Subcutaneous Versus Intramuscular injections? why???

[Simon1972]

hey guys, been reading around some forums that inspite of the practiced/accepted norm of intramuscular injection, that people have been practicing subcutaneous ( under layer of skin) injections without a problem.

the inserted pamplets of the legit gear says for Intramuscular use only - is this for people on TRT that need long lasting effects ( weeks between pinning) and for guys that inject weekly such as recreation bodybuilders is it neccessary?

Now i know people will say, IM is the way to go, but does anyone have personal anecdotal evidence or even published studies as to why it would or wouldnt be the way to go?

it'd be good if anyone practicing Subcutaneous injections could pipe in and let us know your experiences and effects- compared to IM.

interested to find out if everyone is just jumping on the band wagon because "its the way its always been done", certainly would make administering a hell of alot easier!

thanks guys.

[Psychoeric210]

That makes me wonder too. I'm the kind of person that doesn't "stare" at the needle but feels...I didn't think my nurse was giving me my TRT inj. IM. Never felt the same as prev. inj. I hope you find the info you are looking for and you've piqued my curiosity to look into this too.

[Simon1972]

bump

[gixxerboy1]

I dont have studies on either. But like you said the packet with the test says intramuscular. Im pretty sure the pharmaceutical companies that make it now how to administer it. I've done it that way for years. It works and it doesnt hurt. So im not about to change.

Im not saying sub-q doesnt work. But i see no reason to change

[blacksmoke]

There is some threads on it in hrt forum and couple guys that do it for trt.

[Sgt. Hartman]

http://forums.steroid.com/showthread...s#.T5CzfTd5nTp