Comparison between 100mg test Sub-Q and IM (with labwork)

[GFA]

Figured I would make a post specifically for this now that I have my results.

Quick summary, blood work using 100mg test-cyp 1 injection weekly, no other ancillaries used, timing of shot was Sunday morning. Reasoning was to get a real comparison between using test Sub-Q and IM. No other variables to cloud the results. I know protocols call for AI, HCG , multiple shots and so on. This is to get a result from just testosterone 1x a week using IM and Sub-Q delivery methods. These are MY personal results so if you have different results I encourage you to post them.


Results from labwork (100 mg Test-cyp Sub-Q 1x a week)

Estradiol 21.2 7.6-42.6 pg/mL
Testosterone , Serum 366 348-1197 ng/dL
Testosterone, Total, Lc/Ms 334.0 348.0-1197.0 ng/dL
Testost., % Free+Weakly Bound 30.8 9.0-46.0 %
Testost., F+W Bound 102.9 40.0-250.0 ng/dL

So when I did 1 shot IM 100g a week, my Total test was 792, over 2x what it is using Sub-Q.

This is a slight increase from baseline which was 284.

Summary

Baseline (no testosterone injections) 284 ng/dL (Sept 12, 2012)
100mg Test-Cyp 1x a week Sub-Q 366 ng/dL (Jan 3, 2013)
100mg Test-Cyp 1x a week IM 792 ng/dL (May 11, 2012)

Ill be switching back to IM with a drop of ldex 1x a week to keep the e2 in check. This explains why I have been feeling tired lately.


Bottom line, Sub-Q is not as effective as IM for me. IM shots are 2x as effective for raising testosterone levels with the same dosage and timing.

Question: Why did you switch from IM to Sub-Q if your test was good to begin with?

Answer: I wanted to see what impact sub-q had on my RBCs and test levels, in addition sub-q is much easier than IM. I know from experience HCG is effective sub-q so I was hoping injecting test sub-q would give me similar results.


Question: How long did you do Sub-Q or IM before getting test results?

Answer: 6 weeks on each protocol before getting labs.


Question: When did you get the labwork done in relation to the injections?

Answer: Labs were done on Wednesday, injections were on Sunday so 3 days after.

[Torqued]

How long after your injections were your labs drawn in each case?

How long were you on IM before getting the labs listed above?

How long were you on SQ before getting the labs listed above?

[lovbyts]

How long after your injections were your labs drawn in each case?

How long were you on IM before getting the labs listed above?

How long were you on SQ before getting the labs listed above?

^^^^This

[kelkel]

GFA curious why you didn't go twice per week SQ, which is the more preferred method of SQ protocols.

Interesting comparison though and would love to see more from others. Although I don't know anyone injecting 100mg SQ at one time. Max seems to be around 60mg per injection.

[GFA]

How long after your injections were your labs drawn in each case?

How long were you on IM before getting the labs listed above?

How long were you on SQ before getting the labs listed above?

Lab done on Wednesday, injection on sunday (3 days after last injection).

6 weeks on each before getting labwork.

GFA curious why you didn't go twice per week SQ, which is the more preferred method of SQ protocols.

I wanted to keep the results close from a control stand point. 1 shot weekly IM vs 1 shot weekly SQ. Changing up dosing schedule or adding ancillaries dont keep the results consistent. Adds more variables that way.

[bass]

It's not a good comparison imo, sq protocol is called for twice a week as Kel noted, so the comparison should have been each protocol done correctly to get maximum results. That e2 test is not sensitive assay, so you really don't know where you sit with e2. Thanks for taking the time to do this, now we know sq is best taken twice weekly.

[lovbyts]

Lab done on Wednesday, injection on sunday (3 days after last injection).

6 weeks on each before getting labwork.

I wanted to keep the results close from a control stand point. 1 shot weekly IM vs 1 shot weekly SQ. Changing up dosing schedule or adding ancillaries dont keep the results consistent. Adds more variables that way.

Looks like you need to do it one more time to make the test complete using the 2x a week sq method.

