Sublingual anadrol?

Printable View

11-28-2008, 08:19 PM
DDDNTZ

Sublingual anadrol?

Anyone have any experience with this? Ever used it or heard of it? I've used anadrol before but never seen it in sublingual form.
11-28-2008, 10:47 PM
DDDNTZ

anyone?
11-28-2008, 10:48 PM
Amorphic

yes i have heard of it. the only guy that made it is no longer making them. heard mixed things about his sublingual products, i wouldnt use them
11-28-2008, 11:01 PM
DDDNTZ

thanks for the info.is it hard to make it in sublingual form? if i knew of a ugl that made it would you think it was suspect?
11-28-2008, 11:07 PM
Amorphic

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDDNTZ

thanks for the info.is it hard to make it in sublingual form? if i knew of a ugl that made it would you think it was suspect?

to my knowledge i only knew of one ugl that made it and he is no longer producing. i would say suspect, yes
11-28-2008, 11:08 PM
jimmyinkedup

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDDNTZ

thanks for the info.is it hard to make it in sublingual form? if i knew of a ugl that made it would you think it was suspect?

They mix compound with a carrier (hbcd) like was used in cyclo diol andro products. Supposedly it assures a high absorbtion rate...HOWEVER i would be suspect of these claims as drug companies are currently trying to use this with traditional medicines and not having the results they expected...prob why we dont see many sublingual prescription meds. The advantage is supposedly a lower dose(mgs) yields same results beacuse it bypasses the first pass mechanism in the liver... im sure if it worked well the drug companies would be all over it as it would same them $$ in lower medicine amounts needed for same results.
11-29-2008, 09:02 AM
UncleD

whats the point? works fine as it is?? who wants to hold a pill under there tounge for a half hour anyway
11-29-2008, 10:58 AM
LATS60

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmyinkedup

They mix compound with a carrier (hbcd) like was used in cyclo diol andro products. Supposedly it assures a high absorbtion rate...HOWEVER i would be suspect of these claims as drug companies are currently trying to use this with traditional medicines and not having the results they expected...prob why we dont see many sublingual prescription meds. The advantage is supposedly a lower dose(mgs) yields same results beacuse it bypasses the first pass mechanism in the liver... im sure if it worked well the drug companies would be all over it as it would same them $$ in lower medicine amounts needed for same results.

Well it's the same with orals bypassing the first pass.
The trouble with sublingual is because it's a steroid, and with the added ester its very lipophillic. Since the mucous membranes in the mouth and nose only let hydrophilic substances through, the rate of absorption is extremely limited.
11-29-2008, 10:19 PM
jimmyinkedup

Quote:

Originally Posted by LATS60

Well it's the same with orals bypassing the first pass.
The trouble with sublingual is because it's a steroid, and with the added ester its very lipophillic. Since the mucous membranes in the mouth and nose only let hydrophilic substances through, the rate of absorption is extremely limited.

Hey lats - oral having an added ester?? Doesnt make sense to me...where am i off?? orals as far as i know have no added ester ...base compound 17aa so as an effective dose survives first pass. no ester .... orals while they are 17aa dont 100% survive first pass in the mg dosage you ingest... you have me curious ..can u explain?