Could you elaborate on my entire paragraph and we'll get some constructive ideas going?
New to TRT, STILL FEEL THE SAME !
- Thread starter IMPACT631
- Start date
Could you elaborate on my entire paragraph and we'll get some constructive ideas going?
Megatron28
Moderator
What? You made a statement that injecting twice weekly is no different than injecting once weekly except for a placebo effect. Back that statement up. Because I have blood work showing that isn't true and I think lots of guys here will tell you the same thing. Plus what you wrote makes one conclude that you don't fully understand how esters and testosterone injections work. So again, back up your assertion.
Please read my initial paragraph again please.
Megatron28
Moderator
I read it again. Still makes no sense. You don't appear to understand what you are talking about yet you are making bold assertions. You don't understand esters, half lifes, how esters are cleaved off, the aromatase enzyme and so on.
So please explain, what is the injection "absorbing" into per your statement above? Are you talking about the blood stream? Target tissue? Something else?
What I am asking for is an in depth overview of my paragraph, detailing the reasoning behind why I am wrong so that I may actually learn something if indeed I have to. If you have knowledge, please share it. All I know is what I have been told by a friend who is a nurse.
Megatron28
Moderator
Perhaps you should analyze and study something before parroting what someone else tells you and calling it a placebo effect.
I still see no evidence on your part. One person's blood results is not a make for a credible study, sir. Perhaps you should seem less smug when you have little to no backing. I was simply trying to invoke thought, and that seems beyond you on this issue.
Megatron28
Moderator
You are the one who said the following:
You then later said you were just repeating what a nurse friend told you. So when I challenge you to back up your statements, why is the onus on me to disprove you? You acted like you knew what you were talking about. So back it up. Teach me.
You then later said you were just repeating what a nurse friend told you. So when I challenge you to back up your statements, why is the onus on me to disprove you? You acted like you knew what you were talking about. So back it up. Teach me.
You're still avoiding everything I said, you're being a child right now. Can you please go through my intial comment, point out in detail everything you think is incorrect and provide evidence as to why? Be constructive and get that pole out of your ass.
Megatron28
Moderator
So now we have a 19 year old kid that has done one injection of test trying to provoke thought in this forum? Based on the questions you asked in your other thread you are very uneducated about TRT and the HPTA but nonetheless you are here to provoke thought? How about doing some reading first? You joined in June this year. That is plenty of time to have learned the basics. But go ahead. Keep provoking thought with dumb assertion and TRT 101 Questions.
Megatron28
Moderator
Read post #33 by MPRTZ in the following thread.
http://www.steroidology.com/forum/t...apy/666581-100mg-5-days-vs-200mg-10-days.html
methos0123
New member
I have blood draws that can attest to the positive effects of twice weekly shot vs once a week shots.
E2 went down by about one half.
Megatron is not the only one that has evidence.
E2 went down by about one half.
Megatron is not the only one that has evidence.
halfape211
Not Novice, But Not Pro
I wanted to thank Jackadee for providing some entertainment and humour today. LOL I fondly remember when I was a teenager...., I thought I knew it all. Those were the good days.
And to Megatron..., you, sir, have a lot of patience.
PS Jackadee - Like it or not, it is incumbent upon you and anyone else to provide empirical evidence when offering a theory. Otherwise, we might be still going around thinking the world was flat.
And to Megatron..., you, sir, have a lot of patience.
PS Jackadee - Like it or not, it is incumbent upon you and anyone else to provide empirical evidence when offering a theory. Otherwise, we might be still going around thinking the world was flat.
Last edited:
I wanted to thank Jackadee for providing some entertainment and humour today. LOL I fondly remember when I was a teenager...., I thought I knew it all. Those were the good days.
And to Megatron..., you, sir, have a lot of patience.
PS Jackadee - Like it or not, it is incumbent upon you and anyone else to provide empirical evidence when offering a theory. Otherwise, we might be still going around thinking the world was flat.
Well, I was under the assumption that the ester used in Cypionated took days to be absorbed, and all relevant information I can find backs my statement up. I am finding no empirical evidence to back up twice weekly shots, all I am asking for is solid proof done on a minimum of 300 people strongly suggesting it actually matters and I can't get even that.
Megatron28
Moderator
Back to my earlier question, what do you mean by "absorbed"? Please explain that without using the word absorbed. And explain what the test cyp is being absorbed into.
Okay, read. It's an analogy, lol? Seriously though, what I am saying is a counter argument to the preferred theory that twice weekly injections are superior. The weight of evidence does not fall upon me, you and other post repeatedly of its benefits and there is no substantial proof to your claims.
