Full cycle injected Sub-Q vs IM … My results and what I noticed (shocking)

[Zarati]

I just switched from pure subq back to IM. lots of scar tissue to dig around which sucks, but honestly I feel harder and dryer within days (pinning tren)
my nightsweats have increased going IM. I feel meaner too. maybe placebo , sticking with IM for a while though, maybe TEST i will do subq here n there, every other compound no

With subQ you need to wait longer to see effects, like 8 weeks. How many people actually stick around and not switch back and say subQ didn't work?

 

[Muay Thai]

With subQ you need to wait longer to see effects, like 8 weeks. How many people actually stick around and not switch back and say subQ didn't work?

8 weekjs to see results on what? tren ace?@!?@! I have extra test so I just pinned 1cc slin pin into rear delt but i literally have no fat there and its a .5in hopefully it does something, now i regret it. oh well. ill go with my gut feeling and stick with IM i jus ran out of spots rn and i have a hematoma on one buttcheek

 

[CafeL33]

My former endocrinologist was the one who popularized the SubQ method for TRT. I tried it under his supervision and I would estimate from memory that I had at least 30-35% lower blood values than using the same dose IM. He was collecting data for his study but you felt how much of an arrogant pompous ass he was.

Here's part of the abstract of the study:
To investigate the effect of low doses of subcutaneous testosterone in hypogonadal men since the intramuscular route, which is the most widely used form of testosterone replacement therapy, is inconvenient to many patients

So it was simply for convenience and not effectiveness. And the conclusion was "Therapy with weekly subcutaneous testosterone produced serum levels that were within the normal range in 100% of patients for both peak and trough levels"

I was part of this study. He considered my T levels normal. Except I lost my ability to have sex and had maybe the normal levels of a 65 year old. He had a really arrogant and smug response. I switched back to IM.

Also the Testosterone of choice is a Test Enanthate which is preserved with chlorbutanol and not the usual benzyl alcohol which can create pain and bumps in people.

 

[OuchThatHurts]

The quote you just posted is an excerpt from a Saudi pilot study of 22 subjects completed in 2006 "Subcutaneous administration of testosterone. A pilot study report" by Abdullah M. Al-Futaisi, Ibrahim S. Al-Zakwani, Abdulaziz M. Almahrezi, and David Morris (1) (see ref link below)

I saw two additional studies that also showed comparable plasma testosterone levels and E2 concentrations however the studies were conducted on a few hypogonadal males with most of the subjects women in M2F transition. There can be no ideal comparison because they were not given daily but rather weekly injections and obviously the female physiology in aromatization of T is going to create far different plasma profiles vs males.

The only thing I found recent, specifically on TRT was with hypogonadal males but unfortunately was conducted using testosterone undecanoate at it's standardized dose of 1000mg (4ml) in caster oil given in a single dose and T levels were tested at one, two, and three months. T remained elevated up to 2 months however was vague what elevated meant. What I want to know is who can put 4cc's subq? That would have to be one thick fat layer.

The ones I referenced in my previous post above (or similar) all used IM administration. At the end of the TU im vs s.c. (subq) study in the above paragraph, the testosterone levels remained similar but when asked, 63% of the male subjects said they preferred IM and those that preferred SubQ was 26% while 11% had no preference. They concluded that while plasma concentration remained similar in most of the subjects, few preferred the SubQ method in terms of convenience. They also noted that at 24hrs post inj, subq had the highest incidence of pain and/or redness at the injection site. But with 4cc's I'm not surprised.

Prudence demands I personally stick with what I know works. If you want to do something where results are rather ambivalent, I say more power to you and if it works for you, it works for you. Excellent. Case closed. But there would have to very compelling benefits for me to move to daily oil injects.

It was interesting this was brought up. I would have liked to see nice benefits with subq. Maybe with TRT on the rise, more studies will be done in the coming years to justify such a shift. Has anyone tried TNE or aqueous micronized suspension subcutaneously? That might be an interesting 4 week experiment with baseline bloodwork, and at 2wk, and 4wk hormone panels. I'll even pitch in if someone wants to give it a go. I only have one amp of aqueous T suspension left that I was planning on using this friday leg day. It will not be subq.

REF:
(1) Subcutaneous-administration of testosterone (a pilot study report)

 

[Type-IIx]

My former endocrinologist was the one who popularized the SubQ method for TRT. I tried it under his supervision and I would estimate from memory that I had at least 30-35% lower blood values than using the same dose IM. He was collecting data for his study but you felt how much of an arrogant pompous ass he was.

