Sub q steroids?

ajfromab said:
I’m fairly certain it was this article and it was listed as a source it’s been a few weeks since I read it

www.t-nation.com

An Important Bulletin for TRT Patients

How to easily wipe out the possible negative side effects of testosterone replacement therapy with one simple adjustment. I’ve written before about how subcutaneous (under the skin) injections are more convenient and less problematic than intramuscular injections for men undergoing...
www.t-nation.com www.t-nation.com


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Welp that's not it but their is a lot more info in this one than the first. Seems that info was not easy to find till it made it to Pubmed more recently. You may find this thread about it an interesting read - https://www.canadianbrawn.com/threads/im-vs-subq-study.7095/

It seems to have an opposing view to what you gleaned from the first one you posted "After linear regression, type of TRT modality was not found to be associated with TT levels (p=0.057). SCTE-AI " but even that is some special kinda bullshit, they were comparing Cypionate to Enanthate for some reason that I can only assume is prompted by money, as they are probably trying to sell the auto-injector they used for TE.

The only thing that really changed was Estradiol and Hematocrit were slightly higher post treatment in the Cypionate/IM group compared to the Enanthate/subQ group, likely because of higher peaks in the IM injected group.

So the question is were the differences because of IM vs SC or Cyp vs Enth ? No way to tell other than to hypothesize.

IMO the only thing that might possibly be learned here is that this may provide some backup to something important that I love to mention often "it's the peaks that get ya". In my mind that is one of the stronger arguements for higher frequency injections and also probably for SC injections for TRT. Just my opinion about the SC part though, I've still seen nothing that proves it and my own experience has been no significant difference.
 
gondar1 said:
Welp that's not it but their is a lot more info in this one than the first. Seems that info was not easy to find till it made it to Pubmed more recently. You may find this thread about it an interesting read - https://www.canadianbrawn.com/threads/im-vs-subq-study.7095/

It seems to have an opposing view to what you gleaned from the first one you posted "After linear regression, type of TRT modality was not found to be associated with TT levels (p=0.057). SCTE-AI " but even that is some special kinda bullshit, they were comparing Cypionate to Enanthate for some reason that I can only assume is prompted by money, as they are probably trying to sell the auto-injector they used for TE.

The only thing that really changed was Estradiol and Hematocrit were slightly higher post treatment in the Cypionate/IM group compared to the Enanthate/subQ group, likely because of higher peaks in the IM injected group.

So the question is were the differences because of IM vs SC or Cyp vs Enth ? No way to tell other than to hypothesize.

IMO the only thing that might possibly be learned here is that this may provide some backup to something important that I love to mention often "it's the peaks that get ya". In my mind that is one of the stronger arguements for higher frequency injections and also probably for SC injections for TRT. Just my opinion about the SC part though, I've still seen nothing that proves it and my own experience has been no significant difference.
Click to expand...

It’s the peaks that get ya , I could agree with that for sure .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
backintime said:
If you folks are doing subq in the belly of any substance what do you do if you get real lean? Like if you get sub 10 or even sub 8 percent or less and have veins on your abs with really no fat to inject? With most if your abs are that lean then the rest of you is equally ripped or more so how would you (or we even pros for that matter) inject all your stuff subq then?

No I don't qualify in this demographic at this point but I have been curious. Same with women, if they get real lean where do they do their subq?
Click to expand...

This always gets twisted because we start talking about fat.
Subcutaneous doesn't mean "into the fat" though. Sub= Under and Cutaneous= Skin. So it means "under the skin".

You could argue that everything under the skin is subQ including fat yes but also muscle tissue which would make IM shot's subQ. We accept that calling those shot's IntraMuscular creates a distinction. Bearing that distinction in mind the main goal is to get it in ya but not into muscle. Or a blood vessel, lymphatic system, organs etc.

So for our purposes you can do it almost anywhere, it doesn't need to go into fat although it often ends up there. Anywhere between the bottom layer of skin and the muscle generally works. It doesn't matter how lean you are, I've yet to meet anyone who was so supremely lean and crammed full of muscle at the same time that they couldn't pinch up (tenting) a bit of loose skin to stick a needle in at an angle.

To answer your question more directly you can pin anywhere in your belly that doesn't lead to punching into a vein or muscle *. Or seek out other sites, I like the top of my thigh where the crease of my crotch starts. Easy to reach, I can see all the veins that are there and if by chance it does form a lump or go red or whatever its under the gaunch and know one will see it unless I get lucky.

Make no mistake, volume is a consideration. This is mainly suited for less than a ml IMO. So more for folks on TRT or very frequent shots, might not be for a heavy dosing competitor.

