1-TEST CYP (Dihydroboldenone Cypionate)

[raw33man]

OMG ! SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY lol.... Whoever that carries the legit version of this drug

 

[LK3]

The reason why DHB and many other steroids never achieved great popularity comes down to one main reason--Big Pharma and ignorance.

Why is it that most guys still use the same steroids today that were being used in the 1960's? Is it because all those steroids are so great that no other steroid can hold a candle to them? No. There is one reason and one reason alone. It's because they were script drugs. They were the original "steroids" that all bodybuilders knew about and used for decades.

You see, until the turn of the century, just about no one had any idea there were 100's of other steroids synthesized and explored for activity from the 50's through the 70's. Bodybuilders had become so accustomed to and content with these particular drugs that no one even questioned the existence of other drugs. We had what we had and we knew they worked.

Then, around the turn of the century, we saw supp companies introduce the first PH's, which were nowhere near as effective as script AAS and required conversion in order to furnish results. People learned real quick that these "legal" steroids were 2nd rate products with no real value to seasoned steroid users.

A year or two later supp companies began releasing legitimate, active steroids (requiring no conversion), but there were two problems with these products. For one, none of these drugs were absorbed efficiently, as they lacked an effective delivery system. We saw companies begin utilizing sublingual and even cyclodextrin technology in order to increase the absorption rate, but even then, absorption was fairly poor. More so, most of the actual compounds themselves just weren't that strong.

By this point, even though these products were moderately effective, they were still far inferior to the injectable and methylated steroids that bodybuilders had been using from day 1.

Then, in 2003, the first genuine methylated steroid was eleased--M1T. However, opinions had already been formed, especially by the steroid using commuity. The general consensus was that if it was legal, it was shit compared to already known sscript drugs.

By 2005, supp companies had released the 3 strongest oral steroids to ever be used by the general public, but by and large, the traditional steroid using community remained ignorant to the advancements in the indystry and continued to stay in denial. Even to this day, we still see some guys claim that script drugs are far better than any of the "designer shit". We've all heard comments such as "why not use real steroids", and other such ignorance.

When 1-tst (DHB) was originally released, it did not have an effective deloivery system, so even though it was available, there was no way to delivery meaningful quanities into the body--at least compared to what we could acheive with injectable and methylated drugs. So naturally, people pretty much wrote iff off as another OTC flop.

It was releaed in injectable form by UGL's by 2005, but its previous association with the supp market, as well as improper production (horrible PIP), caused it to fall off the radar within a relatively short period of time. these days, barely anyone carries it. Why? Consumer demand.

Yet, UGL's are still selling EQ left and right, which is a mere fraction as effective as DHB. In fact , DHB crushes EQ in just about every way, yet EQ still sells like hotcakes and DHB doesn't. Make a lot of sense? Not really.

90% of the problem comes back to ignorance--misinformation. How many times have we heard people make comments like "If it was any good, why didn't poharm companies make it?" Or "Pharms didn't make it because it wasn't safe". This reasoning has been applied to any steroid was was not orignally sold as a pescription.

However, these arguments are flat-out nonsense. Many people fail to realize that the AAS which pharms chose to make were slected not because they had the best characteristics for bodybuilding, but because they were suitable for the treatment of certain medical conditions.

Had bodybuilding been the focal point of Big Pharma, you can bet your ass they would have producedan entirely different catalog of script drugs. However, building massive muscles, insane strength, and promoting desirable cosmetic side effects were not top priorities for pharm companies. Big Pharma was aware of many, many steroids that were very strong (in terms of myotropic potency) and equally safe, but possesed characteristics which made them less desirable for the treatment of certain diseases or for use in certain population groups.

For example, if the goal is to create a steroid that can be used for women and children, they are going to be looking for vastly differnet characteristics than if they were attempting to design a sterolid ideally suited for muscle growth or strength development. Side effects such as muscle hardness, density, vascularity, or dryness wre non-issues and never considered.

The fact is that DHB is an excellent bodybuilding drug. It produces a primo-like effect, but is much more myotropic (growth promoting). Aside from tren, there isn't a single non-methylated, non-aromatizing, script steroid as strong as this.

