Makeing injectable Dianabol and Anadrol

[tenny]

hes probley posting with some other devise

other than the computer

 

[PsyT]

Do you know about the space bar and the space character? The space bar is on the row of keys just underneath your favourite key, the [>.] key. It's that long button that prints nothing when you press it but makes the cursor move to the next position on the right. We all use it, it's a popular key.

sorry.bro

I.only.post.now.when.I.have.technical.information.to.share.that.is.not.being.posted(like.in.this.thread)

I.have.a.laptop.that.is.broken.and.I.am.very.poor.my.apologies.to.your.eyes.

 

[tsimehc75]

sorry.bro

I.only.post.now.when.I.have.technical.information.to.share.that.is.not.being.posted(like.in.this.thread)

I.have.a.laptop.that.is.broken.and.I.am.very.poor.my.apologies.to.your.eyes.

lmao!! i now know i couldn't live without my spacebar

 

[prime]

Isn't Equipoise basically the attempt at Dianabol in injectable form? Obviously not the same results but the difference is just the Dianabol without the 17-alpha-methyl group.

 

[eroc613]

So are you guys that are posting technical jargon saying it isn't less harsh on the liver in injectable form?

Because you act like taking it in oral form doesn't put it in the blood stream.

Or are you just splitting hairs? Which kinda makes you look silly.

If it's not as harsh, it not as harsh.

 

[eckstg]

Ok you win. Ill just make the damn capsules!!!

Just please no more science lingo!!

 

[Dubs]

No that's not true.

There won't be a first pass via the hepatic portal vein because the drug is being introduced directly into systemic circulation. However, there will be as many passes through the liver as the half-life of the drug permits. Consider,

-- An average person has 5 liters of blood (~5 quarts);

-- The length of time it takes blood to circulate throughout the body depends on numerous factors including body mass and heart rate but on average **broken link removed** i.e. in one minute all of a persons blood will have passed through their heart;

-- Besides the hepatic portal vein the liver is fed blood directly from the aorta which comes from the left-ventricle;

-- The half-life of Stanozolol is 1 day, methandienone is 4-6 hours, oxymethelone is 8-9 hours so on a very conservative estimate the liver will receive an injection of blood (via the aorta and the proper hepatic artery) containing Stanozolol at least 300 times (ie. 5 hours x 60 minutes). That blood will flow out of the liver and back into systemic circulation at a much lower rate but it will flow out eventually because the liver can only contain a limited amount of blood -- so the volume entering will eventually equal the amount exiting. So we can safely assume the liver will handle the Stanolozol contining blood hundreds of times.




This is doubtful. The toxicity is unchanged because the liver will eventually process the same quantity of the substance (it would actually process more of the drug when it is injected because of greater bioavailability) . Injecting the drug improves its bioavailability because you are not relying on absorption via the stomach wall and small intestine and you are avoiding the first pass liver metabolism effect which destroys a siginificant quantity of the drug (precise amount depends on the drug in question). You could argue that because the liver doesn't receive a bolus of the drug (via the hepatic portal vein) the liver is not taxed to the same extent in a given period of time and it has time to replenish its glutathione and glucuronide reserves. Maybe, but not likely. If you are concerned with sparing the liver from processing a large dose of the drug all at once then you are better off assisting the liver in its work of glucuronidation, methylation and glutathione conjugation.



Then in this case the liver will never really get an AAS-free period to replenish itself so the bolus argument becomes moot.

PS:- Are you the broscientist from that crap forum "Steroid Encyclopedia"?

the official professional muscle scientist. please direct any further questions to him.

Do you know about the space bar and the space character? The space bar is on the row of keys just underneath your favourite key, the [>.] key. It's that long button that prints nothing when you press it but makes the cursor move to the next position on the right. We all use it, it's a popular key.

LMFAO. bro, that was awesome hahaha.

sorry.bro

I.only.post.now.when.I.have.technical.information.to.share.that.is.not.being.posted(like.in.this.thread)

I.have.a.laptop.that.is.broken.and.I.am.very.poor.my.apologies.to.your.eyes.

haha, bro, dont sweat it. its not a huge deal, he was just being funny. we should start a "get psyt a new laptop" thread.

 

[iprimate]

sorry.bro

I.only.post.now.when.I.have.technical.information.to.share.that.is.not.being.posted(like.in.this.thread)

I.have.a.laptop.that.is.broken.and.I.am.very.poor.my.apologies.to.your.eyes.

No problem. I was just being a prick.

 

[iprimate]

So are you guys that are posting technical jargon saying it isn't less harsh on the liver in injectable form?

No, it is highly unlikely that injecting a C-17 alpha-alkylated AAS is "less harsh" on your liver than taking it orally.

Because you act like taking it in oral form doesn't put it in the blood stream.

I don't know how you obtained this conclusion.

Or are you just splitting hairs? Which kinda makes you look silly.

If it's not as harsh, it not as harsh.

Unfortunately, knocking over broscience requires facts and logic. If I just asserted that it's no less harsh I would be no better than the broscientists that start these myths.