Here's part of the abstract of the study:
To investigate the effect of low doses of subcutaneous testosterone in hypogonadal men since the intramuscular route, which is the most widely used form of testosterone replacement therapy, is inconvenient to many patients

So it was simply for convenience and not effectiveness. And the conclusion was "Therapy with weekly subcutaneous testosterone produced serum levels that were within the normal range in 100% of patients for both peak and trough levels"

I was part of this study. He considered my T levels normal. Except I lost my ability to have sex and had maybe the normal levels of a 65 year old. He had a really arrogant and smug response. I switched back to IM.

Also the Testosterone of choice is a Test Enanthate which is preserved with chlorbutanol and not the usual benzyl alcohol which can create pain and bumps in people.

Very good information. Thank you.

 

[qbkilla]

My former endocrinologist was the one who popularized the SubQ method for TRT. I tried it under his supervision and I would estimate from memory that I had at least 30-35% lower blood values than using the same dose IM. He was collecting data for his study but you felt how much of an arrogant pompous ass he was.

Here's part of the abstract of the study:
To investigate the effect of low doses of subcutaneous testosterone in hypogonadal men since the intramuscular route, which is the most widely used form of testosterone replacement therapy, is inconvenient to many patients

So it was simply for convenience and not effectiveness. And the conclusion was "Therapy with weekly subcutaneous testosterone produced serum levels that were within the normal range in 100% of patients for both peak and trough levels"

I was part of this study. He considered my T levels normal. Except I lost my ability to have sex and had maybe the normal levels of a 65 year old. He had a really arrogant and smug response. I switched back to IM.

Also the Testosterone of choice is a Test Enanthate which is preserved with chlorbutanol and not the usual benzyl alcohol which can create pain and bumps in people.

I like how he put "inconvenient" as a nice way to phase not wanting to inject im. Eating good food and training are "inconvenient" but we all do them, lol

 

[nothuman]

My former endocrinologist was the one who popularized the SubQ method for TRT. I tried it under his supervision and I would estimate from memory that I had at least 30-35% lower blood values than using the same dose IM. He was collecting data for his study but you felt how much of an arrogant pompous ass he was.

Here's part of the abstract of the study:
To investigate the effect of low doses of subcutaneous testosterone in hypogonadal men since the intramuscular route, which is the most widely used form of testosterone replacement therapy, is inconvenient to many patients

So it was simply for convenience and not effectiveness. And the conclusion was "Therapy with weekly subcutaneous testosterone produced serum levels that were within the normal range in 100% of patients for both peak and trough levels"

I was part of this study. He considered my T levels normal. Except I lost my ability to have sex and had maybe the normal levels of a 65 year old. He had a really arrogant and smug response. I switched back to IM.

Also the Testosterone of choice is a Test Enanthate which is preserved with chlorbutanol and not the usual benzyl alcohol which can create pain and bumps in people.

Damn, this makes me want to go back to IM. Thanks for sharing this.

 

[Reload]

Not me. I'm done with IM injections.
SQ 10-15mg/day puts my testosterone, total around 750-800 ng/dL every time I test.
If it ain't broke...

 

[nothuman]

Not me. I'm done with IM injections.
SQ 10-15mg/day puts my testosterone, total around 750-800 ng/dL every time I test.
If it ain't broke...

Yea my levels are good sub q as well but I kind of want to experiment with IM not to see how I test

 

[fisther69]

Not me. I'm done with IM injections.
SQ 10-15mg/day puts my testosterone, total around 750-800 ng/dL every time I test.
If it ain't broke...

I’m at 25-30 a day and the same. I take no anti-e..my estrogen stays around 15-27 depending on body fat.

But this is just trt..if I blast I’ll go back to IM

 

[CafeL33]

I would like to add that my results were based on SubQ 2X per week vs IM 2X per week, same dose. I was the one who suggested twice a week to the endocrinologist doing the study (Dr. Morris). He had most people on SubQ once a week (for "convenience")

I wonder what my results would be ED, maybe I should find the discipline to do it

 

[Knight9]

Dante sent me this..

https://www.urology.uci.edu/pdf/Comparison-of-outcomes-for-hypogonadal-men-treated-with-intramuscular-testosterone-cypionate-versus-subcutaneous-testosterone-enanthate.pdf

 

[Type-IIx]

Dante sent me this..

https://www.urology.uci.edu/pdf/Comparison-of-outcomes-for-hypogonadal-men-treated-with-intramuscular-testosterone-cypionate-versus-subcutaneous-testosterone-enanthate.pdf

Good overview (a few slides from a presentation; summary). I'd like to see the free T though. That's always been the significant difference between subq vs IM. Also, as mentioned in this thread, subq slin pin injections with preparations intended for IM administration (containing benzyl alcohol) are not equal to the chlorbutanol preparations typically delivered by an auto-injector device (e.g., Xyosted).