Thanks for your effort. Great idea and great initiative.

[bullshark99]

Very interesting GFA, labs taken 3 days after inject, would assume this would be a peak number, pretty surprised how low it is. Subaqueous clearly suggested twice per week but if the draw was 72 hrs after inject I do not see how 2 pins @ 50mgs would yield numbers much different than one pin @100mgs considering it was peak levels? SubQ delivers slower if not mistaken, so maybe the 2 pins would change things , but how much???

[bass]

when I did my comparison its was about the same. not sure how much fat GFA has, but if he fairly thin he might be injecting under the skin and not in the fat! just something to look into...

[GFA]

It's not a good comparison imo, sq protocol is called for twice a week as Kel noted, so the comparison should have been each protocol done correctly to get maximum results. That e2 test is not sensitive assay, so you really don't know where you sit with e2. Thanks for taking the time to do this, now we know sq is best taken twice weekly.

Actually I would say its a very good experiment to do because know we know that injecting sub-q is completely different than IM for absorption. What is happening exactly when you inject sub-q? Is less being absorbed? We know the half life of test is ~6 days which means injecting sub-q is not absorbing the test as efficiently as IM.

I would seriously reconsider doing sub-q unless we know what the aborptions rates are.

[OLDANDWEAK]

Just curious, about where is your BF % currently, and did you use the 1" pins throughout the six week period?

[GFA]

Just curious, about where is your BF % currently, and did you use the 1" pins throughout the six week period?

I would say around 20%+ BF and 5/8" needles.

I was injecting into my abdominal region. It was definitely into the fat. The last time I saw a 6 pack was in my fridge. So no accidental IM injections there haha.

Anyways I did an IM injection today 200mg to jumpstart the system. Ill prob get another lab done in 2 months or so.

[APIs]

I guess everyone absorbs differently. Personally, I've never had the desire to try sub-q...

[GFA]

I guess everyone absorbs differently. Personally, I've never had the desire to try sub-q...

Right, my body appears to metabolize testosterone at a much higher rate when injecting sub-q.

Regardless of dosing frequency (2x a week or 1x a week) with a half life of a week, a 3 day lab should yield similar results if my body was absorbing the testosterone at the same rates IM vs sub-q.

This is clearly not the case which means in my body, IM is much more effective.

I had 2 reasons for trying sub-q, 1. easier to do, 2. possibly control rbc levels.

My RBCs have been much better the past 6 weeks but now I know its because my body wasnt absorbing the testosterone.

Summary: Injecting sub-q is a waste of time for me. Might work for others but definitely does not work for me. Injecting sub-q was supposed to yield similar absorption rates. It clearly does not in my case. Injecting into the fat is basically just pouring it into the drain.

[OLDANDWEAK]

I just started subQ injections a couple of weeks ago. This has got me worried that my levels will go way down now. It is easier for sure, and I can do it myself with no worries. I will have labs done around feb/mar and see where I am at that time. My total test level was 680 last labwork with IM injection EOW of 200mg. And the blood was pulled 10 days after injecting. If my levels are lower next BW I will start doing IM 100mg per week.

[GFA]

I just started subQ injections a couple of weeks ago. This has got me worried that my levels will go way down now. It is easier for sure, and I can do it myself with no worries. I will have labs done around feb/mar and see where I am at that time. My total test level was 680 last labwork with IM injection EOW of 200mg. And the blood was pulled 10 days after injecting. If my levels are lower next BW I will start doing IM 100mg per week.

Ya never know unless you try. 200 EOW is too long since the half life is 6-7 days. That means you are crashing down to 300ish before your next injection. Probably 1600-300 range peak to low.

Im not going to bother with more frequent injections sub-q because 1x week IM should be the same as 1x a week sub-q if the absorption rates were the same given the half life of test.

Anyone else using sub-q, I recommend seeing if it actually works for you. Having AIs and HCG in your protocol makes it hard to determine since HCG by itself can raise your test levels if you are secondary. That is the reason I did just testosterone during my experiment with exact same dosing schedule. I know exactly how sub-q impacts my body.

