Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    fartingdonkey is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    8

    Undecylenate ester activity - Mod/vet input?

    The delay reported with people using steroids is largely due to ester breakdown and the differences between short and long esters. Fine. Nobody argues this point.

    What I haven't been able to figure out is how a product can be in the body, yet not be functional ever.

    The reason I bring this up is due to the claim that I should run EQ longer than ten weeks since I might only enjoy the benefits after 4-6 weeks and only until ten weeks was up. This doesn't really make any sense to me. What makes more sense is that the delay is caused by the slow breakdown, but that eventually the product will continue to breakdown and be functioning well after my last shot.

    So which is it? Gains are delayed but eventually caught up because product stays active well after final dose or gains are delayed because the body somehow has to get used to the new drug and only allows it to be effective after X period has elapsed?
    Last edited by fartingdonkey; 06-25-2004 at 02:22 PM.

  2. #2
    PurePower is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Antarctica
    Posts
    1,919

  3. #3
    fartingdonkey is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by PurePower

    Solid read.

    It is as I suspected: simply because an ester slows the point at which you begin to notice the drugs' effects does NOT mean that you are losing the benefit from the drug, you're simply moving the start point to a few weeks (in the longer ester's case) later than the initial injection.

    Great link!

    Did anybody else notice the contradiction in the article about water retention?

    At one point it was mentioned that suspension increased water retention because there is no ester attached to it, and then the article went on to argue that enanthate and cypionate cause more water retention than propionate because they have SLOWER breakdown rates!!!

    I think the latter is the correct of the two.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •