• All new members please introduce your self here and welcome to the board:
    http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=259
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
M4B Store Banner
SPC-210x65
Riptropin Store banner
Generation X Bodybuilding Forum
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Mysupps Store Banner
IP Gear Store Banner
Anabolic Hormones Store Banner
Ganabol Store Banner
Spend $100 and get bonus needles free at sterile syringes
Professional Muscle Store open now
LandmarkChem Email Banner
advertise1
Bruce Labs Store banner
gd
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
granabolic123
Blackroids-animated-optimized-number-1
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
advertise1
apollo
steroidjet
kinglab
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store

Parenabol/EQ and "Gurus"

Stewie

Featured Member / Verified Customer
Featured Member
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Messages
5,121
To save time. Please send me over studies you want me to reveiw. I will get back with you asap.
I'm not discrediting transgenic murine models don't hold value. Replication in humans is far, far away from being a suitable mimic to fully extrapolate to humans.

Humanising the mouse genome piece by piece

Review Article Open Access Published: 23 April 2019

In modelling human disease in an age of personalised medicine, humanisation of a single allele will not be sufficient to address the great variability between individuals, including response to treatment and clinical trajectories. This remains a challenge for mouse modelling in general, not just for creating genomically humanised models. Furthermore, humanisation of a single gene may not be sufficient to understand biology or pathology—particularly when protein complexes or ligand–receptor interactions are involved. Thus, at a minimum, the between-species conservation of these interactions should be considered. Future approaches to humanised mouse models may lie in humanising entire networks or pathways.


----
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
I'm not discrediting transgenic murine models don't hold value. Replication in humans is far, far away from being a suitable mimic to fully extrapolate to humans.

Humanising the mouse genome piece by piece

Review Article Open Access Published: 23 April 2019




----

I agree with you that you cannot duplicate consistency in humans that was discovered in rodents. Discovery in rodents takes experiments in humans to confirm success. I also agree that some discoveries should be considered void that were discovered in rodents. However, I do believe that rodent testing has showed some value in medical history such as humanized monoclonal antibodies.

Research in a chimpanzee is most ideal. However, this is not as "humane" for society and economical for institutions.
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
What I dont understand is how Trenbolone is being offered up as being safer to take than EQ. To me that is just ludicrous.
Because it is the shit for people who can use it!!!
 

pesty4077

Moderator/ Featured Member / Kilo Klub
Staff member
Moderator
Featured Member
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
9,311
This is the part where I realize that my common sense is impeccable, but my scientific approach is limited. Great conversation and I always love to read these posts and let people who have more book smart educate me.

This is what I cling to the most is free knowledge that I can use. I have started multiple successful businesses with never stepping into one college. I hope people appreciate this forum like I do and all this education for free.
 

MR. BMJ

Kilo Klub Member / Verified Customer
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
3,645
Maybe you would be enlightened to know that we are actively inserting human genes into rats and raising rat populations with human genes to better understand medicine. That means rats have value in human medicine. Granted there is more research done when research passes scientific studies in rats. To dismiss animal studies passing research "as only more research needs to be done" is ignorant.
It's not ignorant, and i'm not totally dismissing them either. They are a stepping block for further research to be done. Something that occurs in these models have shown almost dick when extrapolated to humans, as it pertains to a lot of what we are discussing. And no, i'm not saying it hasn't produced nothing. I don't really care about inserting human genes into rats, yes that's cool, but what has that proved as it relates to humans? I'm actually asking because i'm interested, i'm not a know it all. Having "value" is pretty broad, again I never said there was 'no' value, but how has "inserting genes into rats" helped with anything we are discussing. Animal models have susceptibilities to organ damage that isn't seen in humans, so you can't always extrapolate the data.

Sorry, I see you and Stewie discussing this....

Stewie just wrote:
I'm not discrediting transgenic murine models don't hold value. Replication in humans is far, far away from being a suitable mimic to fully extrapolate to humans.

