Why are injectables shot IM?

[Mr.Rose]

This may be a stupid question but i was just curious.

Why are our injections such as test, etc, shot IM instead of sub-Q?

If i remember correctly, i think sub-q is where growth hormones and such are administered.... i think, i may be wrong, please correct me.

[MONEY AND MASS]

your right but try it sub-q and tell us how that goes... hopefully you dont swell up

[Bonaparte]

If i remember correctly, i think sub-q is where growth hormones and such are produced.... i think, i may be wrong, please correct me.

???????????????????????????????????????
You think they are naturally produced by the body in the fatty sub-Q layer???

[MONEY AND MASS]

???????????????????????????????????????
You think they are naturally produced by the body in the fatty sub-Q layer???

lol hahaha the pituitary is behind the belly button! hahaha

[MONEY AND MASS]

im sorry, im sorry, i didnt mean for it to turn into this, i didnt mean to flame you bro. y are you asking? you dont like the 1 1/2'' IM injection? dip a cig in test and smoke it that works.

[MONEY AND MASS]

This time Im really sorry dont take me seriosly, dont smoke test, dont smoke anything except gun barrels and racing slicks

[Mr.Rose]

haha, nice, flame me right in the morning,

nah i was just curious, im fine with shooting IM, i get no pain from shooting IM, was just wondering. Hoe much swelling would you get from shootin 1mL into sub-Q?

I know they are produced in the pituitary gland. I screwed that part up, i meant thats where Gh's ans such are administered.

what are the absorption rates for like test between muscles and adipose tissue?

[Mr.Rose]

According to convention if we inject oil-based anabolic steroids into the fat layer beneath the skin and above the muscle (subcutaneous) it will impair absorption and could delay dissapation of drugs for many weeks or months. New research conducted at the Royal Victoria Hospital in Canada at the endocrine clinic tested the viability of subcutaneous shots.

The study involved 22 patients who were using the clinic for testosterone replacement therapy. The anabolic steroids was testosterone enanthate . The subjects were instructed to self-administer their testosterone subcutaneously once per week. The same 1ml that would have been injected once every 2 weeks was divided up into .5ml weekly injections. Blood tests which were conducted periodically throughout the 1 year investigation were suprisingly and unquestionably consistent. For exactly 100% of patients enrolled, testosterone levels remained in the physiological (normal) range for the entire duration of the study. This included both peak and trough levels (high & low during each week). Furthermore injections were extremely well tolerated. Each patient took over 50 injections and not one single adverse reactionn was noticed at the injection site.

The investigation concluded that not only was subcutaneous testosterone enanthate a viable option as far as drug release , but it was safe, cheap and far more comfortable for their patients compared to intramuscular injections.

Well it may be unrealistic to inject a full throttle cycle via subcutaneous. Recall the patients were injecting .5ml a week. And we all know there are many anabolic steroids users who far exceed this volume/dosage on a weekly basis. It also does not mean that every oil-based anabolic steroids, even in low to moderate dosages, will be viable for subcutaneous. It is possible that some anabolic steroids based on their preservatives, carriers, concentrations, or natural properties of active substances may be more irritating to local tissues when given subcutaneously.

Still the possibility of a subcutaneous cycle cannot be excluded especially for those using reasonable doses in the 1 ml range.

Saudi Med J, 2006 Dec;27(12):1843-6 courtesty of W. Llewellyn

[MONEY AND MASS]

According to convention if we inject oil-based anabolic steroids into the fat layer beneath the skin and above the muscle (subcutaneous) it will impair absorption and could delay dissapation of drugs for many weeks or months. New research conducted at the Royal Victoria Hospital in Canada at the endocrine clinic tested the viability of subcutaneous shots.

The study involved 22 patients who were using the clinic for testosterone replacement therapy. The anabolic steroids was testosterone enanthate . The subjects were instructed to self-administer their testosterone subcutaneously once per week. The same 1ml that would have been injected once every 2 weeks was divided up into .5ml weekly injections. Blood tests which were conducted periodically throughout the 1 year investigation were suprisingly and unquestionably consistent. For exactly 100% of patients enrolled, testosterone levels remained in the physiological (normal) range for the entire duration of the study. This included both peak and trough levels (high & low during each week). Furthermore injections were extremely well tolerated. Each patient took over 50 injections and not one single adverse reactionn was noticed at the injection site.

The investigation concluded that not only was subcutaneous testosterone enanthate a viable option as far as drug release , but it was safe, cheap and far more comfortable for their patients compared to intramuscular injections.

Well it may be unrealistic to inject a full throttle cycle via subcutaneous. Recall the patients were injecting .5ml a week. And we all know there are many anabolic steroids users who far exceed this volume/dosage on a weekly basis. It also does not mean that every oil-based anabolic steroids, even in low to moderate dosages, will be viable for subcutaneous. It is possible that some anabolic steroids based on their preservatives, carriers, concentrations, or natural properties of active substances may be more irritating to local tissues when given subcutaneously.

Still the possibility of a subcutaneous cycle cannot be excluded especially for those using reasonable doses in the 1 ml range.

Saudi Med J, 2006 Dec;27(12):1843-6 courtesty of W. Llewellyn

good post

[TITANIUM]

According to convention if we inject oil-based anabolic steroids into the fat layer beneath the skin and above the muscle (subcutaneous) it will impair absorption and could delay dissapation of drugs for many weeks or months. New research conducted at the Royal Victoria Hospital in Canada at the endocrine clinic tested the viability of subcutaneous shots.

The study involved 22 patients who were using the clinic for testosterone replacement therapy. The anabolic steroids was testosterone enanthate . The subjects were instructed to self-administer their testosterone subcutaneously once per week. The same 1ml that would have been injected once every 2 weeks was divided up into .5ml weekly injections. Blood tests which were conducted periodically throughout the 1 year investigation were suprisingly and unquestionably consistent. For exactly 100% of patients enrolled, testosterone levels remained in the physiological (normal) range for the entire duration of the study. This included both peak and trough levels (high & low during each week). Furthermore injections were extremely well tolerated. Each patient took over 50 injections and not one single adverse reactionn was noticed at the injection site.

The investigation concluded that not only was subcutaneous testosterone enanthate a viable option as far as drug release , but it was safe, cheap and far more comfortable for their patients compared to intramuscular injections.

Well it may be unrealistic to inject a full throttle cycle via subcutaneous. Recall the patients were injecting .5ml a week. And we all know there are many anabolic steroids users who far exceed this volume/dosage on a weekly basis. It also does not mean that every oil-based anabolic steroids, even in low to moderate dosages, will be viable for subcutaneous. It is possible that some anabolic steroids based on their preservatives, carriers, concentrations, or natural properties of active substances may be more irritating to local tissues when given subcutaneously.

Still the possibility of a subcutaneous cycle cannot be excluded especially for those using reasonable doses in the 1 ml range.

Saudi Med J, 2006 Dec;27(12):1843-6 courtesty of W. Llewellyn

I question this statement.

Stay IM for gear injections.

Best

T