The truth is that there are at least a couple dozen potentially available steroids that have never been produced as script dyugs, which are suprior to traditional steroids in one way or another. There are seversal "dry" designers which ghave never been produced, but which are capable of producing significantly more growth than any other dry steroid we currently have. Yet there is no demand for them because most people have been filled with misinformation or are simply uneducated.

while i very much agree that legality and sociopolitical environment keep progress in this area limited to non existent, lets ask a question.

do you really want better bb drugs?

i can remember a thread where parts of this were touched on, maybe something on mystantin or some theoretical drug that gives you magic results...

you yourself said it would be a sad day or something similar...

i think there is something to be said for not approaching this subject like we tend to approach all other aspects of conventional medicine...

i will also point out that every old timer here had access to this stuff, legit access in injectable form.

it was available roughly the time when cfp had just begun and everyone and there grandmother was reading animalkits...

i know dc doesn't like to talk about it but cfp started as a rant about people searching for all these new crazy drugs. lol

saying look, everyone is thinking that its this or that exotic magic compound on new designer drug that is gona put them on the next level, taking physical and legal risks for essentially no reason. the route to success in bb, or just going to the freakin gym which is what 90% of the people reading this are doing ( just going to the gym ) is doing the same boring thing over and over and over again. using the same drugs, using reasonable doses so you CAN do it day in day out for the next 20-30 years. because THAT is what its gona take for you to look good naked...

not the perfect cycle.

 

[RamboStallone]

The reason why DHB and many other steroids never achieved great popularity comes down to one main reason--Big Pharma and ignorance.

Why is it that most guys still use the same steroids today that were being used in the 1960's? Is it because all those steroids are so great that no other steroid can hold a candle to them? No. There is one reason and one reason alone. It's because they were script drugs. They were the original "steroids" that all bodybuilders knew about and used for decades.

You see, until the turn of the century, just about no one had any idea there were 100's of other steroids synthesized and explored for activity from the 50's through the 70's. Bodybuilders had become so accustomed to and content with these particular drugs that no one even questioned the existence of other drugs. We had what we had and we knew they worked.

Then, around the turn of the century, we saw supp companies introduce the first PH's, which were nowhere near as effective as script AAS and required conversion in order to furnish results. People learned real quick that these "legal" steroids were 2nd rate products with no real value to seasoned steroid users.

A year or two later supp companies began releasing legitimate, active steroids (requiring no conversion), but there were two problems with these products. For one, none of these drugs were absorbed efficiently, as they lacked an effective delivery system. We saw companies begin utilizing sublingual and even cyclodextrin technology in order to increase the absorption rate, but even then, absorption was fairly poor. More so, most of the actual compounds themselves just weren't that strong.

By this point, even though these products were moderately effective, they were still far inferior to the injectable and methylated steroids that bodybuilders had been using from day 1.

Then, in 2003, the first genuine methylated steroid was eleased--M1T. However, opinions had already been formed, especially by the steroid using commuity. The general consensus was that if it was legal, it was shit compared to already known sscript drugs.

By 2005, supp companies had released the 3 strongest oral steroids to ever be used by the general public, but by and large, the traditional steroid using community remained ignorant to the advancements in the indystry and continued to stay in denial. Even to this day, we still see some guys claim that script drugs are far better than any of the "designer shit". We've all heard comments such as "why not use real steroids", and other such ignorance.

When 1-tst (DHB) was originally released, it did not have an effective deloivery system, so even though it was available, there was no way to delivery meaningful quanities into the body--at least compared to what we could acheive with injectable and methylated drugs. So naturally, people pretty much wrote iff off as another OTC flop.

It was releaed in injectable form by UGL's by 2005, but its previous association with the supp market, as well as improper production (horrible PIP), caused it to fall off the radar within a relatively short period of time. these days, barely anyone carries it. Why? Consumer demand.

Yet, UGL's are still selling EQ left and right, which is a mere fraction as effective as DHB. In fact , DHB crushes EQ in just about every way, yet EQ still sells like hotcakes and DHB doesn't. Make a lot of sense? Not really.

90% of the problem comes back to ignorance--misinformation. How many times have we heard people make comments like "If it was any good, why didn't poharm companies make it?" Or "Pharms didn't make it because it wasn't safe". This reasoning has been applied to any steroid was was not orignally sold as a pescription.

However, these arguments are flat-out nonsense. Many people fail to realize that the AAS which pharms chose to make were slected not because they had the best characteristics for bodybuilding, but because they were suitable for the treatment of certain medical conditions.

Had bodybuilding been the focal point of Big Pharma, you can bet your ass they would have producedan entirely different catalog of script drugs. However, building massive muscles, insane strength, and promoting desirable cosmetic side effects were not top priorities for pharm companies. Big Pharma was aware of many, many steroids that were very strong (in terms of myotropic potency) and equally safe, but possesed characteristics which made them less desirable for the treatment of certain diseases or for use in certain population groups.

