# Large dosage injection frequency?



## jyoung8j (Oct 7, 2013)

Think I know the answer but wanna hear ur input.. so when running a large cycle of long esters lets say 1200mg of test e or cyp and deca at 800-1000mg a wk are u guys pinning ed or multiple injections a day.. may sound dumb.. but I was doing ed and a bud asked why..


----------



## losieloos (Oct 7, 2013)

Dude that's ****ing beast and here i am running 700 a week...


----------



## Popeye (Oct 7, 2013)

Doesnt matter in the amount...it matters on the ester....i fyou are using test e or c and deca it only needs to be pinned twice a week....so yes that would be dumb to pin e or c and deca ed......prop...aceteate...phenylprop is a different story


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 7, 2013)

jyoung8j said:


> Think I kno the answer but wanna hear ur input.. so when running a large cycle of long esters lets say 1200mg of test e or cyp and decca at 800-1000mg a wk are u guys pinning ed or multiple injections a day.. may sound dumb.. but I was doing ed and a bud asked why..



No logical reason to pin more than once a week with long esters

not competing, never come off=short esters are useless to me

At a gram of deca and/or test e, ONCE a week 

I prefer TWO inject sites on that one day a week though..e.g. 1.7ml of 300mg/ml deca in both delts to be at 1g deca/wk

Less scar tissue that way

Also, I have to add I'm actually using a shorter ester in this test 600mg I'm on..just experimenting, but no true usefulness for short esters when it comes to myself


----------



## jyoung8j (Oct 7, 2013)

Ok so how do u pin 1200mg and 800mg in 2 pins lol guess I just love needles..


----------



## PillarofBalance (Oct 7, 2013)

Pinning daily means that while you're running a gram of whatever, your peak plasma levels are nowhere near that.  Once or twice a week. I prefer twice with test e personally.


----------



## Popeye (Oct 7, 2013)

Pending on dose....roughly 2ccs of each compound twice a week


----------



## jyoung8j (Oct 7, 2013)

The test I have is 200mg and so is the deca.. so only way I'm understanding is 2 pins twice a wk to get tht high of dosage..


----------



## katelly (Oct 7, 2013)

jyoung8j said:


> Ok so how do u pin 1200mg and 800mg in 2 pins lol guess I just love needles..



you gotta pin that twice bro 600mg and 400mg of each twice a week


----------



## Tren4Life (Oct 7, 2013)

You could lessen you volume of test with tc 300 that would be 2cc instead of 3cc twice a week of the test


----------



## Tren4Life (Oct 7, 2013)

I forgot to add that tc 300 is lighter and goes in smoother than te 200 IMO


----------



## DF (Oct 7, 2013)

I think what he is saying is that he cant get that many mg into 2 shots.... Yes, you cant jam 5cc into a 3ml syringe so you'll have to do more than 2 pins/week.


----------



## jyoung8j (Oct 7, 2013)

Yes df.. thts wht I'm saying.. I felt was easier to figure out doing it ed then 2 shots twice a wk..


----------



## Popeye (Oct 7, 2013)

It would be 3cc test 2cc deca per shot...2xweek.....whats the problem?....if you dont like to shoot that much at a time then go ahead and do 200/week


----------



## Popeye (Oct 7, 2013)

*200/day* or whatever it would be...


----------



## Popeye (Oct 7, 2013)

id at least split it eod


----------



## Tren4Life (Oct 7, 2013)

DF said:


> I think what he is saying is that he cant get that many mg into 2 shots.... Yes, you cant jam 5cc into a 3ml syringe so you'll have to do more than 2 pins/week.



AHHH I see my bad. So you don't think using a syringe for a horse would work huh?? LOL


----------



## Yaya (Oct 7, 2013)

Im thinking of longer esters for now, but damn... I got so much fukking sus!!!


----------



## jyoung8j (Oct 7, 2013)

Yea I just need a horse syringe..lol


----------



## jyoung8j (Oct 7, 2013)

So 2 pins 2x a wk totalling 4pins..


----------



## PillarofBalance (Oct 7, 2013)

jyoung8j said:


> So 2 pins 2x a wk totalling 4pins..