[TMan96]

Great topic interested in seeing more responses on this thread. I am currently IM. Thinking about doing sq @ some point.

[HRTstudent]

Good thread.

I just replied to your other thread, but I look forward to more.

I agree that this is a very good experiment in that you limited all the variables you could. Is it perfect? No. But this is the best 1-man study of IM vs Subq that I've seen online in a while.

[HRTstudent]

Great topic interested in seeing more responses on this thread. I am currently IM. Thinking about doing sq @ some point.

If you're someone like the OP who had a really nice 700 T level with 1 shot per week, then it might be fine to stay with that. But for some people like myself, 1 time shots of T into the muscle leave them in hypogonadal range at the end of the week.

Now, would 2 shots intramuscular be better? Probably. But now you must ask, whats the significance of poking over 100 holes in your muscles for the next 30,40,50 years? Ouch... that's what made me want to switch to SubQ. I just intuitively do not believe that much trauma (even if it seems small) to my muscles is good.

[GFA]

If you're someone like the OP who had a really nice 700 T level with 1 shot per week, then it might be fine to stay with that. But for some people like myself, 1 time shots of T into the muscle leave them in hypogonadal range at the end of the week.

Now, would 2 shots intramuscular be better? Probably. But now you must ask, whats the significance of poking over 100 holes in your muscles for the next 30,40,50 years? Ouch... that's what made me want to switch to SubQ. I just intuitively do not believe that much trauma (even if it seems small) to my muscles is good.

Believe me, I was really hoping SubQ would be just as effective as IM for a variety of reasons, unfortunately its not. If others have success with it, then continue to do it.

Thanks for the props on the 1 man study lol. I know its not perfect and I heard many times to do this or that but changing variables alters the integrity of the study thats why I chose to stick with 1 shot a week because I know how 1 shot a week works via IM on my body.

[Allaaro]

I did sub-q injections, 3x per week for 150mg total. My free test was in middle of the range. 56.5 in a range of 31-94.

I changed to 200mg total, 2x per week IM. My free test came back at 121.1 with the same ranges.

Bloodwork on Monday morning with mon/wed/fri on sub-q and mon/thur shots IM. I know the dosages aren't the same....but it seems to me I respond better to IM. My doc lowered me to 160mg per week IM and I'll have results in a few weeks when I get my appointment.

[kelkel]

Personally I rotate and use SQ as just a part of it in my twice per week protocol. In otherwords I prefer the more stable levels of twice per week injections but don't really care if it's IM or SQ. Whatever I choose for that day. Glutes, delts, SQ.....

[PetrX]

Reason why estrogen levels and such are lower when you inject via SQ is because it doesn't absorbed as effective as IM therefore you Test levels don't go up as high which is why estrogen levels are lower via SQ

[bass]

Actually I would say its a very good experiment to do because know we know that injecting sub-q is completely different than IM for absorption. What is happening exactly when you inject sub-q? Is less being absorbed? We know the half life of test is ~6 days which means injecting sub-q is not absorbing the test as efficiently as IM.

I would seriously reconsider doing sub-q unless we know what the aborptions rates are.

GFA, I did this experiment a wile ago and posted it here, the difference between yours and mine is I continued AI and hCG , my test levels were almost the same. if you see my latest BW I just posted, at 50 mgs twice a week got my total close to 800 and my free way above normal range. I guess we all absorb differently but I think the key here is SQ must be twice a week to be effective, I can't explain it but thats how it works best!

[GFA]

Reason why estrogen levels and such are lower when you inject via SQ is because it doesn't absorbed as effective as IM therefore you Test levels don't go up as high which is why estrogen levels are lower via SQ

Which defeats the purpose of injecting SQ, you can obtain the same result by not injecting testosterone at all. If you absorbing less test, that means you have to inject more to get the same effect which would probably have the same effect on estrogen.

In my case I was absorbing almost no test.

GFA, I did this experiment a wile ago and posted it here, the difference between yours and mine is I continued AI and hCG , my test levels were almost the same. if you see my latest BW I just posted, at 50 mgs twice a week got my total close to 800 and my free way above normal range. I guess we all absorb differently but I think the key here is SQ must be twice a week to be effective, I can't explain it but thats how it works best!

