Ah shyt, youre absolutely right. I had to check her profile even before I posted because it says MALE. Lol. Yes 10 is where it should be...
Ok as for alternatives I offer this post which was very relevant when I was researching for my wife. I cant remember the author thought I believe it may have come from the illustrious Patrick Arnold...
When determining which AAS are the best choices for women desiring to ward off masculinization as much as possible, we must look for one thing. We must locate AAS which supply the lowest androgenic effect per effective dose. When using only a steroid's A:A ratio in order to determine which drugs are best suited for this purpose, one could easily be led astray, as a steroid's A:A ratio tells us nothing about the steroid's effective dosing range. A steroid could have the best A:A ratio in the world, but if a woman needs to use 1000 mg of it per week in order to see good results, it could end up supplying a much more pronounced androgenic effect than a steroid with an inferior A:A ratio, but which can be used in significantly lower dosages, while seeing equal or better results.
Traditionally, Anavar has been recognized as the "safest" steroid, in terms of masculinizing side effects. This is largely because not only does Anavar have an androgenic rating of only 20, but a woman generally does not need to use much to see good results, at least for a beginner.
Steroids such as EQ, Primo, or even Winstrol have also been traditional 2nd choices, as they provide a stronger androgenic component per mg, but still much lower than adrug such as testosterone. However, drugs such as EQ, Winstrol, and Primo have alos been known to cause androgenic side effects in some women, especially as the dose rises. Today, there is no reason for a woman wishing to avoid masculinization to EVER use a drug like EQ. In reality, EQ is a poor drug for a woman wishing to avoid these side effects, as not only does EQ typically provide a weaker muscle building effect per mg than many other steroids, but it is a full 50% as androgenic as testosterone. Therefore, in order to use EQ at an effective dosage, a woman's androgen level will be well in excess of what is considered "safe" for the complete avoidance of masculinization.
One poster her mentioned some "PH's". The truth is that some of today's designer steroids are some of the very best drugs for building muscle while minimizing androgenic activity (today's most effective OTC steroids are usually not PH's at all, but are 100% genuine methylated steroids, just like dianabol or Anadrol). In fact, listen carefully, 2 of today's OTC steroids not only supply an androgenic component as weak an Anavar's, per mg, but they're even more effective at building muscle tissue, per mg. This means that a lady could use one of these drugs at a dose equal to Anavar, build more muscle, and not expose herself to any more androgenic avtivity. Or...she could use a smaller dose of one of these OTC steroids compared to Anavar, build an equal amount of muscle, and expose herself to a lesser amount of androgenic activity.
These 2 drugs are E[istane and Superdrol. Before any scoffs and makes a fool out of themselves due to ignorance, remember than Var has an androgenic rating of 20...well so does Epistane and SD. Epistane & SD are extrenely weak androgens...just as weak as Var, per mg. This is why no one ever experience masculinizing side effects when using them, just like Var. However, Epistane has a greater myotropic effect (muscle building), per mg, than Var. When it comes to SD, SD desorys Var is terms of msucle building potential, per mg.
A lady could use just 5 mg of SD per day, which would provide the androgenic equivalent of 5 mg of Var, yet it would build an amount of muscle equal to at least 40-50 mg of Var per day. How many women would like to build that amount of msucle while experiencing an androgenic effect equal to only 5 mg of Var? A LOT! If a lady chose to use 10 mg of SD per day, she would still only have to deal with the androgenic equivalent of 10 mg of Var per day, yet she would build muscle many times as quickly...at least as well as 100 mg of Var!
The bottom line is that SD, despite being known as a "harsh" steroid, is one of the most benign steroids in production today when it comes to andrgenic potency. Hell, a woman just starting out could take only 2.5 mg of SD per day, stand virtually zero chance of suffering even the slightest degree of masculinization, yet build way more muscle than what an equal dose of Var would build. However, SD is a fairly liver toxic steroid (although not very much at those lower dosages), and will cause some people to suffer appetite suppression, depression, lethargy, etc.
Epistane is not as potent a muscle builder as SD, but it does exceed Var on a mg per mg basis....while being equally androgenic. Epistance is also pretty much side effects fre...no appetite suppression, lethagy, etc. Today, I consider Epistane to be the premiere beginner's AAS for women wishing to avopid masculinization at all costs. the reasoning is simple. It is as low in sides as Var, does not have any greater of an androgenic effects, abd builds more msucle. It is also only mildly liver toxic, like Var. I have switched my female clients from Var to Epistane and by an large, they get better results than Var, without experiencing any masculinization at all.
Cynostane is also another ASS which has an androgenic rating of 20, but is at least as strong as Var, per mg, when it comes to building muscle.
If we look at all categories of PED's, the one with the absolute lowest androgenic effect is Ostarine. Ostarine is not an AAS, but a SARM which displays almpost non-existent androgenic activity. In a beginning feamle AAS user, it will build noticable amounts of msucle tissue and due to its very weak androgenic component, it can be used for months withouit any issues in that area. Ostarine, like all AAS, may stop a woman's period briefly, but it will resume upon cessation of use.
I have written articles on Ostarine, SD, Epsiane, as well as some articles on AAS use in women. The fact of the matter is that the landscape has changed dramatically when it comes to AAS and women...and many of them are just now starting to figure it out. I could go on forever about this subject, but I am getting tired.
One last thing...one poster in this thread mentioned Halodrol as possible steroid for use in women (it is technically a cross between a DS and PH). Yes, it can be used safely (safer than EQ, that is for sure), as it does supply a rather weak androgenic effect...and when dosed proplery, women will get greater results without experiencing any masculinizing side effects. Still, Epistane, SD, Cynostane, and Ostarine are all androgenically weaker, per mg, than Halodrol...as well as more effective muscle builders. Perhaps only Ostarine is a weaker muscle builder than Halo. Note: When I mention Cynostane, I am referring only to a single steroid known as Cynostane. IML makes an OTC steroid product called Cynostane, which is a combination of both Cynostane and Dimethazine. The addition of Dimethazine, due to its androgenic potency, makes IML's Cynostane product less than ideal for women.