You responded:
I agree with you that you cannot duplicate consistency in humans that was discovered in rodents. Discovery in rodents takes experiments in humans to confirm success. I also agree that some discoveries should be considered void that were discovered in rodents. However, I do believe that rodent testing has showed some value in medical history such as humanized monoclonal antibodies.

Maybe I didn't word it perfectly, but i'm pretty sure that was my point in this. I've never discounted ALL research in rodent/murine models, but how does something that occurs in animal models not warrant more research in humans....that is what I meant by there needing more research to be done. You even admitted in your response to Stewie above that duplicating consistency is an issue.

I'm pretty much certain we are all agreeing here. I will admit that I don't hold as much faith in animal/rodent studies, and you can still call me ignorant though.
 

MR. BMJ

Kilo Klub Member / Verified Customer
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
3,645
This is the part where I realize that my common sense is impeccable, but my scientific approach is limited. Great conversation and I always love to read these posts and let people who have more book smart educate me.

This is what I cling to the most is free knowledge that I can use. I have started multiple successful businesses with never stepping into one college. I hope people appreciate this forum like I do and all this education for free.

These always end up being the best threads:)
 

MR. BMJ

Kilo Klub Member / Verified Customer
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
3,645
Is Lats co-owner/founder? My bad if he is, that's cool. I thought BigA was the sole owner/founder.
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
It's not ignorant, and i'm not totally dismissing them either. They are a stepping block for further research to be done. Something that occurs in these models have shown almost dick when extrapolated to humans, as it pertains to a lot of what we are discussing. And no, i'm not saying it hasn't produced nothing. I don't really care about inserting human genes into rats, yes that's cool, but what has that proved as it relates to humans? I'm actually asking because i'm interested, i'm not a know it all. Having "value" is pretty broad, again I never said there was 'no' value, but how has "inserting genes into rats" helped with anything we are discussing. Animal models have susceptibilities to organ damage that isn't seen in humans, so you can't always extrapolate the data.

Sorry, I see you and Stewie discussing this....

Stewie just wrote:


You responded:


Maybe I didn't word it perfectly, but i'm pretty sure that was my point in this. I've never discounted ALL research in rodent/murine models, but how does something that occurs in animal models not warrant more research in humans....that is what I meant by there needing more research to be done. You even admitted in your response to Stewie above that duplicating consistency is an issue.

I'm pretty much certain we are all agreeing here. I will admit that I don't hold as much faith in animal/rodent studies, and you can still call me ignorant though.
I respond to you tomorrow as I am passing out. East coast time. Rodent discoveries always warrant more research in humans. However, we don't study AAS in humans.
 

MR. BMJ

Kilo Klub Member / Verified Customer
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
3,645
I respond to you tomorrow as I am passing out. East coast time. Rodent discoveries always warrant more research in humans. However, we don't study AAS in humans.
No worries man, I thought I deleted my whole response to you and hadn't even proof read it, then I couldn't find it, and now it's past the time to correct anything. I'm afraid to look at it now...i'm tired too. lol.
 

N.L....M.....

Well-known member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
824
The fact that we don’t currently study certain AAS in humans doesn’t mean that rats are evidence of what happens when humans take them. It simply means that the actual evidence we have is from blood work and experience from the HUMANS that have and do use them.
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
The fact that we don’t currently study certain AAS in humans doesn’t mean that rats are evidence of what happens when humans take them. It simply means that the actual evidence we have is from blood work and experience from the HUMANS that have and do use them.
Blood work is bullshit for EQ unless you already have kidney damage.

