long term damaging effects whatsoever. Once again, I implore you to weigh this out in your own mind and use your own good judgement.

It is erroneous to tell people that with proper precautions there will be NO long term damage. Fact is there are many more factors to take into account than the ones we think about here on the boards. The body is a complex machine that involves millions of processes. There is absolutely no way to determine the types of effects these compounds could have later in life as there is absolutely ZERO medical knowledge on these compounds. In fact I think liver issues would be the last of my worries when comparing against cholesterol (heart disease is the number 1 killer in America), heart atrophy, and the X-Factor (or unknown factor of the compounds).

I agree with one thing, however. Anyone who has taken an economics class knows that people place different values on different things. There is an opportunity cost for just about everything and depending on this value will depend on the amount of risk you want to take.

Just be smart, limit yourself on these compounds and don't think that ANY supplement will fully protect you. Cycle Support and Liver Longer are GREAT supps to take to help protect you as much as possible, but take it for what it is worth, nothing more.

Lastly, the benefit to cost ratio for taking protection supps during a cycle is VERY high so be smart. If you could protect yourself 50% more (hypothetical numbers) at an opportunity cost of maybe 1 lb over a 4 week span would you do it?

 

[ImJ2x]

Hey Lake -- haven't conversed with you in forever.
But I think you're saying to definitely use support supps (including liver stuff) on-cycle, right?
And how do you feel about the thread topic? (It's an OLD argument, I know.) My position is that stacking 2 methyls at half strength is no more toxic than running one of the compounds solo at full strength. (It might even be less toxic.) Agree or disagree?

 

[ImJ2x]

PS: You're probably the guy I'd most trust with this question, so I'm gonna ask it:
Would RYR+Nicotinic Acid+Beta Sisterol be the best possible support "stack" to deal with cholesterol probs from AS/PHs? (The three compounds all work differently, and should work synergistically quite well, in my opinion.)
And how about our SAMe+NAC+MT stack for liver support? Critique, please...

 

[Travis]

I'd agree with Lake on the fact that liver toxicity is one of my least worries on/after cycle. Unless your going crazy with doses and extended oral cycles you should not have issues (assuming you do not not have previous medical condition, diet is good, etc).

 

[ImJ2x]

I'd agree with Lake on the fact that liver toxicity is one of my least worries on/after cycle. Unless your going crazy with doses and extended oral cycles you should not have issues (assuming you do not not have previous medical condition, diet is good, etc).

Is this just because of the resilient nature of the liver? (I've tried to kill my liver with Jack Daniels, but my "values" are still just fine.)

 

[RisingAgainst]

PS: You're probably the guy I'd most trust with this question, so I'm gonna ask it:
Would RYR+Nicotinic Acid+Beta Sisterol be the best possible support "stack" to deal with cholesterol probs from AS/PHs? (The three compounds all work differently, and should work synergistically quite well, in my opinion.)
And how about our SAMe+NAC+MT stack for liver support? Critique, please...

Red Yeast Rice = NO NO! Nicatonic Acid = VERY GOOD, Beta Sisterol is something I lack the intelligence to comment on efficiently.

Niacin is the ONLY cholesterol modulation supplement that I trust 100%, with a possibility for something like Policosanol. I have hereditary hypercholesterolemia so, I definitely watch cholesterol much closer than the average cycle user. LMD and D argue well over certain subjects from what I've seen and just to let you know LMD, I'm just as intelligent as Dana, I just lack the capacity to control the flow of words. (Read: compulsively type my mind) and sometimes, the words typed dont reflect my exact opinion, so your arguement, although good, was in vain, as I agree and was just trying to make a point last nite.

 

[Travis]

Is this just because of the resilient nature of the liver? (I've tried to kill my liver with Jack Daniels, but my "values" are still just fine.)

It just seems that the effects on the liver are over exaggerated (with good reason when it comes to giving advice to people when you arent technically qualified too). Better a safe then sorry kinda thing. Also, I really havent seen a lot of bloodwork where someones liver values are severely elevated (of course their are isolated cases).

Compare that to the trashed lipid values you see in bloodwork all the time. And as RA previously mentioned I also dont put a TON of faith in bloodwork, but its still another tool in the toolbox.

 

[RisingAgainst]

It just seems that the effects on the liver are over exaggerated (with good reason when it comes to giving advice to people when you arent technically qualified too). Better a safe then sorry kinda thing. Also, I really havent seen a lot of bloodwork where someones liver values are severely elevated (of course their are isolated cases).