The C-17 alpha-alkylated AAS are toxic to the liver because of their chemical structure not because they are taken orally. Whether you inject a substance or eat it it will get processed by your liver. If the substance has a half-life (the time it takes for 50% of the substance to leave your "system") greater than 60 seconds then it will get "handled" by your liver multiple times -- regardless of how it got into your system.

If you are going to inject C-17 alpha-alkylated AAS then do so for the right reasons: to site inject and to get more of the drug into your blood (i.e. improved bioavailability). If you are concerned about your liver then use supplements like synthergine, injectable glutathione and injectable phosphatidylcholine. Don't kid yourself that injecting C-17 alpha-alkylated AAS will make a siginficant difference to your liver.

Incidentally, most veterinary steroids are given by injection and when C-17 alpha-alkylated AAS are injected into dogs and horses they are commonly also given an **broken link removed** of **broken link removed** formulation like Synthergine. If it were true that injecting was less harsh on the liver then there would have been no need for veterinary use of liver protectants.

 

[eroc613]

No, it is highly unlikely that injecting a C-17 alpha-alkylated AAS is "less harsh" on your liver than taking it orally.



I don't know how you obtained this conclusion.



Unfortunately, knocking over broscience requires facts and logic. If I just asserted that it's no less harsh I would be no better than the broscientists that start these myths.

The C-17 alpha-alkylated AAS are toxic to the liver because of their chemical structure not because they are taken orally. Whether you inject a substance or eat it it will get processed by your liver. If the substance has a half-life (the time it takes for 50% of the substance to leave your "system") greater than 60 seconds then it will get "handled" by your liver multiple times -- regardless of how it got into your system.



If you are going to inject C-17 alpha-alkylated AAS then do so for the right reasons: to site inject and to get more of the drug into your blood (i.e. improved bioavailability). If you are concerned about your liver then use supplements like synthergine, injectable glutathione and injectable phosphatidylcholine. Don't kid yourself that injecting C-17 alpha-alkylated AAS will make a siginficant difference to your liver.

Incidentally, most veterinary steroids are given by injection and when C-17 alpha-alkylated AAS are injected into dogs and horses they are commonly also given an **broken link removed** of **broken link removed** formulation like Synthergine. If it were true that injecting was less harsh on the liver then there would have been no need for veterinary use of liver protectants.

You make good points, but my question is: Doesn't the first oral run through your liver the worse run? (Considerable breakdown) And also injecting it a a lesser mg dose would be effective in lowering the stress on the liver, right? Like you metioned about the improved bioavailability.
I respect your views, I never meant that they are not still harsh on the liver, just useing injectable form can help lower the strain. Less dosage but higher bioavailability.

And by saying Broscientist, do you mean people that read research? I agree with that, because unless you are the one actually doing the research, we are all broscientist. Just understanding/reading on different topics doesn't mean anything more you understand what others have produced. Plus we all know what was accurate research ten years ago, may have proven wrong today. But I'm sure you know this since you said, "it's highly unlikely that it's less harsh." Showing you do not know for a fact, and it's your personal view.

 

[iprimate]

You make good points, but my question is: Doesn't the first oral run through your liver the worse run? (Considerable breakdown)

It's the worst in terms of the relative proportion of the drug you lose to first pass liver metabolism but that doesn't mean that it is the worst in terms of the liver's coping capacity. Liver cells will start dying when the liver's ability to neutralise and eliminate toxic metabolites is impaired. The detoxification process will start slowing down (or stop) when the required chemicals (glucuronides, glutathione, sulphate, glycine) are depleted. If you introduce toxins into your circulation faster than the liver can clear them then liver cells will start dying. You can do this with either one single overdose or chronic moderate dosing. With the exception of ridiculously large overdoses (eg. 5gms of acetaminophen/paracetemol in one dose) the liver will cope just as well if the dose is split or consumed all at once. All that matters is the the liver can replenish its store of detoxifying compounds.

And also injecting it a a lesser mg dose would be effective in lowering the stress on the liver, right?

Eating or injecting a lesser dose will reduce the stress on the liver because it will have less work to do.

Like you metioned about the improved bioavailability.

Higher bioavailability means more work for your liver because more of the drug will reach your liver.

I respect your views, I never meant that they are not still harsh on the liver, just useing injectable form can help lower the strain. Less dosage but higher bioavailability.

Yes, by injecting you can achieve higher bioavailability which will permit you to use less of the drug thereby lessening the work required by your liver. But this is simply the same as using less of the drug.

And by saying Broscientist, do you mean people that read research?

No I mean people that originate and/or disseminate falsities and half-truths that appear scientific.

I agree with that, because unless you are the one actually doing the research, we are all broscientist.

No, the broscientist is a special type of animal.

Just understanding/reading on different topics doesn't mean anything more you understand what others have produced.

Unfortunately it does. Your intelligence and background knowledge will determine your comprehension. Take as an example Yohimbe's statement in this thread that the AAS will only go through your liver once. To make such a statement requires near complete ignorance about the circultaory system and its relation to the liver. Yohimbe read the phrase "first pass liver metabolism" somewhere and he repeats it without actually understanding what it means. He sounds like he knows what he is talking about (if you are even more ignorant than him) but he's just disseminate bullshit with an air of authority. He is a broscientist par excellence.