Yes...........


----------



## jyoung8j (Oct 7, 2013)

Ok sorry I'm a blonde..lol


----------



## SFGiants (Oct 7, 2013)

Just a thought, if you don't know how to run x amount of gear you shouldn't be running x amount of gear.

You have a lot of spots on your body to pin.

Glutes one day, ventro another, delts, tri's, quads, chest, traps and so on.


----------



## DF (Oct 7, 2013)

jyoung8j said:


> Yes df.. thts wht I'm saying.. I felt was easier to figure out doing it ed then 2 shots twice a wk..



You are pinning 10cc/week.  6cc of test & 4cc of deca.  That's the problem doing higher mg cycles.  I would have looked into getting some higher mg gear for this cycle.


----------



## jyoung8j (Oct 7, 2013)

Well I guess never asked or anyone told me otherwise.. so I assumed to get tht much mg thts how u did it.. live and learn.. mayb I should or shouldn't run thtmuch either way tht was kinda a douche bag comment.. just trying to do things the right way u kno mayb not as seasoned as the rest of u but someday I will b..


----------



## jyoung8j (Oct 7, 2013)

Yea I understand it now df thanks for the explanation.. at time tht was highest I could get my hands on.. and seems to me higher mg stuff hurts lil more..


----------



## SFGiants (Oct 7, 2013)

jyoung8j said:


> Well I guess never asked or anyone told me otherwise.. so I assumed to get tht much mg thts how u did it.. live and learn.. mayb I should or shouldn't run thtmuch either way tht was kinda a douche bag comment.. just trying to do things the right way u kno mayb not as seasoned as the rest of u but someday I will b..



I'd rather give you a douche bag comment then watch you hurt yourself bro.

You need to know things before hand not get started then ask bro.

TC 300 is smooth as butter it should not hurt but Test E 300 may, Deca at 200mg is fine most don't make it higher although I have in the past it just wasn't worth it for me to continue to do so.


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 7, 2013)

jyoung8j said:


> Ok so how do u pin 1200mg and 800mg in 2 pins lol guess I just love needles..



Well, 3ml in each glute for the 1200mg

2ml in each thigh for 800mg

Once a week.. 4 needles, but still easy


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 7, 2013)

SFGiants said:


> I'd rather give you a douche bag comment then watch you hurt yourself bro.
> 
> You need to know things before hand not get started then ask bro.
> 
> TC 300 is smooth as butter it should not hurt but Test E 300 may, Deca at 200mg is fine most don't make it higher although I have in the past it just wasn't worth it for me to continue to do so.



Really? I can pin 1.7-2ml in delt with 300mg/ml deca with no PIP

Maybe I'm just lucky


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 7, 2013)

Yaya said:


> Im thinking of longer esters for now, but damn... I got so much fukking sus!!!



I know the feelin

Stickin back to test e after I use up this t600


----------



## SFGiants (Oct 7, 2013)

hulksmash said:


> Really? I can pin 1.7-2ml in delt with 300mg/ml deca with no PIP
> 
> Maybe I'm just lucky



Never said Deca would hurt just said it's no made at 300mg often.


----------



## SFGiants (Oct 7, 2013)

SFGiants said:


> I'd rather give you a douche bag comment then watch you hurt yourself bro.
> 
> You need to know things before hand not get started then ask bro.
> 
> TC 300 is smooth as butter it should not hurt but Test E 300 may, *Deca at 200mg is fine most don't make it higher although I have in the past it just wasn't worth it for me to continue to do so*.



I liked NPP better and is why it became not worth running Deca for me, I run neither anymore haven't in years.


----------



## Seeker (Oct 7, 2013)

If you want a nice even dispersal rate then you should pin based on the half life of the drug. If you're using test E then you should pin the test  e every 4 days and the deca every 7-8. If you have test c then every 8 days with the deca. 

That's how I like to do my pins. It's not a must but I like it. No matter what you do you should not go past the half life of the drug.


----------



## jyoung8j (Oct 7, 2013)

Ok sfg if thts ur concern I appreciate tht.. this amount of gear Im not currently running thts y I'm asking now.. life and learn..