 

[Zarati]

Good overview (a few slides from a presentation; summary). I'd like to see the free T though. That's always been the significant difference between subq vs IM. Also, as mentioned in this thread, subq slin pin injections with preparations intended for IM administration (containing benzyl alcohol) are not equal to the chlorbutanol preparations typically delivered by an auto-injector device (e.g., Xyosted).

You can tell easily by the graph free T must be higher with subQ.
Total T is higher and also estradiol is lower... So more free T

 

[Muay Thai]

You can tell easily by the graph free T must be higher with subQ.
Total T is higher and also estradiol is lower... So more free T

this makes me want to go back to incorporating subq AND IM not just exclusively one , i was doing IM again recently after subq for a while

 

[OuchThatHurts]

Good overview (a few slides from a presentation; summary). I'd like to see the free T though. That's always been the significant difference between subq vs IM. Also, as mentioned in this thread, subq slin pin injections with preparations intended for IM administration (containing benzyl alcohol) are not equal to the chlorbutanol preparations typically delivered by an auto-injector device (e.g., Xyosted).

It's very basic but it looks promising.. It doesn't say how they were dosed. Was it daily? Weekly? It just says 12 weeks. Was chlorbutanol used in both? Was the IM the same formula? Also, the IM was Test Cypionate vs the auto-injector which was T Enathate. Not a huge difference but for an A-B comparison seems rather odd. I'm sticking with what's proven and the subq guys are liking their protocol so it's all good. At the end of the day we all do what we like and we're all making progress. It's good to field test these protocols. I just can't pin myself three times a day. I know I'll slack off bc I hate it that bad. I won't do it. I'm higher than TRT doses right now anyway so... I do like the idea of an auto-injector though.

 

[Type-IIx]

You can tell easily by the graph free T must be higher with subQ.
Total T is higher and also estradiol is lower... So more free T

Free T is not the difference between total T and E2. The Vermeulen equation describes how we derive free T, and it is described by the equation:

Cₐ: concentration of albumin
κₐ: coefficient of albumin binding to T
κₐ = 3.6 * 10⁴

AT: albumin-bound T
FT: free T
AT = κₐCₐ * FT
bioavailable T = AT + FT

 

[Type-IIx]

It's very basic but it looks promising.. It doesn't say how they were dosed. Was it daily? Weekly? It just says 12 weeks. Was chlorbutanol used in both? Was the IM the same formula? Also, the IM was Test Cypionate vs the auto-injector which was T Enathate. Not a huge difference but for an A-B comparison seems rather odd. I'm sticking with what's proven and the subq guys are liking their protocol so it's all good. At the end of the day we all do what we like and we're all making progress. It's good to field test these protocols. I just can't pin myself three times a day. I know I'll slack off bc I hate it that bad. I won't do it. I'm higher than TRT doses right now anyway so... I do like the idea of an auto-injector though.

Agreed. I think subq is great for convenience while on TRT if you hate pinning IM as it maintains a sufficient nadir T (I also think it's interesting that it seems to lead to reduced aromatization even though you'd expect the bolus to aggregate where Aromatase activity tends to be high, in adipose tissue). Lots of caveats to aromatization including individual metabolism, Aromatase expression, the fact that systemic estrogen concentrations don't necessary reflect tissue stores and activity. However, if seeking to optimally derive muscle anabolic benefits from supraphysiological doses, you'd want to go IM (greater peak, greater AUC/bioavailability & free T). Just my opinion my bros.

 

[Zarati]

Agreed. I think subq is great for convenience while on TRT if you hate pinning IM as it maintains a sufficient nadir T (I also think it's interesting that it seems to lead to reduced aromatization even though you'd expect the bolus to aggregate where Aromatase activity tends to be high, in adipose tissue). Lots of caveats to aromatization including individual metabolism, Aromatase expression, the fact that systemic estrogen concentrations don't necessary reflect tissue stores and activity. However, if seeking to optimally derive muscle anabolic benefits from supraphysiological doses, you'd want to go IM (greater peak, greater AUC/bioavailability & free T). Just my opinion my bros.

Some people end up with high estrone doing subQ and they have high estrogen like symptoms. They get confused because their estradiol is just fine

 

[nothuman]

Wow the last page on this thread is making my head spin. Lots of conflicting info on both sides. I prefer injecting right underneath my abs every day but ultimately, I want to do what is most effective. Still not entirely sure which is the winner here.