Do you want me to explain it without that word because you believe it is inadequate? I need more information. The Cypionate is being absorbed into the blood stream, yes?
Megatron28
Moderator
Here is an example from Wikipedia that will help you understand the concept of a large infrequent dose (loading dose) vs. smaller more frequent doses (maintenance dose). Ideally, we would be on an IV drip for getting out testosterone, but that isn't practical. Many of us have found that twice-weekily injections do the best job of keeping our hormone levels relatively even. I would give you my personak experience, but you seem to only value scientific controlled peer reviewed studies and your friends who are nurses.
For an example, one might consider the hypothetical drug foosporin. Suppose it has a long lifetime in the body, and only ten percent of it is cleared from the blood each day by the liver and kidneys. Suppose also that the drug works best when the total amount in the body is exactly one gram. So, the maintenance dose of foosporin is 100 milligrams (100 mg) per day; just enough to offset the amount cleared.
Suppose a patient just started taking 100 mg of foosporin every day.
On the first day, they'd have 100 mg in their system; their body would clear 10 mg, leaving 90 mg.
On the second day, the patient would have 190 mg in total; their body would clear 19 mg, leaving 171 mg.
On the third day, they'd be up to 271 mg total; their body would clear 27 mg, leaving 244 mg.
As one can see, it would take many days for the total amount of drug within the body to come close to 1 gram (1000 mg) and achieve its full therapeutic effect.
For a drug such as this, a doctor might prescribe a loading dose of one gram to be taken on the first day. That immediately gets the drug's concentration in the body up to the therapeutically-useful level.
First day: 1000 mg; the body clears 100 mg, leaving 900 mg.
On the second day, the patient takes 100 mg, bringing the level back to 1000 mg; the body clears 100 mg overnight, still leaving 900 mg, and so forth.
Here is a link so you can read more.
Loading dose - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For an example, one might consider the hypothetical drug foosporin. Suppose it has a long lifetime in the body, and only ten percent of it is cleared from the blood each day by the liver and kidneys. Suppose also that the drug works best when the total amount in the body is exactly one gram. So, the maintenance dose of foosporin is 100 milligrams (100 mg) per day; just enough to offset the amount cleared.
Suppose a patient just started taking 100 mg of foosporin every day.
On the first day, they'd have 100 mg in their system; their body would clear 10 mg, leaving 90 mg.
On the second day, the patient would have 190 mg in total; their body would clear 19 mg, leaving 171 mg.
On the third day, they'd be up to 271 mg total; their body would clear 27 mg, leaving 244 mg.
As one can see, it would take many days for the total amount of drug within the body to come close to 1 gram (1000 mg) and achieve its full therapeutic effect.
For a drug such as this, a doctor might prescribe a loading dose of one gram to be taken on the first day. That immediately gets the drug's concentration in the body up to the therapeutically-useful level.
First day: 1000 mg; the body clears 100 mg, leaving 900 mg.
On the second day, the patient takes 100 mg, bringing the level back to 1000 mg; the body clears 100 mg overnight, still leaving 900 mg, and so forth.
Here is a link so you can read more.
Loading dose - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Alpin
New member
Jackadee
2 times weekly injections reduce estradiol conversion of Test.
I have labs to prove it. I can inject LESS Testosterone than on once weekly shots and still have a 900 ng/dl trough level with a dramatic reduction in serum estradiol.
You just started on TRT kid. I been using it for YEARS.......
i know how the stuff works and I have not met ANY doc who starts their patient especially a 19 year old kid off at 300 mg a week and 3 mg a week of arimidex. This is unheard of. This doc you have is taking great risks with your health. Which makes me question if he is a real doc. And i say he because i am sure no female endo would prescribe such an outrageous beginning dose.
2 times weekly injections reduce estradiol conversion of Test.
I have labs to prove it. I can inject LESS Testosterone than on once weekly shots and still have a 900 ng/dl trough level with a dramatic reduction in serum estradiol.
You just started on TRT kid. I been using it for YEARS.......
i know how the stuff works and I have not met ANY doc who starts their patient especially a 19 year old kid off at 300 mg a week and 3 mg a week of arimidex. This is unheard of. This doc you have is taking great risks with your health. Which makes me question if he is a real doc. And i say he because i am sure no female endo would prescribe such an outrageous beginning dose.
Wooh, this guy likes hypotheticals. That's actually starting to make a lot more sense, unfortunately it's still not valid enough evidence to preach a theory without clear forwarning. In your hypothetical medication protocol, where do spikes in consequential hormones come into play? Wiki's the go to place for relevant and reliable information.
Not seeing grounds to your theory, sadly, although the anologies are compelling whilst also being inadequate to the topic.
