Needle length and absorption

[Finalforce]

Hey im just curious if using a 1 inch needle for glute for a person with 12-14%bf is alright and if its possible for not all of the gear to be absorbed if its not deep enough into the muscle. Never gotten any lumps or anything, just wondering if its worth switching to 1.5 inch thanks!

[ACE5HIGH]

Hey im just curious if using a 1 inch needle for glute for a person with 12-14%bf is alright and if its possible for not all of the gear to be absorbed if its not deep enough into the muscle. Never gotten any lumps or anything, just wondering if its worth switching to 1.5 inch thanks!

Its worth switching but you can get away with a 1" in a pinch. When I have to use 1" for glutes I just try to get it far in as I can and never had issues except a little extra soreness next day from being a little shallow, Mostly its just inconvenience.

[Finalforce]

I see but is there a chance some of my gear is not being absorbed? this is my main worry I feel close to no soreness ever now, I thought if the gear isnt absorbed this is what causes lumps to form.

[ACE5HIGH]

yes your correct. Again its going to "work" but better to just get 1.5". Using the 1" in my glutes was the only time I have noticed a little bit of a lump. Therefore I now use 1.5" for glutes

[Finalforce]

thanks alot man Ill give it a try!

[Times Roman]

there is a debate as to whether or not SubQ is as effective as IM.

Don't know what the final answer was, but I seem to remember that SubQ is about as good as IM.

could be wrong. Anyone?

[ACE5HIGH]

If Im not mistaken oil is best absorbed IM because Lipid soluble drugs are taken up rapidly by direct diffusion through capillaries. Also exercise increases muscular blood flow and improves absorption after the injection. On the other hand, blood supply of subcutaneous tissue is very poor, so absorption is slower than that of IM...

[tony1032]

If Im not mistaken oil is best absorbed IM because Lipid soluble drugs are taken up rapidly by direct diffusion through capillaries. Also exercise increases muscular blood flow and improves absorption after the injection. On the other hand, blood supply of subcutaneous tissue is very poor, so absorption is slower than that of IM...

I've always been under the impression that subcutaneous is slower, but that does not imply less efficient, does it? I've been running 1" for quite some time in glutes, quads, etc., and haven't noticed any decrease in effectiveness.

[ACE5HIGH]

I've always been under the impression that subcutaneous is slower, but that does not imply less efficient, does it? I've been running 1" for quite some time in glutes, quads, etc., and haven't noticed any decrease in effectiveness.

Well unless someone were a whale they wouldn't notice a difference with a 1" pin, since 1" is a good bit into muscle even in glutes, its just not as deep as 1.5"

Subcutaneous is pretty dang shallow especially for folks who are lean. Let me give you an example of its "less effectiveness". BTW this is only my experience, Im not making any medical or research based facts... First time I used HCG I mixed too much BA water with it on accident and it was pretty well diluted around 250Iu's HCG per .75ml

So I was still using it at the most I was comfortable with Sub Q about .65ml and I would have a nice lump under injection site my skin for oh a solid 2 weeks... That means its sitting there not being absorbed into the blood stream for that long period. So my conclusion would be that it was pretty inefficient knowing that I could put 2ml's in my thigh and have it absorbed in couple days max.

[Ashop]

You want to inject DEEP IM. I use 1.5" for glutes and 1" else where.

[Times Roman]

I've always been under the impression that subcutaneous is slower, but that does not imply less efficient, does it? I've been running 1" for quite some time in glutes, quads, etc., and haven't noticed any decrease in effectiveness.

the reason I ask, is that before i came over here, the nurse always administered, and would grab a pinch of flesh right below the belt line in the back, and inject that way. I'd ask her if IM or SubQ, and she said IM. But never any soreness. recently, i've been doing that as well, and i don't notice any difference, except no soreness in the muscle the next day......

I bet the nurse was actually administering SubQ and telling me it was IM.

I remember reading an article on it before too. and the article said, as best i can remember, that there isn't much of a difference, which is why, apparently, why Kaiser really administers it SubQ

[ACE5HIGH]

Roman im just not following since Ive never heard any debate about the two being equal or similar or even safe.... Have you guys done both IM and SQ? If so you know that the main difference is that you can inject hardly any volume SQ... Which is why its effective for the things that you can like HCG, Insulin etc... But we are talking about AAS here right? Id never attempt like 1ml + Sub Q That would suck !

Pretty sure this can also be dangerous and cause an abscess do to the very poor absorption...

[Times Roman]

ACES^
yes, we are talking aas.... test enth to be specific, and some tren A as well.
1ml SubQ is not an issue with me. On the hip, above the glutes, and to the side, where the skin is loose, it goes in quickly and painlessly. In fact, it has the capacity to do much more than 1ml.
There is no residual lump after more than a minute or two, which is why my doc told me to massage it a bit after pinning. there is NO doubt that what is pinned is absorbed 100%

After a few months of my initial trt program, and them injecting SubQ, is when we had another blood panel, and they suggested we back off 20% due to free test significantly beyond the upper limit of the optimal range.