----------



## halfwit (Oct 7, 2013)

I know I'm new here, but my take on dosing protocols is based on the amount of oil you're going to be injecting.  If you're pushing a lot of short esters, that's going to be a bit of oil and ED or EOD is likely going to be your best bet as you simply won't be able to push 6ml into one muscle unless you've seriously conditioned them to do so.  With longer esters, you can usually get away with M-W-F (for simplicity) and not have to push more than 3ml at a time, which most muscle groups can take no problem.  

Injecting once a week versus 2x is more of a sides consideration as you're going to see a bigger spike of hormones from a single inject per week, causing your negative feedback loop to try to create more estradiol/prolactin/progesterone to assume homeostasis.  You will see higher blood serum levels with a 1x/wk injection protocol, but you'll have to be on top of your AI/DA a bit more due to these spikes. 

This is of course assuming we're talking rather large doses, not the typical 500mg-750mg - which can be done E3.5D easy. 

My .02c


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 7, 2013)

halfwit said:


> I know I'm new here, but my take on dosing protocols is based on the amount of oil you're going to be injecting.  If you're pushing a lot of short esters, that's going to be a bit of oil and ED or EOD is likely going to be your best bet as you simply won't be able to push 6ml into one muscle unless you've seriously conditioned them to do so.  With longer esters, you can usually get away with M-W-F (for simplicity) and not have to push more than 3ml at a time, which most muscle groups can take no problem.
> 
> Injecting once a week versus 2x is more of a sides consideration as you're going to see a bigger spike of hormones from a single inject per week, causing your negative feedback loop to try to create more estradiol/prolactin/progesterone to assume homeostasis.  You will see higher blood serum levels with a 1x/wk injection protocol, but you'll have to be on top of your AI/DA a bit more due to these spikes.
> 
> ...



I still don't get the prevelance of "fear the spikes of hormone levels" type of thinking going on these days

Does anyone realize the body ONLY pulses hormone levels, from cortisol to testosterone to catecholamines to et al

There is no linear action to the body and homeostatis


Also, the release of estrogen/aromatization/DHT conversion is all genetic and not dependent on injection frequency


----------



## PillarofBalance (Oct 7, 2013)

halfwit said:


> I know I'm new here, but my take on dosing protocols is based on the amount of oil you're going to be injecting.  If you're pushing a lot of short esters, that's going to be a bit of oil and ED or EOD is likely going to be your best bet as you simply won't be able to push 6ml into one muscle unless you've seriously conditioned them to do so.  With longer esters, you can usually get away with M-W-F (for simplicity) and not have to push more than 3ml at a time, which most muscle groups can take no problem.
> 
> Injecting once a week versus 2x is more of a sides consideration as you're going to see a bigger spike of hormones from a single inject per week, causing your negative feedback loop to try to create more estradiol/prolactin/progesterone to assume homeostasis.  You will see higher blood serum levels with a 1x/wk injection protocol, but you'll have to be on top of your AI/DA a bit more due to these spikes.
> 
> ...



You inject shorter esters more frequently because they are shorter esters. Less oil volume from more frequent injections is just something of a benefit.


----------



## DocDePanda187123 (Oct 7, 2013)

hulksmash said:


> I still don't get the prevelance of "fear the spikes of hormone levels" type of thinking going on these days
> 
> Does anyone realize the body ONLY pulses hormone levels, from cortisol to testosterone to catecholamines to et al
> 
> ...



The variation between peaks and troughs in endogenous testosterone production is not the same as when cycling exogenously even in smaller cycles than this one. This is something TRT patients do all the time, switch from weekly or every 2wk injections to bi-weekly. Smaller spikes means less sides to deal with and more stable serum/therapeutic levels.


----------



## PillarofBalance (Oct 8, 2013)

hulksmash said:


> Also, the release of estrogen/aromatization/DHT conversion is all genetic and not dependent on injection frequency



I don't agree with this but I'm gonna have to work on a proper answer as to why... Prepare your angus... You gonna get repped


----------



## NbleSavage (Oct 8, 2013)

_*grabs popcorn*_


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 8, 2013)

Docd187123 said:


> The variation between peaks and troughs in endogenous testosterone production is not the same as when cycling exogenously even in smaller cycles than this one. This is something TRT patients do all the time, switch from weekly or every 2wk injections to bi-weekly. Smaller spikes means less sides to deal with and more stable serum/therapeutic levels.