You should try again without HCG or AI. Your experiment is flawed since HCG and AI can raise your test levels. Thats why I went with testosterone alone. When I did HCG mono therapy in the past my test levels went up to 700 ish @250 iu a day. AIs are also known to increase testosterone levels .

Its possible you are absorbing very little to no testosterone. You wont know for sure unless you redo your bw only using testosterone.

@kelkel, have you tested just SQ alone? If not, its also possible your SQ injections are going to waste.

Im not here to tell people how to inject, but if they think they are getting the same absorption rates using SQ, its clearly not the case for me and others may have similar absorption rates. Introducing ancillaries in your protocol only cloud your results.

Baseline (no testosterone injections) 284 ng/dL
100mg Test-Cyp 1x a week Sub-Q 366 ng/dL (increase of 82 ng/DL) - basically within the standard deviation.
100mg Test-Cyp 1x a week IM 792 ng/dL (May 11, 2012) - increase of 512 ng/dL

This is a HUGE difference in absorption rates. Thats like 16% absorption rate if you consider IM as 100% (and I dont know what the absorption rate for IM is)

SQ is 16% (82/512) as effective as IM. 84% is metabolized.

[booku]

I am very intrigued by your results. I am 22 years old and just started TRT on Dec. 29th, with test only at 100 mg/week sub-Q at 2, 50 mg shots/week. My baseline T level pre TRT was 70 ng/dL. Will post my first bloodwork results in February. My fingers are crossed that sub-Q works well enough for me!

This will be a good trial run for a Test ONLY, SUB-Q, twice a week protocol

[lovbyts]

I am very intrigued by your results. I am 22 years old and just started TRT on Dec. 29th, with test only at 100 mg/week sub-Q at 2, 50 mg shots/week. My baseline T level pre TRT was 70 ng/dL. Will post my first bloodwork results in February. My fingers are crossed that sub-Q works well enough for me!

This will be a good trial run for a Test ONLY, SUB-Q, twice a week protocol

22 and on TRT? Under doctor supervision right?

[booku]

22 and on TRT? Under doctor supervision right?

correct, doctor prescribed. thyroid good, pituitary good, testicles good, so this is the road I've taken

[GFA]

correct, doctor prescribed. thyroid good, pituitary good, testicles good, so this is the road I've taken

Looking forward to the results but have you explored HPTA restart? How is your LH/FSH? 22 is really young to do TRT for the rest of your life. Having kids may be very difficult in the future.

[GFA]

So far we have

GFA - 100 mg (1x100mg weekly)
Baseline 284 ng/dL (Total test)
SQ 366 ng/dL (Total test) 102.9 ng/dL range 40.0-250.0 (F+W Bound)
IM 792 ng/dL (Total test) 243.1 ng/dL range 40.0-250.0 (F+W Bound)
Summary - IM 600% more effective than SQ for total test.

Allaaro - do you have total test levels as well?
Baseline ?
SQ 56.5 (Free test) 150mg (3x50mg)
IM 121.1 (Free test) 200mg (2x100mg)
Summary - 30% increase in test yields 150% higher free test levels. Would like to see similar levels of test injected per week and total test. Your free test increases look similar to mine in terms of percentages.

Booku
Baseline 70 ng/dL (Total test) 1.7 pg/mL range 9.3-26.5 pg/mL (free test)
SQ ? 100mg (2x50mg)
IM ?
Summary - unknown

[booku]

So far we have

GFA - 100 mg (1x100mg weekly)
Baseline 284 ng/dL (Total test)
SQ 366 ng/dL (Total test) 102.9 ng/dL range 40.0-250.0 (F+W Bound)
IM 792 ng/dL (Total test) 243.1 ng/dL range 40.0-250.0 (F+W Bound)
Summary - IM 600% more effective than SQ for total test.