* stay a few inches away from your belly button too, their is some funny business going on there that can affect absorption
 
IronRobi said:
I'm not so sure it would have a higher peak level , but this would theoretically lead to a higher stable level with much less peaks and valleys.
Click to expand...
agreed @IronRobi - I didn't indicate it would have a have a higher peak level but more stable levels. I will find the study and post it, it was on another forum and was a good read albeit long.
 
I never looked into subq before... for oils... there was a big debate about it on ology and a few guys posted bloodwork showing they had crazy low levels... but they were also doing europharm... psl... which everyone on that site was raving about but then threads started coming in with bloodwork about it being shit but it kept being deleted... but since these guys were blaming subq it didnt get deleted... ive never though about actually subq'ing oil till last week i bounced around 4 pharmacies and they all said the same thing that 5/8slin pins are no longer used... and thats what i used to get into the muscle on chest n delt... the biggest they seem to carry is only 8mm now i began to think about sub-q still thought it wasnt a thing but i do remember reading on threads people talking about sq'ing a lot and i sidnt remember where i read them but i figured they all couldnt be referring to hgc, hgh and suspensions. So i figured id ask, and what im hearing im glas to hear... if i do short esters i dont wanna be pinming an inch-inch & 1/2 everyday... the days of actually enjoying pinning are looong gone. But sub q is nothing
 
gondar1 said:
This always gets twisted because we start talking about fat.
Subcutaneous doesn't mean "into the fat" though. Sub= Under and Cutaneous= Skin. So it means "under the skin".

You could argue that everything under the skin is subQ including fat yes but also muscle tissue which would make IM shot's subQ. We accept that calling those shot's IntraMuscular creates a distinction. Bearing that distinction in mind the main goal is to get it in ya but not into muscle. Or a blood vessel, lymphatic system, organs etc.

So for our purposes you can do it almost anywhere, it doesn't need to go into fat although it often ends up there. Anywhere between the bottom layer of skin and the muscle generally works. It doesn't matter how lean you are, I've yet to meet anyone who was so supremely lean and crammed full of muscle at the same time that they couldn't pinch up (tenting) a bit of loose skin to stick a needle in at an angle.

To answer your question more directly you can pin anywhere in your belly that doesn't lead to punching into a vein or muscle *. Or seek out other sites, I like the top of my thigh where the crease of my crotch starts. Easy to reach, I can see all the veins that are there and if by chance it does form a lump or go red or whatever its under the gaunch and know one will see it unless I get lucky.

Make no mistake, volume is a consideration. This is mainly suited for less than a ml IMO. So more for folks on TRT or very frequent shots, might not be for a heavy dosing competitor.

* stay a few inches away from your belly button too, their is some funny business going on there that can affect absorption
Click to expand...
Why on an angle?
Ive always tried for striaght in, maybe therewere no issues because it was water based and like 5ui of water lol
 
gondar1 said:
This always gets twisted because we start talking about fat.
Subcutaneous doesn't mean "into the fat" though. Sub= Under and Cutaneous= Skin. So it means "under the skin".

You could argue that everything under the skin is subQ including fat yes but also muscle tissue which would make IM shot's subQ. We accept that calling those shot's IntraMuscular creates a distinction. Bearing that distinction in mind the main goal is to get it in ya but not into muscle. Or a blood vessel, lymphatic system, organs etc.

So for our purposes you can do it almost anywhere, it doesn't need to go into fat although it often ends up there. Anywhere between the bottom layer of skin and the muscle generally works. It doesn't matter how lean you are, I've yet to meet anyone who was so supremely lean and crammed full of muscle at the same time that they couldn't pinch up (tenting) a bit of loose skin to stick a needle in at an angle.

To answer your question more directly you can pin anywhere in your belly that doesn't lead to punching into a vein or muscle *. Or seek out other sites, I like the top of my thigh where the crease of my crotch starts. Easy to reach, I can see all the veins that are there and if by chance it does form a lump or go red or whatever its under the gaunch and know one will see it unless I get lucky.

Make no mistake, volume is a consideration. This is mainly suited for less than a ml IMO. So more for folks on TRT or very frequent shots, might not be for a heavy dosing competitor.

* stay a few inches away from your belly button too, their is some funny business going on there that can affect absorption
Click to expand...
See I never pinch up the skin. Just toss it in and inject. I will go at 45 on my thighs though because the fat is thinner. and likely most of my sub q are fat or shallow muscle injections.
I likely have not had issues because of the lower volume shots.
 
Sorbate said:
See I never pinch up the skin. Just toss it in and inject. I will go at 45 on my thighs though because the fat is thinner. and likely most of my sub q are fat or shallow muscle injections.
I likely have not had issues because of the lower volume shots.
Click to expand...