There are enough success stories that people are optimistic, but not everything that will work in the animals will work in people.
 

maldorf

Featured Member / Kilo Klub
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
23,364
Because it is the shit for people who can use it!!!
Maybe Eq isn't safe for the kidneys, but it sure as hell is safer overall than trenbolone. Both are meant for animals only too. Trenbolone has to be one of the most dangerous injectable steroids. Terrible for the cardiovascular system in every way. To recommend that people take it is irresponsible.
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
Maybe Eq isn't safe for the kidneys, but it sure as hell is safer overall than trenbolone. Both are meant for animals only too. Trenbolone has to be one of the most dangerous injectable steroids. Terrible for the cardiovascular system in every way. To recommend that people take it is irresponsible.
To recommend any AAS is irresponsible
 

cracker backer

Active member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
317
Maybe Eq isn't safe for the kidneys, but it sure as hell is safer overall than trenbolone. Both are meant for animals only too. Trenbolone has to be one of the most dangerous injectable steroids. Terrible for the cardiovascular system in every way. To recommend that people take it is irresponsible.
to be fair, in the materials I've read on his site, he recommends a 50-100 mg per week dosage of tren. Enough to see some of the unique benefits tren offers, but at a threshold below where problems starts.
 

pickapeck

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
897
The fact that we don’t currently study certain AAS in humans doesn’t mean that rats are evidence of what happens when humans take them. It simply means that the actual evidence we have is from blood work and experience from the HUMANS that have and do use them.
I worked in the labs for Sterling Winthrop in the 80s. There was an old guy there that worked with rodents and steroids. They studied them in rats and hamsters. He said those fuckers were mean as hell and would turn around and bite all the time. The hamsters were the worst because they have almost no neck so hard to hold and control the head and could reach around and bite real nasty. That must have been fun times watching over a bunch of angry jacked rodents. Kind of like managing a hardrore gym.
 

pickapeck

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
897
to be fair, in the materials I've read on his site, he recommends a 50-100 mg per week dosage of tren. Enough to see some of the unique benefits tren offers, but at a threshold below where problems starts.
I think Serge Nubret lived on the stuff, Tren Hex. He had a stroke in his 70s I think and he was still on.
 

N.L....M.....

Well-known member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
824
I think Serge Nubret lived on the stuff, Tren Hex. He had a stroke in his 70s I think and he was still on.
Serge also loved thyroid cream I forget who was talking about it but they said he would lather it on. What was that stuff called
 

b-boy

IFBB Pro / Quadruple Featured Member/ Verified Cus
IFBB PROS
Featured Member
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 15, 2003
Messages
8,420
Maybe Eq isn't safe for the kidneys, but it sure as hell is safer overall than trenbolone. Both are meant for animals only too. Trenbolone has to be one of the most dangerous injectable steroids. Terrible for the cardiovascular system in every way. To recommend that people take it is irresponsible.
To not read the man's content and see what exactly he recommends is irresponsible! He recommends a dosage of 50-100mg per week. Typical bodybuilder and gym rat dosages are 75-100 mg EOD, he is recommending 25mg or less EOD...pretty big fucking difference!
 

maldorf

Featured Member / Kilo Klub
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
23,364
To not read the man's content and see what exactly he recommends is irresponsible! He recommends a dosage of 50-100mg per week. Typical bodybuilder and gym rat dosages are 75-100 mg EOD, he is recommending 25mg or less EOD...pretty big fucking difference!
If that's the case, I didn't know that, then that is certainly a reasonable dosage. Low dose on other steroids is going to be safe too. 100 mg/ wk anything is ok in my book.
 

maldorf

Featured Member / Kilo Klub
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
23,364
to be fair, in the materials I've read on his site, he recommends a 50-100 mg per week dosage of tren. Enough to see some of the unique benefits tren offers, but at a threshold below where problems starts.
I used 100 mg/ wk at one time and can attest personally to the fact that it had beneficial effects to muscle building.
 

Staff online

  • pesty4077
    Moderator/ Featured Member / Kilo Klub
  • K1
    Blue-Eyed Devil

Forum statistics

Total page views
509,277,748
Threads
124,948
Messages
2,417,466
Members
155,908
Latest member
Saisaici
Top