A comprehensive look at modern AAS cycling.

[panerai]

Diver, you're bad...

 

[Andy13]

i was a tad off on the molecular weight of testoerone.. It's 288.. And the molecular weight of T-enanthate is 400. So T-enanthate is 72% testosterone.. So, when 250mg of t-enanthate is injected, you are getting 180mg of test. So you've got the molecular weight calculation down.

I was lazy and on some of these graphs I didn't take molecular weight into consideration.. It's fine when we're dealing with graphs of the same ester but can make a difference when you graph more than one ester at a time... For instance, when I did the sustanon graphs and took the molecular weight into consideration, the graph was very indicative of a graph of a single ester testosterone with a half life of between 4-6 days. I give the range of 4-6 days since there seems to be some debate on the acutal half lives of the esters.. But sustanon can deffinetly be regarded as a single ester testosterone with a half life of 4-6 days.

Mathematically, the esters in sustanon cannot be grouped together.. However once graphed, it does look very much like a single ester testosterone..



"So, I calculate that the initial dosage of test from a 250mg shot of enanthate is 179mg. However, this is more than an order of magnitude off from the graphs that are posted. Am I doing this wrong? Please correct me, if I am...

-Diver"

Sorry, let me clarify. When I did the graphs, I used the expontial function and then subtracted it from the next day. That way the graph reads mg-released/day. If you only graphed the exponential function, you would have the amount of esterified, inactive test in your system.. which WOULD be an order of a magnitude off.

So, sorry.. about that little detail..

Aside, I forgot to add.. I think a step funtion would work great with this.. But the results will be the same.. It would save some time on a graphics calculator but not really on the almighty Excel!!

Andy

 

[diverho]

Omnadren Frontload

Andy13, Zyg, anyone...

Have you gotten a chance to read this post? It's from a person that frontloaded omnadren, but didn't see any results early on:

http://boards.elitefitness.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=64626

Any thoughts on this?

btw, Andy, thanks for the clarification in your last post...

-Diver

 

[MR. BMJ]

Whether or not these theories/equations are right, it is still fairly interesting. No sense on having ANDY do all this typing only to have it slip into the archives so damn fast. So i'm giving it a big BUMP!

BMJ

 

[Zyglamail]

Have you gotten a chance to read this post? It's from a person that frontloaded omnadren, but didn't see any results early on:

Actually, yes I have read it. I am frontloading my current cycle 1220mg enth and EQ for first 2 and 600mg each after that. I noticed the effects by the end of week 2.

Now, for the guy who used the omna, I would have to say he likely responds a bit slower than most to begin with and people who respond slow normally will also respond slower to a frontload. For the most part, that is the only negative post I have seen from those that have frontloaded....and really his post was not all that begative, he just did not get the response he felt he would have.

 

[Audio8]

Just bumping this classic thread for the new guys...

 

[Andy13]

Good man

 

[Maxx Out]

Alota good info in this thread, good work guys!

Maxx >>>>>

 

[argent]

Great post as always andy?

Just out of curiosity, what would prevent someone from attaching a shorter ester to the Boldenone molecule? That would make our lifes less complicated in those last 4 weeks of a cycle.

 

[calvinIII]

Great post, this ones saved on the hard drive.