For example, if the goal is to create a steroid that can be used for women and children, they are going to be looking for vastly differnet characteristics than if they were attempting to design a sterolid ideally suited for muscle growth or strength development. Side effects such as muscle hardness, density, vascularity, or dryness wre non-issues and never considered.

The fact is that DHB is an excellent bodybuilding drug. It produces a primo-like effect, but is much more myotropic (growth promoting). Aside from tren, there isn't a single non-methylated, non-aromatizing, script steroid as strong as this.

The truth is that there are at least a couple dozen potentially available steroids that have never been produced as script dyugs, which are suprior to traditional steroids in one way or another. There are seversal "dry" designers which ghave never been produced, but which are capable of producing significantly more growth than any other dry steroid we currently have. Yet there is no demand for them because most people have been filled with misinformation or are simply uneducated.

Mike, thanks for the information.

If this is EQ on "steroids" (no pun intended), then I'm all for it. I love EQ and love boldenone in general. I even have a blend of bold base, bold prop, bold cyp, and bold undec that I sometimes alternate with my normal EQ doses. The only reason I don't use it more is because the combination of prop and cyp causes some very uncomfortable PIP.

 

[LK3]

Mike, thanks for the information.

If this is EQ on "steroids" (no pun intended), then I'm all for it. I love EQ and love boldenone in general. I even have a blend of bold base, bold prop, bold cyp, and bold undec that I sometimes alternate with my normal EQ doses. The only reason I don't use it more is because the combination of prop and cyp causes some very uncomfortable PIP.

dude, please don't take this the wrong way but you and i have spoken about some health concerns you have.

do you really think it is smart to play with drugs that impact rbc production in not totally known ways?

im sorry if some of you guy think im being a downer on this subject.

but to a large degree it is the mentality displayed in this thread that leads to us as a group getting a bad image and probably worse to a more undesirable legal/social environment.

it would be irresponsible for me NOT to point some of this stuff out.

 

[RamboStallone]

dude, please don't take this the wrong way but you and i have spoken about some health concerns you have.

do you really think it is smart to play with drugs that impact rbc production in not totally known ways?

im sorry if some of you guy think im being a downer on this subject.

but to a large degree it is the mentality displayed in this thread that leads to us as a group getting a bad image and probably worse to a more undesirable legal/social environment.

it would be irresponsible for me NOT to point some of this stuff out.

Yes, my health concerns were related to curcumin brother. I have iron deficiency anemia, always have, it's no secret. After using curcumin for a couple months I wasn't feeling good. That's when I contacted you about curcumin and it's affects on iron levels.

I stopped it and pulled blood work and my iron and hemoglobin were the lowest they had ever been. Before I ran the blood work and spoke to you, I did some research and it turned out curcumin was shown to alter iron metabolism by chelating iron and suppressing the protein hepcidin. This would lead to iron deficiency anemia which I already have, so it was a double whammy for a guy like me. To clarify, this was only for those who were susceptible, which I obviously was. It's not be taken as anyone using curcumin would become anemic, that is not true at all.

Now that I am off of curcumin and supplementing iron again, I feel much better. No more weak legs, etc. I have blood work taken regularly. I'm due for another draw soon. My condition is in no way caused or related to AAS use but of course I do have to be careful of what I use and monitor myself not just for this but all my health markers when on cycle (a must for anyone using any kind of AAS, even TRT).

I am in no way bashing curcumin, but it is just not for me for the reasons stated above. Shit even acid reflux medication can inhibit some of iron's absorption.

I understand your concerns brother but most of what you said can be said about most if not all AAS use. Let's be honest, if I am concerned about my health, I should not be using altogether.

 

[LK3]

Yes, my health concerns were related to curcumin brother. I have iron deficiency anemia, always have, it's no secret. After using curcumin for a couple months I wasn't feeling good. That's when I contacted you about curcumin and it's affects on iron levels.

I stopped it and pulled blood work and my iron and hemoglobin were the lowest they had ever been. Before I ran the blood work and spoke to you, I did some research and it turned out curcumin was shown to alter iron metabolism by chelating iron and suppressing the protein hepcidin. This would lead to iron deficiency anemia which I already have, so it was a double whammy for a guy like me. To clarify, this was only for those who were susceptible, which I obviously was. It's not be taken as anyone using curcumin would become anemic, that is not true at all.

Now that I am off of curcumin and supplementing iron again, I feel much better. No more weak legs, etc. I have blood work taken regularly. I'm due for another draw soon. My condition is in no way caused or related to AAS use but of course I do have to be careful of what I use and monitor myself not just for this but all my health markers when on cycle (a must for anyone using any kind of AAS, even TRT).

