Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

do legal steriods work?

bicepts101

bicepts101

New member
give me a little insite on what everybody thinks of legal steriods. You guys think someone could make any significant gains with it?
 
bicepts101 said:
give me a little insite on what everybody thinks of legal steriods. You guys think someone could make any significant gains with it?
Click to expand...

Move to the UK.......its all legal over here.
 
There is only one legal steroid in the US, 1-testosterone. I have never tried it myself since it is more expensive than other (illegal) AS but I think it should work at least as well as test.
 
anything OTC in the U.S. is going to no where near be as effective as illegal AS - if at all effective. just use creatine bro. and i don't think so Spidey
 
DaddyX said:
anything OTC in the U.S. is going to no where near be as effective as illegal AS - if at all effective. just use creatine bro. and i don't think so Spidey
Click to expand...
What, you think because it's illegal it must be more effective? 1-Testosterone is a REAL anabolic steroid, not a prohormone. It just has it's double bond in a different place (1 position in 1-test vs. the 4 position in normal test). Why would you think it will bind AR sites any less effectively than 4-test (normal test)? I can give you several examples of commonly accepted AS that have a 1-double bond including d-bol and eq. Give some rational why you think 1-test is less effective (or noneffective). It can not aromatize so no estrogen problems and it can not be converted to DHT so it isn't overly androgenic. Seems to me it would be a pretty good choice if you were willing to shell out the cash.
 
Spidey - your an idiot if you think it works as well as steroids bro...........is that rational enough ?
 
Finally, an argument where DaddyX and myself are on the same side.

You've been reading too much supplement company propaganda Spidey.
 
DaddyX said:
Spidey - your an idiot if you think it works as well as steroids bro...........is that rational enough ?
Click to expand...
Actually, that isn't an argument at all, rational or otherwise. Could it be you don't actually have one? I said I never tried 1 test therefore I don't have an informed opinion as to its effectiveness. However, just looking at the structure from a chemist's point of view I don't see a huge difference between 4-test and 1-test; just a misplaced double bond. So again (maybe without the childish namecalling this time), give me a scientifically plausible reason why 1-test should not bind as well to the receptors as 4-test and have comparable anabolic activity. Alternatively, give me a personal experience comparing 4-test and 1-test; it's a bit subjective but at least it's something.

Nelson- the same goes for you. Give me a plausible reason not some bullshit about listening to supp. companies. I am not some wide-eyed kid easily swayed by propaganda. In fact, I don't get any infomation from supp companies. All the information I have concerning suppliments, I got from this board from people who actually supplied supporting scientific literature. My claim that 1-test doesn't aromatize or get converted to DHT stems from my understanding of the biochemistry involved in those transformations. 1-test simply doesn't have the necessary chemical features to undergo those transformations. I have never read about 1-test from any supp company and I have never bought or used it. I simply maintain that it IS a steroid and not a prohormone (like 1-AD for example). 1-Test isn't converted to anything else in the body; it remains unchanged as 1-test. That is the definition of a drug vs. a prodrug. A prodrug must be enzymatically converted to the real drug inside the body.

I know Sigmund Roid has experimented with esters of 1-test. He might be able to at least give a personal comparison.
 
Spidey, here I am!

Yes, I have injected 1-test ester for 2 weeks (750 mg/week) and gained 7 pounds of muscle without water retention. I had to stop, because the injections were too painful. The 1-test seems to be very irritating for the muscle. Conclusion: it works!

Furthermore, in the Netherlands all prohormones are illegal, so according to some people on this thread this means that prohormones DO work in the Netherlands.

The only reason that 1-test is the only steroid that is legal in the US, is that it circumvents your laws about steroids. Now there is even formestan in some supplements, which is a very good suicial aromatase inhibitor (when injected), and has saved numerous women with breast cancer. So it works very well. Soon your laws will be tightened, and then ALL molecules with 4 rings become illegal.

ALA is legal, so it does not work right?
 
Thanks Sigmund. I feel validated now :D . Some people just can't get it through their heads that 1-test is not a prohormone. It's funny kinda (in a sad kind of way).

Actually, I think a large part of the reason that prohormones like 1-AD, 4-AD, and others get a bad reputation is the method of administration. I wonder how well test suspension would work if you ate it? Bioavailability really sucks for the oral route. Most of it ends up getting degraded. I bet if you made an injectable from prohormones it would work a lot better; purely hypothetical on my part though.

So, how would you rate 1-test enanthate vs. 4-test enanthate? Obviously you are going to get more water retention with the 4-test due to aromatization but how about anabolism?
 
Hi Spidey,

I felt that 1-test enanthate was comparable to primo, which itself is quite powerful when used in the right dosages (like 500+ mg/week). Not strange, because primo is the 1-alfa methylated version of 1-test. The methyl group only causes it to be somewhat more orally available, but not much else.
 
Assuming 1-test works, wouldn't it also affect the HPTA and impair endogenous testosterone?
If so, I see no reason to take pro-steroids instead of regular steroids (aside from legal issues, but they are nonexistent to many of us outside the US).
In other words, doesn't it have to have the same side effects for it to work?
 
People confuse a lot of scientific banter that goes along with the definition of these products as some sort of validation that they have merit. They don't. They're essentially crappy short acting drugs which are about a tenth as effective as real steroids, but with twice the side effects.

Sure, they're more effective if injected. Even the old prohormones are more effective if injected. But they aren't meant to be injected so there are sterility issues. So now you're taking a weaker drug, with more side effects and risking infection -- for what? To spend hudreds of dollars on something that might give a little temporary muscle? (You would need a few bottles to feel anything).