Allaaro - do you have total test levels as well?
Baseline ?
SQ 56.5 (Free test) 150mg (3x50mg)
IM 121.1 (Free test) 200mg (2x100mg)
Summary - 30% increase in test yields 150% higher free test levels. Would like to see similar levels of test injected per week and total test. Your free test increases look similar to mine in terms of percentages.

Booku
Baseline 70 ng/dL (348-1197 ng/dL) (Total test), 1.7 pg/mL (9.3-26.5 pg/mL) free test
SQ ? 100mg (2x50mg)
IM ?
Summary - unknown TBD Feb 2013

added my free test in there with ranges.

also my LH was 1.5 on a scale of 1.7-8.6 mIU/mL and my FSH was 2.5 on a scale of 1.5-12.4 mIU/mL. the diagnosis i received from an endo and a urologist is that it's idiopathic secondary hypogonadism, which means that the cause is unknown, ie. "sometimes it just happens" in the words of the endo. somehow the pituitary might have been damaged from sickness, environment, etc.

[Allaaro]

So far we have

GFA - 100 mg (1x100mg weekly)
Baseline 284 ng/dL (Total test)
SQ 366 ng/dL (Total test) 102.9 ng/dL range 40.0-250.0 (F+W Bound)
IM 792 ng/dL (Total test) 243.1 ng/dL range 40.0-250.0 (F+W Bound)
Summary - IM 600% more effective than SQ for total test.

Allaaro - do you have total test levels as well?
Baseline ?
SQ 56.5 (Free test) 150mg (3x50mg) range of 31-94 Total test: 25, range of 8.4-28.7 (so my free t is real low compared to total)
IM 121.1 (Free test) 200mg (2x100mg) range of 31-94 No total test results here but I'll have that number with my 160mg per week IM soon.
Summary - 30% increase in test yields 150% higher free test levels. Would like to see similar levels of test injected per week and total test. Your free test increases look similar to mine in terms of percentages.

Booku
Baseline 70 ng/dL (Total test)
SQ ? 100mg (2x50mg)
IM ?
Summary - unknown

Added in ranges for free test and total test for first one.

Also baseline: Free testosterone , 19.1, range 31-94 range. Total test: 9, range 8.4-28.7

[kelkel]

@kelkel, have you tested just SQ alone? If not, its also possible your SQ injections are going to waste.

No, never just SQ alone. I prefer a rotation for variety and will always do so. I just don't like the thought of one way only for many of the reasons posted above. In multiple threads I've stated, IMHO, that it's the twice per week protocol that's crucial, not so much SQ. But again, that's just my opinion based on less injected = less spike in E.

Really great thread GFA. Keep tracking things and update this. Very informative.

kel

[bass]

Which defeats the purpose of injecting SQ, you can obtain the same result by not injecting testosterone at all. If you absorbing less test, that means you have to inject more to get the same effect which would probably have the same effect on estrogen.

In my case I was absorbing almost no test.

You should try again without HCG or AI. Your experiment is flawed since HCG and AI can raise your test levels. Thats why I went with testosterone alone. When I did HCG mono therapy in the past my test levels went up to 700 ish @250 iu a day. AIs are also known to increase testosterone levels .

Its possible you are absorbing very little to no testosterone. You wont know for sure unless you redo your bw only using testosterone.

@kelkel, have you tested just SQ alone? If not, its also possible your SQ injections are going to waste.

Im not here to tell people how to inject, but if they think they are getting the same absorption rates using SQ, its clearly not the case for me and others may have similar absorption rates. Introducing ancillaries in your protocol only cloud your results.

Baseline (no testosterone injections) 284 ng/dL
100mg Test-Cyp 1x a week Sub-Q 366 ng/dL (increase of 82 ng/DL) - basically within the standard deviation.
100mg Test-Cyp 1x a week IM 792 ng/dL (May 11, 2012) - increase of 512 ng/dL

This is a HUGE difference in absorption rates. Thats like 16% absorption rate if you consider IM as 100% (and I dont know what the absorption rate for IM is)

SQ is 16% (82/512) as effective as IM. 84% is metabolized.