I don't usually either, I think its better to avoid it if you can. I was responding to @backintime 's question about the rare ultra lean folks. I do almost always go in at a 45 though and I don't bury a half inch spike, just go deep enough to be leaving the bolus under the skin but not into muscle. The angle gives more room for error.
One exception is peptides if I'm using a very short, small ga needle, 5mm? no problem going straight in for many spots on the torso/hips. Could never go straight in on say biceps or calves for example if I wanted to shoot there for some reason. But I've got no reason to, I think most people overestimate leanness. A true 10% is probably the leanest I've ever been and it was freaky enough. Not that the number matters but I've seen a ton of stage ready guys up close and the difference between say 10% and 7% is barely noticeable to the average eyeballs for most of the body other than those last stubborn fat deposits above and below the hip area and some men's chest.
 
Sorbate said:
stability is boring, lol. Wild fluctuations is where its at.
Click to expand...
I remember a discussion like this a long long time ago, baically the debate was wild fluctuations keep the body in shock, so rapidly growing..
Based on what ive read on a different thread on c.b. that theory has been debunked.
I had a buddy who thought this, hes like "i just pin whatever i want whenever i feel like.... he blew up faster then anyone ive ever seen but later on i seen it was moreso because he never stopped eatting and he was on grams and grams of juice s week
 
Palmer1991 said:
I remember a discussion like this a long long time ago, baically the debate was wild fluctuations keep the body in shock, so rapidly growing..
Based on what ive read on a different thread on c.b. that theory has been debunked.
I had a buddy who thought this, hes like "i just pin whatever i want whenever i feel like.... he blew up faster then anyone ive ever seen but later on i seen it was moreso because he never stopped eatting and he was on grams and grams of juice s week
Click to expand...
... @Sorbate was kidding.
 
gondar1 said:
I don't usually either, I think its better to avoid it if you can. I was responding to @backintime 's question about the rare ultra lean folks. I do almost always go in at a 45 though and I don't bury a half inch spike, just go deep enough to be leaving the bolus under the skin but not into muscle. The angle gives more room for error.
One exception is peptides if I'm using a very short, small ga needle, 5mm? no problem going straight in for many spots on the torso/hips. Could never go straight in on say biceps or calves for example if I wanted to shoot there for some reason. But I've got no reason to, I think most people overestimate leanness. A true 10% is probably the leanest I've ever been and it was freaky enough. Not that the number matters but I've seen a ton of stage ready guys up close and the difference between say 10% and 7% is barely noticeable to the average eyeballs for most of the body other than those last stubborn fat deposits above and below the hip area and some men's chest.
Click to expand...
I’ve been tested by the gym at 8% a few times, and I just get more definition in my obliques mainly. But I was young, high metabolism hard gainer. Now doing 10% I have to really try and that is more than good enough for me.
I’m likely 14% right now. Unless I’m eating really shitty food, it’s where I sit. So not much fat on my delts or thighs.
I only use 5/16” pins. So 8mm.

I’ve pinned tris a fair bit, till one time I had a bad shot, got an inflimation (not an infection) and it left what I’m going to assume scar tissue and wreck the definition in the horseshoe of my right tri. It took like 2 years to finally go away, and I‘d rub the spot hard whenever I thought about it.

No more shots like that.

I know in my thighs and delts it shallow IM injections. But I get no issues doing this so I don’t worry.
 
Bignate said:
Yes, correct. For some reason, everybody seems to think subQ means into the fat. Never understood that.
Click to expand...
GH, water based roids etc. do not do well in fat..At all...Not sure when folks lost the knowledge on this. Recently most folk are saying just put it in the fat. Not correct.
Fat has little to no vascularity and blood flows. That is needed to absorb the goods. Water based is setting one up for possible infections, not high risk, but its there.
 
ironwill said:
GH, water based roids etc. do not do well in fat..At all...Not sure when folks lost the knowledge on this. Recently most folk are saying just put it in the fat. Not correct.
Fat has little to no vascularity and blood flows. That is needed to absorb the goods. Water based is setting one up for possible infections, not high risk, but its there.
Click to expand...
100% brother, that's my point. Not sure why whenever I hear someone mention subQ they say "just put it in the fat" haha..... Or when people don't pinch to properly get into the subcutaneous tissue, and just jab right in and call it subQ.
 
Bignate said:
100% brother, that's my point. Not sure why whenever I hear someone mention subQ they say "just put it in the fat" haha..... Or when people don't pinch to properly get into the subcutaneous tissue, and just jab right in and call it subQ.
Click to expand...
So what should I call what I do. Intrafat injections, lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top