If you think the legality is worth it, then go for it. But I think it's insane. Get some real gear or let it go.
 
hey nelson i agree i think i will take you up on that

so there is really more side effect to them.

Real gear here i come!!!!!!!!!!!
 
LOL, 1-TEST IS NOT A PRO-STEROID! Damn people, how many times does it need to be said? Pro-drugs (by definition) need to be converted in the body to the active drug. 1-Test is not converted to anything. It remains 1-test; therefore, it is not a prodrug. Why does everyone seem to think that one testosterone analog is "better" than another? AS like D-BOL are much more different in structure from test than 1-test is yet everyone accepts that it is an effective AS.

Actually, test esters are (by definition) pro-steroids. They need to have the ester cleaved inside the body to release test.
 
Nelson Montana said:
People confuse a lot of scientific banter that goes along with the definition of these products as some sort of validation that they have merit. They don't. They're essentially crappy short acting drugs which are about a tenth as effective as real steroids, but with twice the side effects.

Sure, they're more effective if injected. Even the old prohormones are more effective if injected. But they aren't meant to be injected so there are sterility issues. So now you're taking a weaker drug, with more side effects and risking infection -- for what? To spend hudreds of dollars on something that might give a little temporary muscle? (You would need a few bottles to feel anything).

If you think the legality is worth it, then go for it. But I think it's insane. Get some real gear or let it go.
Click to expand...
OK, I didn't have time before to address this post. People were waiting on me to go to lunch. I have no interest in 1-test per se. I have never (and probably never will) taken it so this whole discussion is purely academic to me. However, I think their are some real inaccuracies and bias in Nelson's post

Nelson Montana said:
People confuse a lot of scientific banter that goes along with the definition of these products as some sort of validation that they have merit. They don't. They're essentially crappy short acting drugs which are about a tenth as effective as real steroids, but with twice the side effects.
Click to expand...
Nelson, just because you don't understand the science doesn't mean it is worthless. On what basis do you say that 1-test is a crappy short acting drug with a tenth the effectiveness and twice the sides of "real" steroids? How is 1-test not a "real" steroid in your opinion? Have you actually taken 1-test? Better yet, have you injected it like you would test suspension so that you have a valid comparison? I would argue that it will have fewer sides since it can't aromatize to estradiol like 4-test (normal test) and it can't form DHT either so less androgenic sides (hairloss) as well. Sigmund Roid gained 7 lbs of water free weight with 1-test enanthate in two weeks. How is that less effective than regular test enantate? Do you think he would have gained water free weight with test enanthate? I don't think so; not without the use of anti-e's to cut down on estrogen production. That being said, 1-test will probably have the same effect on the HPTA as 4-test. The only AS I am aware of that perhaps won't suppress natural test production is proviron.

Nelson Montana said:
Sure, they're more effective if injected. Even the old prohormones are more effective if injected. But they aren't meant to be injected so there are sterility issues. So now you're taking a weaker drug, with more side effects and risking infection -- for what? To spend hudreds of dollars on something that might give a little temporary muscle? (You would need a few bottles to feel anything).
Click to expand...
They aren't meant to be injected so there are sterility issues? The answer to that is to buy 1-test powder and make your own solutions that are sterile filtered into a sterile vial. Presto! Sterile solution.

As for the whole "weaker drug with more sides" thing, you have given absolutely no supporting evidence of any kind for that assertion (although I have repeatedly asked for such evidence). Unless you have tried it, you don't even have an informed opinion.
"You would need a few bottles to feel anything". How do you know? Please, if you have a rational explanation, I am all ears.

The running theme in your post seems to imply:

a) 1-test is a prohormone.
Sorry, you are just flat out wrong on this one.

b) Since it is a prohormone, it isn't nearly as effective and is actually more dangerous than "real" steroids.
Just how are prohormones more dangerous? They don't suppress the HPTA any more than "real" steroids. Prohormones like 4-AD and 1,4-ADD (but not 1-AD) can aromatize to estrogens but I don't know that it is any worse than aromatizable steroids like testosterone or d-bol. Prohormones (not being 17-aa) are certainly not as liver toxic as oral AS like d-bol, anadrol, or winstrol.

There are a number of reasons why prohormones in general are not as effective so I would agree with you that PH like 1-AD, 4-AD, and others are not going to give you the same results as the steroids that they are precursers to (4-AD->test, 1-AD->1-test, etc.) That being said, I disagree that they will have more sides or are more dangerous.

No one here has given any evidence of any kind to counter my original post on this thread in which I claimed that 1-test should be simularly effective as normal 4-test. Name calling and condescension aside, no one has even offered anedotal evidence to the contrary. As a matter of fact, the only ancedotal evidence in this entire thread is that of Sigmund roid who has injected 1-test enanthate and normal test enanthate and claimed the 1-test enanthate worked simular to primo.
 
Spidey - stop your jibberish. you should have posted this on the supplement board. Nelson is correct with everything he has said. i have came to the conclusion you are still an idiot. were you the one who was crying about bad karma ?.........LOL,that was funny
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
using hgh for more lean gains?
Replies
9
Views
587
2Thick
2Thick
A
trenbolone for 8 weeks first time
Replies
9
Views
572
ceo
ceo
R
best tren dose for strength ?
Replies
11
Views
921
Sergen
S
Z
trenbolone 200mgs a week enough?
Replies
12
Views
977
Arabian
Arabian
U
Best way to use GHRP-2. Lean gains
Replies
5
Views
336
BodyMonster34
BodyMonster34
Top Bottom