My latest bw was without hcg and ai, it was testalone, my total test was still in good range and my free was abovenormal. What i am trying to say is we can't take this experiment and discredit sq, sq has been working great for so many and it is effective, otherwise dr. Crisler will not endorse it if it didn't work.

[GFA]

My latest bw was without hcg and ai, it was testalone, my total test was still in good range and my free was abovenormal. What i am trying to say is we can't take this experiment and discredit sq, sq has been working great for so many and it is effective, otherwise dr. Crisler will not endorse it if it didn't work.

Not trying to discredit SQ. I have nothing to gain from that but I do want to provide as much quasi scientific information as possible to the community because many members here read something without asking questions and accept it as fact.

If you have baseline numbers, SQ test only and IM test only numbers with dosage and frequency, post them and we can keep a list of all members that have tried it.

Changing up dosage frequency or having ancillaries nullify the test result. We are trying to determine the efficacy of IM vs SQ and that requires many of the variables to be the same.

For those of you that are doing SQ with HCG /AI, maybe you can stop the HCG/AI 2 weeks before your next BW. That should provide some semi accurate results for SQ.

[kelkel]

I don't see how HCG or an AI nullify things as long as the ONLY change is from IM to SQ and there is no titration change in ancillaries. What's your logic on that aspect GFA?

[GFA]

I don't see how HCG or an AI nullify things as long as the ONLY change is from IM to SQ and there is no titration change in ancillaries. What's your logic on that aspect GFA?

Because taking an AI + HCG can raise your test levels in a non additive way so you wont know the true impact of test alone.

For example someone taking test + HCG + AI might have an 800 ng/dL level.

HCG alone could bring you to 800+ ng/dL and if you change from IM to SQ you might think you are getting the full benefits from the testosterone while in reality its just being metabolized. Meaning you might as well not even take the testosterone.

The amount of testosterone is not additive by taking HCG + AI + test injections.

For example (these are just example numbers)

HCG mono could bring your test from 300 to 800 (+500 ng/dL)
Test cyp IM mono could bring your test from 300 to 800 (+500 ng/dL)
AI mono could raise your test levels from 300 to 700 (+400 ng/dL)

Taking all of them together will not bring your levels to 1700. You might still be around 800 with all 3.

So to truly understand the impact of IM vs SQ, you have to only do testosterone. HCG + AI can skew the results due to the non additive nature of taking all 3.

Edit: if I had continued HCG + AI during my experiment, I would have had no idea if it worked or not because my test would have been around 800 and I would have said "Well it seems to work because my test is still 800ish" but in reality it was the HCG and AI doing all the work while the test was being wasted.

[OLDANDWEAK]

I think if you were taking HCG along with the IM injections and dropped the HCG when switching to subQ it would skew the results as well. I believe kelkel was saying that if you are currently running HCG and AI with IM and switched to subQ while still running the HCG and AI it would still be a valid experiment.

[GFA]

I think if you were taking HCG along with the IM injections and dropped the HCG when switching to subQ it would skew the results as well. I believe kelkel was saying that if you are currently running HCG and AI with IM and switched to subQ while still running the HCG and AI it would still be a valid experiment.

The point I am making is if you are taking HCG and switch from IM to SQ, your test levels could stay the same but the testosterone is not being absorbed and the increase would be due solely to HCG + AI.

HCG mono can raise your test levels significantly if you are secondary.

The ideal experiment scenario would be to just take testosterone IM and repeat SQ.

If you are currently taking HCG + AI and doing SQ injections, dropping HCG and the AI will let you know how much test you are absorbing from the test alone.

[booku]

GFA, what needles/syringes were you using for your sub-Q injections, and what sites did you inject with those needle(s)???

And I could potentially do the test since I started with sub-Q test only. But I feel like sub-Q is working very well for me only after 15 days (5 injections so far). Went from caffeine dependence, taking naps every day, zombie mode, just existing, to 1 small cup of coffee in the morning, no naps, great workouts, fairly good energy throughout the day, and rock hard erections constantly, still very early... and with baseline so low who knows until blood work is run