Thread: Most Effective Injection Spot
10-03-2004, 02:50 AM #1New Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
Most Effective Injection Spot
Where is the best, fastest acting and most effective injecting site the lats, tris, or lower abs
10-03-2004, 08:58 AM #2
Anything that is injected IM will take effect more quickly. Personally I like injecting my quads and delts. Abdominal shots are usually only reserved for sub-q injections.
10-03-2004, 08:08 PM #3
I read a very long post and an explanation about all 3 injections....IV is the one that is absorbed 100% <-- do not try it...
sub-q is second....70 something % of HGH is absorbed from the shot...
IM is third.....50 or 60 something % is absorbed that way...
Thats why GH is used sub-q and IGF-1 inections work better IM....
I am sure someone w/ more knowledge then me can go into detail why this is....
10-03-2004, 08:11 PM #4Originally Posted by JYZZA
10-03-2004, 08:20 PM #5
the reasoning behind this is very logical. Obviously IV would be the fastest onset and highest utilization rate, it is injected directly into your bloodstream!
Intra-muscular would be the second in both of these categories, due to the blood transport throughout your muscles. It is not quite as fast as IV, but it will be absorbed quickly.
Sub-cutaneous would be the slowest, due to the absorbtion through the fatty tissues. It takes longer to work its way into your bloodstream, and the absorbtion is slightly lower!
10-03-2004, 08:25 PM #6
Ok I dont understand when is that you inject your ABS
10-03-2004, 09:01 PM #7
10-03-2004, 09:18 PM #8
I have heard of a few people injecting intra-musclarly in the abdomen to attain site growth, but when you hit your abs with suspension and rhIGF-1, you realize how much it really cripples you!
I've talked to a poor bastard who had the bright idea he would inject pgf2a IM into his abs
10-03-2004, 09:50 PM #9Originally Posted by angelxterminator
I will look for it and paste it here....
10-03-2004, 09:54 PM #10
From Billy Bathgate
Ok so.. I wanna talk about this and get some opinions. First let me share a couple facts I have out of my pdr.
IV = 100%
SubQ = 75%
IM = 63%
Distribution IV = .07L/kg
IV = t1/2 of .36hrs
SubQ = t1/2 of 3.8hrs
IM = t1/2 of 4.9hrs
*longer half live of Sub and IM due to slower absorbtion.
Mean Clearance = .14L/hr/kg
Now, there was some guys back maybe 6 or 7 months on Animal's board that did it IV. They all raved about it. Said it felt much much more pronounced.
I wonder if this would be better. With the talk of longer acting HGH, there has been disscusion of the effectiveness of short bursts of GH being better.
Obviously, no body should try this unless they are licenced or have the qualifications for IV administration, as it is much much more serious than other means.
The plasma concentrations of Single Dose Average Plasma Concentraions vs Time in Normal Adult Volunteers (see attatchment, I will do my best in MS Paint, I have no scanner)
10-03-2004, 09:57 PM #11
10-03-2004, 10:29 PM #12
Dayum IV use of HGH is a bit to hardcore for me
10-04-2004, 06:04 AM #13
yes that is a bit hardcore, but i'd give it a try once i start my cycle. Just for a few injects to see whats up with it. BTW where did you get those figures? Your PDR? Is it outdated? and what compound were they using to test the bioavailability and half life of the different injection types?
Not to sound like a know it all, because i'm not, but if that came from a pdr,
it is probably oudated! I dont know the exact number for half life and absorbtion rate into the bloodstream, but it is well known that an Intra-Muscular injection is superior to sub-q as far as onset and half life are concerned!
I will ask my doctor today, he went to school for 18 years and specializes in endocrinology, pain management, etc. If anybody would know the exact figures i'm sure he would!
10-04-2004, 06:07 AM #14
just took a look at that graph, and it does show that IM injections have a faster onset to peak plasma levels of whatever substance they tested, but then it also shows the duration of activity in the body as being longer than sub-q.
Interesting, i'll have to get more info on this now!
10-04-2004, 11:00 AM #15
Yes it is very interesting....this was not posted by me but by another member who is a very knowledgeable in this field....
Please do find out from your Doc....I also want to know what he has to say on this....Yes according to the graph sub-q would look better...humm makes you wonder....
Btw....I personally know few Pros who do their GH IV....one recently started doing it 6 weeks ago.....Olympia is coming up very soon and he is very happy w/ the gains he has made like that.....he said it works the best through IV.....but then again there are negative sides to your IV injections.....
bmf2 has posted a great article about the IV dangers
If this is against the rules please delete the link....and only paste the article but Please also give credit to the author....
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)