Compare that to the trashed lipid values you see in bloodwork all the time. And as RA previously mentioned I also dont put a TON of faith in bloodwork, but its still another tool in the toolbox.

Well said, you pick up off of D and myself very well lol. You and Jane are valuable assets when you apply all that crap you soak up LOL

 

[ImJ2x]

I know RYR is controversial. And I know Lake intentionally added it to CycleSupport for cholesterol concerns. So I'm just wondering how he feels about it now...

 

[RisingAgainst]

I know RYR is controversial. And I know Lake intentionally added it to CycleSupport for cholesterol concerns. So I'm just wondering how he feels about it now...

I'm confident D swayed his opinion on it at least "some". I used to share LMD's sentiments until 3 months of continuous debate and study left me with much more than an open jaw. RYR is definitely not controversial if you get into it, it's something to avoid. Hence the RYR free version of Cycle Support = IDEAL.

edit: don't get me wrong, I've read a LOT of LMD's stuff and have a ton of respect for the guy, but nobody sees eye to eye all the time, no matter what.

 

[Travis]

Well said, you pick up off of D and myself very well lol. You and Jane are valuable assets when you apply all that crap you soak up LOL

True dat. I was actually turned on (not in the ghey way) to D b/c we shared a lot of the same views....I'm just not smart enough to explain it as well as him. :sad:

 

[RisingAgainst]

True dat. I was actually turned on (not in the ghey way) to D b/c we shared a lot of the same views....I'm just not smart enough to explain it as well as him. :sad:

That was originally my thing, that and I LOVE to argue with him lol. When we met at the O.. if I wasn't laughing so hard, I might have spent the day arguing with him lol

 

[ImJ2x]

I'm confident D swayed his opinion on it at least "some". I used to share LMD's sentiments until 3 months of continuous debate and study left me with much more than an open jaw. RYR is definitely not controversial if you get into it, it's something to avoid. Hence the RYR free version of Cycle Support = IDEAL.

edit: don't get me wrong, I've read a LOT of LMD's stuff and have a ton of respect for the guy, but nobody sees eye to eye all the time, no matter what.

Just to start off your research -- as I recall, Beta Sisterol works to lower LDL, just like RYR, but through a completely different mechanism. And since Niacin raises HDL, BetaSis+Niacin should be a nice cholesterol stack (especially if we decide RYR is truly unacceptable).

 

[ImJ2x]

When you guys talk about D (Dana?), you're referring to _______, right? He's not on here much (and I don't have the time to hang out at that "other" board), but I've seen him have some interesting arguments with DrD.

 

[RisingAgainst]

When you guys talk about D (Dana?), you're referring to , right? He's not on here much (and I don't have the time to hang out at that "other" board), but I've seen him have some interesting arguments with DrD.

Yup that's my boy! lol. He doesn't frequent that "other" board much either. You may wanna edit him outta your post or he'll get all rowled up and come destroy this thread with big words we can't understand LOL!!!

 

[thesinner]

Got methyl confusion?

 

[ImJ2x]

Yup that's my boy! lol. He doesn't frequent that "other" board much either. You may wanna edit him outta your post or he'll get all rowled up and come destroy this thread with big words we can't understand LOL!!!

I took your advice and removed his name from my post. But why? I would welcome his input on this stuff.

 

[RisingAgainst]

Got methyl confusion?

huh????? :blink:

 

[LakeMountD]

Just to start off your research -- as I recall, Beta Sisterol works to lower LDL, just like RYR, but through a completely different mechanism. And since Niacin raises HDL, BetaSis+Niacin should be a nice cholesterol stack (especially if we decide RYR is truly unacceptable).

Beta-sitosterol can lower cholesterol, but not in any way the same way as RYR. RYR works as a statin, while B-S works to decrease solubility of cholesterol and prevent it from being absorbed. You need quite a bit of B-S, taken with meals, to have a profound effect.

Nicotonic acid, as stated by RisingAgainst, is definitely a great cholesterol lowering agent, but also causes an unwanted flushing effect, which is why most people refuse to take it and why AI never used it in Cycle Support. Flush Free Niacin is unfortunately, not nearly as effective, which is unfortunate due to its very cheap price.

Imj2x: Stacking two methyls at half dosages compared to 1 methyl at full dosage is not a good way to look at things for many reasons. 1) There is nothing that signifies what an equal serving is. You could say Epistane at 20mg and Superdrol at 10mg would be the same, however, there is absolutely no literature that states that and all that would be said are assumptions. 2) Epistane @ 20mg and Superdrol @10mg only pertains to muscular gains seen. Therefore you can't make the assumption that Epistane is half as strong and again can't make the assumption that Epistane at 20mg is as toxic as Superdrol at 20mg or vice versa. There are far too many unknowns. For example lets look at 20mg of Anavar versus 20mg of Superdrol. Which do you think is worse in blood values?

As said by someone earlier the liver is the least of my worries because, yes, it is resilient. Plus your are far less likely to die from liver cirrhosis than you are heart disease.

As for the debate with RYR, again it comes down to how much you value the positives against the negatives. I am not saying taking statins year-round is a good idea. If I did say that at any point I apparently wasn't paying attention to what I was saying. I must admit though I much rather use RYR at 1200mg versus my cholesterol levels jumping to 230 for an extended period of time. There are other options such as nicotonic acid, but the arguments made before were about CS in particular and there is no nicotonic acid in CS because people complained about the flushing.

 

[ImJ2x]

LMD-- what I understand about the flushing is that it lasts only about an hour (so I'd dose early AM and right before bed), and diminishes over time. So I'd definitely take it.
And I, for one, haven't totally written off RYR -- it's probably the most effective LDL-lowering product available to us. The question is, how to use it safely? Would it make sense to supplement with nicotinic acid and beta sitosterol daily; and add in some RYR either on-cycle or for post cycle therapy, when your cholesterol is at its worst?

 

[LakeMountD]

LMD-- what I understand about the flushing is that it lasts only about an hour (so I'd dose early AM and right before bed), and diminishes over time. So I'd definitely take it.
And I, for one, haven't totally written off RYR -- it's probably the most effective LDL-lowering product available to us. The question is, how to use it safely? Would it make sense to supplement with nicotinic acid and beta sisterol daily; and add in some RYR either on-cycle or for post cycle therapy, when your cholesterol is at its worst?

Well one of the reasons they like to write off RYR (a statin) is the negative impact on the liver. I think it is a little overstated considering people I know take extremely high doses of Lipitor and drink and don't have liver values that are all that much out of whack.

As for the B-S, it is hard to say, I am not too sure what an effective dosage would be, but you often need a good bit of it.

 

[ImJ2x]

Well one of the reasons they like to write off RYR (a statin) is the negative impact on the liver. I think it is a little overstated considering people I know take extremely high doses of Lipitor and drink and don't have liver values that are all that much out of whack.

As for the B-S, it is hard to say, I am not too sure what an effective dosage would be, but you often need a good bit of it.

Well it seems to me that if it's part of a stack (with niacin and beta-sis), you can get away with a lower (and safer) dose of RYR. And if you only use it during the "off" days of a pulsed methyl cycle, you spread out the potential liver probs, while still gaining the cholesterol support you need. Anyone?

 

[RisingAgainst]

Well it seems to me that if it's part of a stack (with niacin and beta-sis), you can get away with a lower (and safer) dose of RYR. And if you only use it during the "off" days of a pulsed methyl cycle, you spread out the potential liver probs, while still gaining the cholesterol support you need. Anyone?

I still think pulsing is blown out of proportion. The ideas and everything behind it are sound, but there's way to many people screwing with it for it to be truly effective in the way it was meant to... most people on here aren't using hormones properly in the first place, then they try to use a new method and totally annihilated a brilliant idea into another twisted "I wanna get big quick because I'm to lazy to do things right" cycles...

 

[thesinner]

I'm confused.

Are we discussing how methyls work or how support supplements work?

 

[ImJ2x]

I'm confused.

Are we discussing how methyls work or how support supplements work?

You're right. So back on point...

 

[thesinner]

Well, liver toxicity doesn't really have to do with the methylation, but rather the pharmacokinetics, as Bobo was alluding to (without using 6-syllable words).

I don't have an example for a steroid pharmacokinetics, but I'll use how beer is liver toxic, to at least give you an idea.

The component of beer which f*cks you up, as we all know, is ethanol.

Ethanol metabolizes into Ethanal (aka Acetaldehyde). This is the chemical that makes you all woozy. As it passes through the liver, liver enzymes go to work, and it is eventually metabolized into harmless carbon dioxide. That's what puts the stress on your liver.

 

[Mulletsoldier]

Well, liver toxicity doesn't really have to do with the methylation, but rather the pharmacokinetics, as Bobo was alluding to (without using 6-syllable words).

I don't have an example for a steroid pharmacokinetics, but I'll use how beer is liver toxic, to at least give you an idea.

The component of beer which f*cks you up, as we all know, is ethanol.

