Oral based Transdermals and Injects

[NegroPops]

I have been doing a lot of thinking about the idea and concept of these, even plan on using transdermal superdrol. But, are these even possible? You can correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the chemical structure of these compounds designed specifically to make them orally available? So to change them to make them capable of being absorbed by our muscles, instead of orally, wouldn't they have to change the molecular structure of the drug? I am pretty sure the structure of a drug and how it is designed to get into our body matters greatly, or else why can't we just drink oil based injects to get the same effect? So changing the molecular structure of the drug would actually change the drug completely, making it not the same. So for example.. oral methandienone and methandienone inject would have 2 different chemical structures, making them 2 completely different drugs.

An example of this would the the comparison between methandienone and boldenone. I am not a chemist and don't know a great deal of the exact science behind this.. but boldenone was created as an attempt to be an injectable version of methandienone. They had to change the molecular structure to make this possible, and the end result was 2 compounds that really are not similar at all.

So I ask again.. how exactly is this possible?

 

[CaliRobK]

In for this as I also have plans to use transdermal SD. I have not done any research to back up this statement, but I have read somewhere that you can drink injectable d-Bol.

 

[El Hefe]

Yes, it's possible. But the efficiency of each different compound would vary greatly.

I'm no expert. But I'm also studying transdermals and trying to increase my knowledge of them.

There's a lot I don't know. But here are a few things that I do know based upon other studies and my current line of work.

- Our skin wasn't designed to absorb chemicals, medicine, etc. Therefore, the skin/body's design is to prevent foreign absorption of such things. For example: I've gotten all sorts of nasty chemicals on my arms and hands, and the skin does an amazing job at safeguarding.

- the carrier/surfactant/transporting agent, etc. makes all the difference regarding efficiency of absorption. If a company doesn't know what there doing or putting into a product, or maybe trying to cut corners - absorption rates with 2 identical active ingredients could vary 30-90% in effective absorption because of the carrier.

- The carrier is often what makes the product and sometimes the company. Have you ever noticed that some (not all) name brand products, medicines, etc. may work better than the generic. Well, that's because all of the research and development goes into the carrier - which they can make proprietary (private). You see, the active ingredients are 'off patent' so that part is sourced easily on the open market. But carriers don't have to be put on the label and can usually be kept private, so that's where they invest.

- Sometimes the most efficient carriers, can also cause the most damage. For example: Surfactants are used in virtually every agriculture application (500+ mil). Sometimes the ones that promote/achieve the best absorption into the plant, also do the most damage to the leaf, its pores, and its waxy surface. One of these chemicals is d'limonene. Which provides great absorption but can also tear the shit up at certain rates. I recently noticed that D'limonene is now used in some transdermals.

- Unfortunately, these companies probably aren't going to send a rep on to EF to explain their carriers or surfactants. Because if it were any good, they'd want to keep the details private.

- Molecular weight and structure play a huge role in the efficiency (and possibility) of absorption. There are some things that simply won't absorb throughout the pores. I would really like some of the more knowledgable vets to chime in here. I don't know enough about the molecular weight and structure of a lot of AAS to know which ones will be the most effective.

But, I'll slowly figure it out.

 

[digit0x]

Yes, it's possible. But the efficiency of each different compound would vary greatly.

I'm no expert. But I'm also studying transdermals and trying to increase my knowledge of them.

There's a lot I don't know. But here are a few things that I do know based upon other studies and my current line of work.

- Our skin wasn't designed to absorb chemicals, medicine, etc. Therefore, the skin/body's design is to prevent foreign absorption of such things. For example: I've gotten all sorts of nasty chemicals on my arms and hands, and the skin does an amazing job at safeguarding.

- the carrier/surfactant/transporting agent, etc. makes all the difference regarding efficiency of absorption. If a company doesn't know what there doing or putting into a product, or maybe trying to cut corners - absorption rates with 2 identical active ingredients could vary 30-90% in effective absorption because of the carrier.

- The carrier is often what makes the product and sometimes the company. Have you ever noticed that some (not all) name brand products, medicines, etc. may work better than the generic. Well, that's because all of the research and development goes into the carrier - which they can make proprietary (private). You see, the active ingredients are 'off patent' so that part is sourced easily on the open market. But carriers don't have to be put on the label and can usually be kept private, so that's where they invest.

- Sometimes the most efficient carriers, can also cause the most damage. For example: Surfactants are used in virtually every agriculture application (500+ mil). Sometimes the ones that promote/achieve the best absorption into the plant, also do the most damage to the leaf, its pores, and its waxy surface. One of these chemicals is d'limonene. Which provides great absorption but can also tear the shit up at certain rates. I recently noticed that D'limonene is now used in some transdermals.

- Unfortunately, these companies probably aren't going to send a rep on to EF to explain their carriers or surfactants. Because if it were any good, they'd want to keep the details private.

- Molecular weight and structure play a huge role in the efficiency (and possibility) of absorption. There are some things that simply won't absorb throughout the pores. I would really like some of the more knowledgable vets to chime in here. I don't know enough about the molecular weight and structure of a lot of AAS to know which ones will be the most effective.

But, I'll slowly figure it out.

I tried asking this question earlier bu no one could really hit it. Also, there is a certain molecular weight limit to the transdermals.

 

[Cipp21]

Hope tranny superdrol works out. Imagine the gains in an 8 week cycle... You'd have to start growing extra limbs to put it all on

 

[Tux]

Pretty much any base hormone and pretty much all orals can be done transdermal with DMSO. Test base, tren base, eq base, var, dbol, winny, masteron base... as long as you can get the base hormone without that long ester, it will be small enough to be transmitted via DMSO. For any long esters though, stick to injection.

 

[RickRock13]

Oral AAS will work transdermals, with the main inference being bioavailability and absorption. Absorption rates of transdermal AAS is debatable and speculative, but I did have very good results with the transdermals I have used (winstrol and Tren)

 

[ceo]

Why would anyone want to rub that stuff all over themselves? For one thing, I just don't like the way it feels. Even after it dries it feels weird to me. Makes me feel like I need to wash it off. I'd also never use it because I have a wife and kids. I wouldn't want to transfer any possible anabolics that may (or may not) be in that stuff to them. Plus injectables are far superior as far as absorption goes, and cheaper (and you don't have to smear them all over your body and worry about transferring it to your woman. Unless you like your women to have beards and deep voices??

 

[digit0x]

Inject is certainly superior in many ways, but there are some instances where I think transdermals really shine. I like what I've seen so far with the transdermals.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EliteFitness

 

[ceo]

how'd you like those blood tests a couple bros posted a while back?

 

[hurricane]

Why would anyone want to rub that stuff all over themselves? For one thing, I just don't like the way it feels. Even after it dries it feels weird to me. Makes me feel like I need to wash it off. I'd also never use it because I have a wife and kids. I wouldn't want to transfer any possible anabolics that may (or may not) be in that stuff to them. Plus injectables are far superior as far as absorption goes, and cheaper (and you don't have to smear them all over your body and worry about transferring it to your woman. Unless you like your women to have beards and deep voices??

couldnt agree more. transdermals are best used for light doses such trt doses or maybe a woman cycle.The obsorption rate you recieve off them will never equal an big boy inject cycle.Anyone tells you other wise is selling you a dream.Am i saying you wont get anything? no im not saying that either but they pale so much to injects for a true cycle, i see no reason for use, unless its the 2 other reason i have listed above.all the other reason ceo named just add onto it.