Smaller spikes=/=less sides; stable serum levels

In fact, following your logic, the best method would be one injection per week, given that stable=linear hormone levels..why?

One injection per week=ONE spike of peak levels (24-48hrs post inject) followed by an exponential decay

2 or more injections per week=MULTIPLE spikes followed by MULTIPLE periods of decay

The latter does NOT give you better stability, given that stability=linear hormone level, which is assumed


Just sayin, there's a lot of placebo and bullshit out there

Not knockin anyone though


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 8, 2013)

PillarofBalance said:


> I don't agree with this but I'm gonna have to work on a proper answer as to why... Prepare your angus... You gonna get repped










http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=aromatase+testosterone+variation&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0,4


----------



## DocDePanda187123 (Oct 8, 2013)

hulksmash said:


> Smaller spikes=/=less sides; stable serum levels
> 
> In fact, following your logic, the best method would be one injection per week, given that stable=linear hormone levels..why?
> 
> ...



But the difference between trough and peak serum levels is much larger with less frequent injections than it is with more frequent injections. You get more spikes yes but the spikes are smaller and much more manageable than if injecting once every week or once every 10days etc. Yes you'll deal with different levels of decay depending on injection frequency but the trade off is serum levels have lower variance this way.


----------



## DocDePanda187123 (Oct 8, 2013)

hulksmash said:


> Smaller spikes=/=less sides; stable serum levels
> 
> In fact, following your logic, the best method would be one injection per week, given that stable=linear hormone levels..why?
> 
> ...



Not at all brother, I love a good debate and I have no problem admitting being wrong if evidence is given to prove me wrong. I don't think you're knocking me at all (if that was directed towards me) but encouraging the spread of knowledge. This is how knowledge is gathered and spread, talking both sides intelligently and without taking it personally


----------



## halfwit (Oct 8, 2013)

hulksmash said:


> I still don't get the prevelance of "fear the spikes of hormone levels" type of thinking going on these days
> 
> Does anyone realize the body ONLY pulses hormone levels, from cortisol to testosterone to catecholamines to et al
> 
> ...


Wait, so you're telling me that the negative feedback loop by which our bodies regulate our T:E ratio is purely genetic and has nothing to do with spikes (diurnal spikes are actually a sawtooth pattern) caused by an exogenous injection of a bioidentical hormone?  

I would love to see your source on this information as I've been on TRT for nearly half a decade and have seen first-hand the changes of going from a E7D to E3.5D protocol as well as the results from others.  No offense intended of course.  



PillarofBalance said:


> You inject shorter esters more frequently because they are shorter esters. Less oil volume from more frequent injections is just something of a benefit.



Actually, I was referring to the fact that most short estered gear is typically very low concentration per volume.  Ex:  Tren acetate is usually 100mg/mL while tren enanthate or tren hex are 200mg/mL.  So we're looking at a direct doubling of oil volume needed to reach the same values of hormone concentrations.  Sure, half-lives do matter - but when doing a gram of tren a week, I'd much rather inject 5mL than 10mL.    (Obviously not talking about folks new to the drug.)


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 8, 2013)

halfwit said:


> Wait, so you're telling me that the negative feedback loop by which our bodies regulate our T:E ratio is purely genetic and has nothing to do with spikes (diurnal spikes are actually a sawtooth pattern) caused by an exogenous injection of a bioidentical hormone?
> 
> I would love to see your source on this information as I've been on TRT for nearly half a decade and have seen first-hand the changes of going from a E7D to E3.5D protocol as well as the results from others.  No offense intended of course.