I am in no way bashing curcumin, but it is just not for me for the reasons stated above. Shit even acid reflux medication can inhibit some of iron's absorption.

I understand your concerns brother but most of what you said can be said about most if not all AAS use. Let's be honest, if I am concerned about my health, I should not be using altogether.

i don't think you are bashing anything.

just keep in mind there are MANY variables here...

yes in general we could say that about aas.

but we could also say that in all probability you could use enough aas to achieve your goals without relying on unknown compounds.

while test may have some impact on blood cells in all probability it is safer then boldenone for example which has very little research in humans, 1test cyp even less.

 

[Mike Arnold]

while i very much agree that legality and sociopolitical environment keep progress in this area limited to non existent, lets ask a question.

do you really want better bb drugs?
Are you talking simply about steroids, or PED's in general? Furthermore, how do you define "better"? Do you mean better at building muscle mass, better at increasing strength, better at inducing aggression, better at increasing muscle hardness, or a better safety profile, etc? Personally, I think it would be great if we had steroids that were better in all of these areas.

i can remember a thread where parts of this were touched on, maybe something on myostatin or some theoretical drug that gives you magic results...

you yourself said it would be a sad day or something similar...
I was referring to being able to build pro-level muscle without having to put in any effort, or minimal effort, such as genetic engineering, etc. If it ever gets to the point where everyone can build a massive physique with relatively little effort, having a great physique will no longer be anything special, as millions of people would have one.

i think there is something to be said for not approaching this subject like we tend to approach all other aspects of conventional medicine...

i will also point out that every old timer here had access to this stuff, legit access in injectable form.
This is exactly what I was saying. In fact, old-timers were usually the worst offenders. Many of them flat-out rejected any new non-traditional steroid without even giving it a chance. Hell, most of the time they didn't even know what it was they were rejecting. The fact that it never caught on in the traditional steroid using community, while drugs like EQ continued to flourish, is a testament to the community's ignorance rather than the drug's effectiveness.

it was available roughly the time when cfp had just begun and everyone and there grandmother was reading animalkits...

i know dc doesn't like to talk about it but cfp started as a rant about people searching for all these new crazy drugs. lol

saying look, everyone is thinking that its this or that exotic magic compound on new designer drug that is gona put them on the next level, taking physical and legal risks for essentially no reason. the route to success in bb, or just going to the freakin gym which is what 90% of the people reading this are doing ( just going to the gym ) is doing the same boring thing over and over and over again. using the same drugs, using reasonable doses so you CAN do it day in day out for the next 20-30 years. because THAT is what its gona take for you to look good naked...

not the perfect cycle.
Understood, but I don't think anyone in this thread ever implied that there was a magickal drug. DHB is simply 1 of 100's of other steroids and a damn good one at that, which is, I suspect, why this thread was posted.

....

 

[Mike Arnold]

Mike, thanks for the information.

If this is EQ on "steroids" (no pun intended), then I'm all for it. I love EQ and love boldenone in general. I even have a blend of bold base, bold prop, bold cyp, and bold undec that I sometimes alternate with my normal EQ doses. The only reason I don't use it more is because the combination of prop and cyp causes some very uncomfortable PIP.

In terms of side effects it is similar to EQ, but its cosmetic effects are more like Primo (although a better muscle builder).

600-800 mg/week is a good dose with this stuff. Under 500 mg/week is a little low for this drug. It's not that 400 mg won't work, but higher dosages will provide noticeably better results.

 

[LK3]

In terms of side effects it is similar to EQ, but its cosmetic effects are more like Primo (although a better muscle builder).

600-800 mg/week is a good dose with this stuff. Under 500 mg/week is a little low for this drug. It's not that 400 mg won't work, but higher dosages will provide noticeably better results.

agree with this statement 100%

 

[jm425]

I'm late to the party but I think I can add some helpful info. A few years back, a good friend of mine had access to 1-test that he home made dosed at 100mgs. I had an opportunity to run it for a short time. 6 weeks if I remember correctly at 400mgs. The shots were very painful but it was like primo on steroids but without the nasty prostate problems primo can induce especially at higher doses.

 

[westcoastbber]

Do any of the raw sponsors here carry 1-test cyp? I've checked with a few haven't seen it on their lists.

