Injection Site

zzxyyy

New member
Hey guys,

Little debate going on here with my buddies. Were questions wether or not the injection site matters in terms of getting the most out of your gear.
Suppose someone who only hits their quads, will they be lacking in terms of getting the most out of their gear as opposed to someone who hits multiple different sites? If so, why is that?
 
Nothing I’ve read suggests they would get less? What’s the logic?

As long it’s going IM (and your not ending up sub q with too short a needle in the glutes for example) it wouldn’t make any significant difference....
 
Yes, nandrolone study showed glutes had better bioavailability than thighs/shoulder. Srs.

But, you also have to weigh in the risk of scar tissue using only a few sites.
 
No. As long as it goes into the muscle and disperses it makes absolutely no difference aside from the volume of liquid that can be pushed.
 
Invalid Link Removed

"the bioavailability and physiological effects of a nandrolone ester in an oil vehicle are greatest when the ester is injected in a small (1 ml vs. 4 ml) volume and into the gluteal vs. deltoid muscle. We conclude that the side-chain ester and the injection site and volume influence the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of nandrolone esters in an oil vehicle in men."
 
Whisky said:
Nothing I’ve read suggests they would get less? What’s the logic?

As long it’s going IM (and your not ending up sub q with too short a needle in the glutes for example) it wouldn’t make any significant difference....
Click to expand...

The dude from excelmale says even sub q makes no different
 
Davy25 said:
The dude from excelmale says even sub q makes no different
Click to expand...

No difference in what capacity? Sub-q can have slower depot release and absorption, so lower peaks but higher troughs. Thats one of the reasons Crisler advocates it. These are non-trivial effects on a shots pharmacokinetics, so not sure why he says it makes no difference.

The science seems to indicate his claim is wrong.
 
Nac said:
No difference in what capacity? Sub-q can have slower depot release and absorption, so lower peaks but higher troughs. Thats one of the reasons Crisler advocates it. These are non-trivial effects on a shots pharmacokinetics, so not sure why he says it makes no difference.

The science seems to indicate his claim is wrong.
Click to expand...

Idk, in terms of gains? Haha
 
Davy25 said:
Idk, in terms of gains? Haha
Click to expand...

Lol, well yeah thats fair. Its why I personally dont really give a fuk that I use multiple sites; if Im not happy with effects of 500mg, Ill do 750mg or whatever.

Its still interdasting from a scientific point of view though, as the data (site matters) goes against intuition (site doesnt matter as long as it gets into your body).
 
What happens to the oil that isn’t absorbed then? It just stays in or? The liver can’t just cleave off the esters like magic.
 
Old Witch said:
What happens to the oil that isn’t absorbed then? It just stays in or? The liver can’t just cleave off the esters like magic.
Click to expand...

I could conjecture, but then Id obviously be talking sh1t.

The researchers didnt offer any explanations in the nandrolone study.

I was under the impression the esterase we are concerned with here is located in plasma?

Maybe we should get 2kvette up in this b1tch.

1) in layman terms, how come glutes might have better absorption and ultimately offer better bioavailability over delts? See:

Invalid Link Removed

2) assuming you pin equal amounts of oil into delts and glutes, what happens to oil/compound in delts that doesnt ultimately contribute to plasma levels (glutes end up enabling greater plasma levels)?

3) my pen1s is sweaty
 
Nac said:
I could conjecture, but then Id obviously be talking sh1t.

The researchers didnt offer any explanations in the nandrolone study.

I was under the impression the esterase we are concerned with here is located in plasma?

Maybe we should get 2kvette up in this b1tch.

1) in layman terms, how come glutes might have better absorption and ultimately offer better bioavailability over delts? See:

Invalid Link Removed

2) assuming you pin equal amounts of oil into delts and glutes, what happens to oil/compound in delts that doesnt ultimately contribute to plasma levels (glutes end up enabling greater plasma levels)?

3) my pen1s is sweaty
Click to expand...

Yea, not super surprising. But I can't read the study to see exactly what caused it. But here is my educated guess...

F(bioavailability)=S(salt factor/ester factor here)*A(absorption)*M(intrinsic clearance)

Here the ester factor lowers the bioavailability, we know the total dose is absorbed at 100%, and the clearance/metabolism follows a logarithmic increase after a certain point d/t esterase saturation & P-glycoprotein induction(It kicks more of the ester+nandrolone out into the intestinal lumen after a certain point d/t no esterase being available to cleave it to nandrolone base). Thats why you get lower bioavailability.

And yea esterases are in plasma.
 
2kvette said:
Yea, not super surprising. But I can't read the study to see exactly what caused it. But here is my educated guess...

F(bioavailability)=S(salt factor/ester factor here)*A(absorption)*M(intrinsic clearance)

Here the ester factor lowers the bioavailability, we know the total dose is absorbed at 100%, and the clearance/metabolism follows a logarithmic increase after a certain point d/t esterase saturation & P-glycoprotein induction(It kicks more of the ester+nandrolone out into the intestinal lumen after a certain point d/t no esterase being available to cleave it to nandrolone base). Thats why you get lower bioavailability.

And yea esterases are in plasma.
Click to expand...

Ok. So just to confirm, when we get bloods done, the readings do NOT include ester+compound, but only the "naked" (de-estered) compound, right?
 
Nac said:
I could conjecture, but then Id obviously be talking sh1t.

The researchers didnt offer any explanations in the nandrolone study.

I was under the impression the esterase we are concerned with here is located in plasma?

Maybe we should get 2kvette up in this b1tch.

1) in layman terms, how come glutes might have better absorption and ultimately offer better bioavailability over delts? See:

Invalid Link Removed

2) assuming you pin equal amounts of oil into delts and glutes, what happens to oil/compound in delts that doesnt ultimately contribute to plasma levels (glutes end up enabling greater plasma levels)?

3) my pen1s is sweaty
Click to expand...

Yes, esterases are in the plasma, that’s why I didn’t think the liver could just break it down to be excreted before it could take effect. But I didn’t factor in what 2kvette mentioned, the volume limitation of available esterases. I assumed wrongly that the body was just constantly making it.
 
Unsatisfactory!
2kvette didn't address point 3 in the slightest.

(POINT 3 LOL)
 
Nac said:
Ok. So just to confirm, when we get bloods done, the readings do NOT include ester+compound, but only the "naked" (de-estered) compound, right?
Click to expand...

Yea, thats right. Just the naked compound with no ester attached.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top