My doc seems to have injected SubQ, and says it's IM. Why? I believe it's Because the pharma co's did their trials with IM, since they were trying to inject as close to the area they were trying to affect as possible, (muscle tissue) so IM. And because the the trials were IM, then the FDA approved it for IM. Since then, I'm thinking, the docs slowly starting going shallower and shallower since there were complaints of soreness with IM. And as they continued to go more and more shallow, and were approaching SubQ, the docs noticed there wasn't much difference, if any, on the blood panels.

Which is why I asked the question. I think it is a myth that you have to go IM for aas. Of course, everyone here goes IM (and so do i except here lately). But my doc does not, and blood panels do not lie.

See, I was thinking IM was recommended was due to the way aas aromaticizes with BF, and IM is further away from BF than SubQ. But I'm not sure even that thought makes much sense either, since the aas disapates after pinning.

Anyone else have thoughts on the issue?

[Times Roman]

Well unless someone were a whale they wouldn't notice a difference with a 1" pin, since 1" is a good bit into muscle even in glutes, its just not as deep as 1.5"

Subcutaneous is pretty dang shallow especially for folks who are lean. Let me give you an example of its "less effectiveness". BTW this is only my experience, Im not making any medical or research based facts... First time I used HCG I mixed too much BA water with it on accident and it was pretty well diluted around 250Iu's HCG per .75ml

So I was still using it at the most I was comfortable with Sub Q about .65ml and I would have a nice lump under injection site my skin for oh a solid 2 weeks... That means its sitting there not being absorbed into the blood stream for that long period. So my conclusion would be that it was pretty inefficient knowing that I could put 2ml's in my thigh and have it absorbed in couple days max.

I'll ask the dumb question here since it seems to be on topic. WHERE did you pin SubQ?

If AAS it skould be below the belt line in the back, where there is a lot of loose skin and large volumes don't matter

If using a slin pin for peptides or whatever, probably in the stomach area because skin is still loose and easier to get at without all the twisting.

I'm hoping you are not picking an area where the skin is real tight and thin?

[Times Roman]

I've always been under the impression that subcutaneous is slower, but that does not imply less efficient, does it? I've been running 1" for quite some time in glutes, quads, etc., and haven't noticed any decrease in effectiveness.

this seems to make sense. but if you are pinning this way consistantly, then after awhile, you will still have stable blood supplies which seems to be the goal here.

[Srobis15]

From what I have read and researched, SubQ isnt as effective because it has a much harder time absorbing the oil base that most gear is in, however it will absorb it eventually, just perhaps not as quickly and efficiently. Have I read this out of a medical journal? No. But I have read it somewhere on this site fairly recently by one of the vets. Regardless, I use a 1" all the time, but thats because I never do quads. And in delts or glutes, I ram that thing as deep as it will possibly go, and some just to make sure its deep enough.

[chuckt12345]

it really is no different than what is believed. Most docs and nurses will pinch fat and inject.

[ACE5HIGH]

I have read it somewhere on this site fairly recently by one of the vets.

Is this the one? http://forums.steroid.com/showthread...jection-of-AAS

Im not even sure why this appears to be a debate for some... Sub-Q is WAY slower in absorption, its a fact. No blood circulation to fat layer = Poor absorption. LOTS of blood circulation to Muscles = Quick Absorption, its really that simple.

Does that mean it's physically impossible, no. Im sure you can "get away" with pinning tiny amounts of oil all over your skin and eventually it will absorb, but its just kinda pointless to do so when there is a perfectly efficient and simple way called IM.... Hopefully some Vets will chime in so we can clear this up.

[FCVtec]

Subcutaneous is pretty dang shallow especially for folks who are lean. Let me give you an example of its "less effectiveness". BTW this is only my experience, Im not making any medical or research based facts... First time I used HCG I mixed too much BA water with it on accident and it was pretty well diluted around 250Iu's HCG per .75ml

So I was still using it at the most I was comfortable with Sub Q about .65ml and I would have a nice lump under injection site my skin for oh a solid 2 weeks... .

I am the same way. I Don't like shooting more than .25ml SQ, I get little lumps that last a few hours even if I put the whole 5/16 insulin needle in(Not much fat between my skin and muscle, its only a thin thin layer). I can't imagine if I tried .5ml SQ, wouldn't be pleasant(I am talking HCG or something.. I would NEVER shoot oil based stuff SQ)

[Venomous]

1 1/2 to 2 inch 23 guage should be enough. IM is the way to go as far as I have been told and I have been involved in AAS for about 13 years

[Srobis15]

Is this the one? http://forums.steroid.com/showthread...jection-of-AAS

Im not even sure why this appears to be a debate for some... Sub-Q is WAY slower in absorption, its a fact. No blood circulation to fat layer = Poor absorption. LOTS of blood circulation to Muscles = Quick Absorption, its really that simple.

Does that mean it's physically impossible, no. Im sure you can "get away" with pinning tiny amounts of oil all over your skin and eventually it will absorb, but its just kinda pointless to do so when there is a perfectly efficient and simple way called IM.... Hopefully some Vets will chime in so we can clear this up.

No, that wasnt the one, but that was a good read nonetheless. Thanks for the link.