This thread is making me want to try it out more and more

 

[blitzalpha]

I'm currently 4 weeks into a Noble Labs 1-test cyp cycle and so far I'm really liking the results. It looks and feels like a more anabolic and androgenic primo. There has been no pip since I've been mixing it with test and mast in the same syringe. So far it's on track to becoming my new favourite steroid! Highly recommended!

 

[ugadawg91]

I'm currently 4 weeks into a Noble Labs 1-test cyp cycle and so far I'm really liking the results. It looks and feels like a more anabolic and androgenic primo. There has been no pip since I've been mixing it with test and mast in the same syringe. So far it's on track to becoming my new favourite steroid! Highly recommended!

Your inbox is full. Where did you get yours ? That's great to hear seriously I got to get on it .

 

[PrivateChemist]

first of all he is not spot on in any way shape or form, not in regards to solubility, nothing. lol

it gets old seeing the same dumb shit.

omg xyz super drug is the best thing ever! lol

its ridiculous!

all this shit has been used, sorry you didn't know before...
sorry you got the memo late, whatever...

its the same idiocy for so many years but we have found ways to bring it to new heights over and over and over again. actually what I am saying is is kinda how cfp started out, but you were like 10 when that happened...

so we have another little kid, who has been juicing way more and way longer then he should looking for the next wonder drug, after having all the older members help him with his mystery blood work...

for real cant you guys just eat come chicken and lift some weights then come back sometime after you cross that 220lb mark then consider all these magic potions...

maybe we can get some kids asking why they have fucked up blood tests in there early 20s...

:banghead:

Where was I incorrect? I do not believe it is a super drug. I simply said that in my opinion it has a better effect/side effect ratio than many of the more popular drugs, like EQ for instance.

DHB is not mind blowing. It's cheaper and more effective than methenolone though. I used it at 700mg per week and got about 1.5x what I would out of methenolone at that same dose, with no noteworthy side effects except high libido!

 

[LK3]

Where was I incorrect? I do not believe it is a super drug. I simply said that in my opinion it has a better effect/side effect ratio than many of the more popular drugs, like EQ for instance.

DHB is not mind blowing. It's cheaper and more effective than methenolone though. I used it at 700mg per week and got about 1.5x what I would out of methenolone at that same dose, with no noteworthy side effects except high libido!

about mg/ml, pain and such...

200mg/ml no prob no pain.



lol

 

[PrivateChemist]

about mg/ml, pain and such...

200mg/ml no prob no pain.



lol

You're right about it going into solution at 200mg/ml with relative ease. Certainly caused me and a few others pain at that concentration though. Lucky that you didn't experience that. I meant solubility in context of in-depot as well. High concentrations seem hit or miss for people - some can tolerate it and others can't. My body reacts poorly to higher concentrations.

 

[RamboStallone]

You're right about it going into solution at 200mg/ml with relative ease. Certainly caused me and a few others pain at that concentration though. Lucky that you didn't experience that. I meant solubility in context of in-depot as well. High concentrations seem hit or miss for people - some can tolerate it and others can't. My body reacts poorly to higher concentrations.

I get crippled by high dosed gear. I'll stick to a 100mg per ml.

 

[LK3]

You're right about it going into solution at 200mg/ml with relative ease. Certainly caused me and a few others pain at that concentration though. Lucky that you didn't experience that. I meant solubility in context of in-depot as well. High concentrations seem hit or miss for people - some can tolerate it and others can't. My body reacts poorly to higher concentrations.

all this has to do with several aspects of depot mechanics.

fist issue is solvents.

most people use ba and bb. both can cause pain and tissue damage especially in higher amounts.

this is the first cause of painful high mg gear. usually you can feel it upon injection.

other solvents like eo and gauc are potentially worse. ( have never and will never use them )

this is basically the case with the 1tc situation.
the version I spoke of was pain free as it used a non traditional solvent.

the next issue with depot mechanics is total mg content. 100mg/ml is or less is most bioavailable, high mgs are less efficient and can cause pain simply due to the amount of active hormone you are putting in one spot, this is often the case if you pain comes 1 or more days after inject.

next issue is true solutions...
sometimes a product may look ok but upon injection the hormone and solvent may leach out of the depot faster then the oil or, the solvent may be metabolized first, causing the product to crash in depot,

crash in depot will result in lots of pain for more then a day or two.

solvent/hormone leaking can cause pain but also can play with blood levels.

the idea behind a true proper solution is even distribution so that it gets metabolized evenly and slowly.

 

[ugadawg91]

Just ordered a couple vials to start, will update in a few weeks . Can't wait

 

[b_cornelius]

Just ordered a couple vials to start, will update in a few weeks . Can't wait

What you stackin it with?