Here's one exmple showing that genetics, e.g. Familial inheritance, control t:e ratio; this one showing the genetic components of gynecomastia and T:E ratios:

*Familial gynecomastia with increased extraglandular aromatization of plasma carbon19-steroids.*
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC425530/

*This is the second documentation of gynecomastia that is associated with increased extraglandular aromatase activity, and the first time that the defect was found to be familial with a probable X-linked (or autosomal dominant, sex limited) mode of inheritance.*

Of course they need more studies, but I consider it common sense that genetics dictate hormone response, e.g. Olympia winners vs gym rats


----------



## SFGiants (Oct 8, 2013)

When I was in a relationships I gave her large injections very frequently!


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 8, 2013)

Good book for everyone to read:

*Steroid Hormone Receptors: Basic Principles and Measurement*

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en...fdBJny1GNpzllREhUFdefgYL8#v=onepage&q&f=false

I liked it


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 8, 2013)

SFGiants said:


> When I was in a relationships I gave her large injections very frequently!



LOL a good reminder I read too much/stay on neurobiology/endocrinology journals too much 

You know what's funny though? From all my studying/reading/etc, I've found:

The simplest things=the truest things

I guess Occams razor remains true even with hormones lol


----------



## halfwit (Oct 8, 2013)

hulksmash said:


> Here's one exmple showing that genetics, e.g. Familial inheritance, control t:e ratio; this one showing the genetic components of gynecomastia and T:E ratios:
> 
> *Familial gynecomastia with increased extraglandular aromatization of plasma carbon19-steroids.*
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC425530/
> ...



I completely agree with you in that genetic predispositions trump everything else, but I have to disagree with the statement that spikes in testosterone levels don't lead to a likewise spike in estradiol.  I do however have to agree that we all do see varying levels of the side effects from said estradiol levels.  I for example have seen E2 values in the 400's without anything to complain about besides some bloating (bunk AI), while I have several friends that will see the formation of lumps and the onset of benign prostatic hyperplasia at much lower values.  

Of course this doesn't even take into account the role of excess adipose tissue or any other possible extraneous variables that could cause such a rapid increase.  My Google-Fu really sucks tonight as I can't find the pubmed article I usually cite when it comes to frequency vs. estradiol output via aromatase action, so I'll have to quote this as a second best:



			
				pubmed said:
			
		

> The ideal testosterone replacement agent should:
> 
> Mimic diurnal patterns of adenogenous hormone secretion.
> Produce physiologic levels of not only testosterone but also its metabolites: dihydrotestosterone (DHT) and estradiol (E2).


Source

I wish I had better information for you as I hate coming off all "bro-sciency", but once I find the better study (if Dre doesn't beat me to it) - I'll be sure to link it for the community.  

My .02c


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 8, 2013)

halfwit said:


> I completely agree with you in that genetic predispositions trump everything else, but I have to disagree with the statement that spikes in testosterone levels don't lead to a likewise spike in estradiol.  I do however have to agree that we all do see varying levels of the side effects from said estradiol levels.  I for example have seen E2 values in the 400's without anything to complain about besides some bloating (bunk AI), while I have several friends that will see the formation of lumps and the onset of benign prostatic hyperplasia at much lower values.
> 
> Of course this doesn't even take into account the role of excess adipose tissue or any other possible extraneous variables that could cause such a rapid increase.  My Google-Fu really sucks tonight as I can't find the pubmed article I usually cite when it comes to frequency vs. estradiol output via aromatase action, so I'll have to quote this as a second best:
> 
> ...



I'll try to find the shit myself then to help; pride begets a downfall!

In fact man, I love this kind of discussion 

Me and you would be great drinking buddies LOL


----------



## halfwit (Oct 8, 2013)

hulksmash said:


> I'll try to find the shit myself then to help; pride begets a downfall!
> 
> In fact man, I love this kind of discussion
> 
> Me and you would be great drinking buddies LOL


Yeah, I'm always for a friendly debate.   _Especially_ if I'm proven wrong!


----------



## jyoung8j (Oct 8, 2013)

Well glad I asked this question...lol good reading..


----------



## DocDePanda187123 (Oct 8, 2013)

jyoung8j said:


> Well glad I asked this question...lol good reading..



Debate spurs knowledge brother. I know Half from Ology and he's one smart brother, Hulk also seems to know a great deal as well!


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 8, 2013)

halfwit said:


> I completely agree with you in that genetic predispositions trump everything else, but I have to disagree with the statement that spikes in testosterone levels don't lead to a likewise spike in estradiol.



