JOWS6
I am banned!
I've been doing subcutaneous shots since the start of my protocol and decided to try one IM shot. The initial pinch felt no different but throughout the day my leg started to feel very tender. I woke up today with the same feeling and it hurts when I stretch or put weight on my leg. Is there something I should be cautious about when delivering via IM?
I also want to address the subcutaneous vs intramuscular topic. I understand IM is the preferred method because people have been doing it this way for so long. Subq is a relatively new idea for delivering testosterone that I believe will catch on. In the thread below, some people voted for IM but have you tried subq? I've read a study that stated subq is an effective way to administer testosterone and those who went this route reported higher QOL rates then those who delivered IM.
I believe those who are a strong advocate against subcutaneous injections without having tried it are halting the progress of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT). It took a while to understand that weekly shots were more effective than bi-weekly or tri-weekly shots even though the evidence was right there in our faces (concerning roller-coaster effects and half-lives of esters). It took a while to understand that orally administered testosterone bound to methyl was dangerous to the liver. I took awhile to overcome the stigma of testosterone and prostate cancer. It took a while to understand the necessity of an aromatase-inhibitor or HcG. As you can see, testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) is was not cut-and-dry from the beginning but "evolved" into what we consider standard today.
I'm not saying that subq is exponentially far greater than IM, but what I am saying is that subq is something to consider trying.
I also want to address the subcutaneous vs intramuscular topic. I understand IM is the preferred method because people have been doing it this way for so long. Subq is a relatively new idea for delivering testosterone that I believe will catch on. In the thread below, some people voted for IM but have you tried subq? I've read a study that stated subq is an effective way to administer testosterone and those who went this route reported higher QOL rates then those who delivered IM.
I believe those who are a strong advocate against subcutaneous injections without having tried it are halting the progress of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT). It took a while to understand that weekly shots were more effective than bi-weekly or tri-weekly shots even though the evidence was right there in our faces (concerning roller-coaster effects and half-lives of esters). It took a while to understand that orally administered testosterone bound to methyl was dangerous to the liver. I took awhile to overcome the stigma of testosterone and prostate cancer. It took a while to understand the necessity of an aromatase-inhibitor or HcG. As you can see, testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) is was not cut-and-dry from the beginning but "evolved" into what we consider standard today.
I'm not saying that subq is exponentially far greater than IM, but what I am saying is that subq is something to consider trying.