Ethanol metabolizes into Ethanal (aka Acetaldehyde). This is the chemical that makes you all woozy. As it passes through the liver, liver enzymes go to work, and it is eventually metabolized into harmless carbon dioxide. That's what puts the stress on your liver.

Exactly, the activity of processing active metabolites which lends itself to the creation of free radicals. While there is no date to support what Sinner was using an analogy to describe, or what Bobo was explicitly describing, [this is relative to anabolics] one would assume more active metabolites = more stress.

 

[thesinner]

I think another important factor to consider is serum concentrations. Oral steroids cause a greater spike in serum concentrations and clear up quickly, which puts a lot of stress on the liver (to clear up the metabolites) in a short period of time.

What's really funny is there was an esterfied version of Superdrol, which was available in the 60's and 70's, that was ridiculously mild. So mild, female athletes used it.

 

[Mulletsoldier]

I think another important factor to consider is serum concentrations. Oral steroids cause a greater spike in serum concentrations and clear up quickly, which puts a lot of stress on the liver (to clear up the metabolites) in a short period of time.

What's really funny is there was an esterfied version of Superdrol, which was available in the 60's and 70's, that was ridiculously mild. So mild, female athletes used it.

I had considered running that, or attempting to construct it [at least inquired about how to do it]. I fear that is far beyond my tools/knowledge/capabilities.

 

[thesinner]

I had considered running that, or attempting to construct it [at least inquired about how to do it]. I fear that is far beyond my tools/knowledge/capabilities.

I remember that thread. I don't think esterification would be a difficult task; however, quality would be a big issue. But all that delves beyond the scope of this discussion topic

 

[Mulletsoldier]

I remember that thread. I don't think esterification would be a difficult task; however, quality would be a big issue. But all that delves beyond the scope of this discussion topic

Most definitely.

 

[ImJ2x]

So what do you guys think about the topic? Is 2 methyls at "half strength" more toxic than 1 methyl at full strength? And if you can explain your position in layman's terms, I'll rep you.

 

[thesinner]

It would definitely not be cumulative. It would depend on the steroids you are using as well.

 

[Mulletsoldier]

This is grossly oversimplifying, and I do not mean to generalize so much, but for the purposes of 'layman' terms here it goes:

Relate anabolics to tastes [bitter, sweet, sour, etc.,] and the liver to the mouth. You cannot standardize between tastes; bitter is distinctly bitter, and sweet is distinctly sweet, so you cannot state 'x' fruit is 2x as sweet as 'y' vegetable is bitter. You can state, however, that placing separate categories of taste in your mouth congruently, is going to be much more for your mouth to process at once, causing more stress to your tastebuds.

 

[ImJ2x]

OK, let's try an example...
Instead of cycling 20mg of SD, let's say you decided to stack 10mg SD and 10mg PP. Would this really be more toxic than 20mg SD solo?

 

[milwood]

OK, let's try an example...
Instead of cycling 20mg of superdrol, let's say you decided to stack 10mg SD and 10mg PP. Would this really be more toxic than 20mg SD solo?

I think the truth of this lies, as was discussed somewhere, in the metabolites produced by each. If SD metabolizes into A, B, and C, how are they affecting your liver? If PP metabolizes into B, C, D and E, how would they affect it? And if you had SD and PP in your system (albeit at lower dosages), how would the body handle metabolites A, B (from both), C (from both), D, and E all together? So you see that the potential biochemichal interactions are an unknown, especially as they relate to a combonation of different compounds.

 

[ImJ2x]

I think the truth of this lies, as was discussed somewhere, in the metabolites produced by each. If superdrol metabolizes into A, B, and C, how are they affecting your liver? If PP metabolizes into B, C, D and E, how would they affect it? And if you had SD and PP in your system (albeit at lower dosages), how would the body handle metabolites A, B (from both), C (from both), D, and E all together? So you see that the potential biochemichal interactions are an unknown, especially as they relate to a combonation of different compounds.

My argument is that's it's good to break these compounds into as many little metabolites as possible. It seems to me that this would be easier for your liver to process than just a couple big metabolites. (Talk about "layman's terms" lol.)

 

[stxnas]

Man, I need to start giving out reps more often. I don't remember repping you guys, but I'll hit all of you that are here from my PM once I spread some love around.

Nice conversation guys...I know it's an old topic, but it's worth revisiting now and then.

Anyway, back to topic. I guess the biggest problem is that do we even know what metabolites these products are making? I understand what Im2Jx is saying, but that's assuming that they are different (I guess the same way I assumed some could be the same ). Since superdrol and pp are both androstanes, does that mean that they will have metabolites in common or does that not matter/play a role in this conversation?