Forgot to add; what really sucks if that I don't see enough research to support either one of opinions on test spike=,=/=estrogen spike

We may end up in a continual state of disagreement LOL



> I do however have to agree that we all do see varying levels of the side effects from said estradiol levels.  I for example have seen E2 values in the 400's without anything to complain about besides some bloating (bunk AI), while I have several friends that will see the formation of lumps and the onset of benign prostatic hyperplasia at much lower values.



Focus on DHT and its role in BHP rather than estrogen, you'll enjoy the research

Id be more worried about the genetic disposition of DHT aromatization rather than estro (for prostate,hair, etc sides anyway)

Glad to have ya as a member


----------



## halfwit (Oct 8, 2013)

hulksmash said:


> Forgot to add; what really sucks if that I don't see enough research to support either one of opinions on test spike=,=/=estrogen spike
> 
> We may end up in a continual state of disagreement LOL


It's all good, it would be boring if we didn't have something to argue about.  



hulksmash said:


> Focus on DHT and its role in BHP rather than estrogen, you'll enjoy the research
> 
> Id be more worried about the genetic disposition of DHT aromatization rather than estro (for prostate,hair, etc sides anyway)
> 
> Glad to have ya as a member


Ya know, I've been intrigued with how they keep flip-flopping back and forth on DHT vs Estradiol vs Testosterone when it comes to BPH and prostate cancer itself.  It's almost as if they're afraid to admit that testosterone isn't the boogeyman that the campaigns of the 80's and 90's wanted us to believe it to be.  

I agree though, DHT can be a nightmare for most fellas.  I'm (knock on wood) one of the lucky ones in that I haven't had any issues yet (well that cialis couldn't remedy) with DHT conversion.  I do worry about the constant push towards gels/creams/patches though as transdermals appear to have a greater incidence of DHT conversion; but that's another thread altogether.   

Thanks man, I appreciate it.  There definitely appear to be some pretty informed folks here, it's a nice break from the usual stuff I get at 'ology.


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 8, 2013)

halfwit said:


> It's all good, it would be boring if we didn't have something to argue about.
> 
> 
> Ya know, I've been intrigued with how they keep flip-flopping back and forth on DHT vs Estradiol vs Testosterone when it comes to BPH and prostate cancer itself.  It's almost as if they're afraid to admit that testosterone isn't the boogeyman that the campaigns of the 80's and 90's wanted us to believe it to be.
> ...



That's how I feel, too-they wanna keep Testosterone's awful image

I'm pretty lucky too when it comes to DHT, sort of..

27 and just now able to grow somewhat of a goatee, and still no body hair except in a few places...I add muscle and strength+keep fat down easily tho

I like having ****ed up/inert DHT conversion/aromatization LOL prolly why I don't get any sides from gear


----------



## NbleSavage (Oct 9, 2013)

This thread took a turn for the scientific. I approve, good reading here Lads.


----------



## hulksmash (Oct 9, 2013)

NbleSavage said:


> This thread took a turn for the scientific. I approve, good reading here Lads.



You brothers just had to let another nerd join here, now look what happened


----------



## NbleSavage (Oct 9, 2013)

hulksmash said:


> You brothers just had to let another nerd join here, now look what happened



PLEASE...the preferred nomenclature is "Geek"...


----------



## halfwit (Oct 9, 2013)

hulksmash said:


> That's how I feel, too-they wanna keep Testosterone's awful image
> 
> I'm pretty lucky too when it comes to DHT, sort of..
> 
> ...


I grow a bit of body hair, but I'm pretty much the same when it comes to sides.  Then again, once you hit your mid 30's the shit just comes out of EVERYWHERE.  :32 (6):


hulksmash said:


> You brothers just had to let another nerd join here, now look what happened


Wait, aren't all juiceheads this way and we play dumb for Planet Fitness commercials?  



NbleSavage said:


> PLEASE...the preferred nomenclature is "Geek"...


----------



## ymenic (Oct 13, 2013)

I personally like to pin EOD. It seems to help keep blood levels stable. I get almost no acne going eod


----------

