T Nation

500-600mg Test Once a Week?

Im using test-e and was wondering rather then do the 250 every 3 days if i just did the 500-600mg in one day and then waited a week next hit? Thoughts?

Bigger spikes and hormonal swings. Some are fine, some feel “off”. Most won’t notice a difference.

Anything i pin, i pin EOD just because of conveniece and not to get messed up in my calendar… wouldnt suggest anything less than e3d

How big a syringe are you will to stab into once a week? Have you picked a spot that can take that much juice?

Im using 27 gauge is it fine? Deltoids

I don’t recommend this much fluid in the delts. Assuming your Test is 200mg/mL, you’re talking three mL. Do that deep in the glutes, man. 1 1/2” needle length. It’s also better absorbed there. Graphs from studies show a larger area-under-curve (AUC) when AAS injected in glutes vice delts.

And as for your question of whether to pin it once a week or twice…do you have recent labs with your SHBG?

If high, you could get away with once. If low, you’ll want to go with 2+ times a week.

As blshaw said above, you may not notice a major difference in how you feel.

But…your results COULD/MIGHT be better with more frequent dosing if you have low SHBG.

Interesting, do you happen to have this available? I don’t know what it is, but glutes just scare me more than delts. I have pinned subQ stomach, delts and quads, but the glutes scare me too much. Maybe it is the giant needle?

Worst was quads. I don’t think I’ll try that again. Three injections, and the third one resulted in almost not being able to sleep due to the PIP (first two were painless).

I had a lot of trouble remembering EoD injections. Was always like did I take one yesterday, or was that two days ago. I guess I could add it to my calendar.

I just use spreadsheets to track my stuff. I could pin at pretty much any frequency I wanted doing this, but I still choose ED or EOD for the most part. Once I start running longer esters I’ll probably go to E3D, but I don’t think I really care to go much past that.

I also use my spreadsheets to track weight and BP

My next blast is going to be a lot of oil. I am thinking of running DHB at 100 mg/mL. Was thinking ED shots of 50 mg/day, Test E 100 mg/day. It is just so much pinning and oil. I am considering doing EOD, but would have to switch from slin pins. Maybe for the blast, I’ll try glutes and do a 100 DHB, and 200 Test E EoD?

Here’s one for deca. Look at the difference between glute and delt!

There are others on the web for Test Cyp vs. enth, etc, as well.

Area under the curve looks to be at least 50% more. Now I’ll say I am a bit skeptical on this data. Was this the same individual? For something like this I need to look at the method to understand exactly what results I am looking at.

Additionally, why would 4 mL of the DECA in the glute have less area under the curve than 1 mL also in the glute? Assuming they are using the same concentration here?

It’s a little hard to glean what is going on here. I see the units of measure for nand are nM? nanometers? so is this the rate at which the drug disperses through the tissue? I am not sure this is so much about rate of absorption as it is rate of dispersion. Or are they considered synonymous for this?

The 4mL shot is irrelevant. It was NPP, not deca.

There were two 4 mL shots. One NPP, and the circle data points were Deca.


Me too, buddy. These were mean concentrations across several individuals. And I know you know about huge variations between individuals.

Not to be taken as gospel, was just throwing some interesting stuff.

Back when I saw this, I poked around some more and found similar graphs for other substances, too. It has the ring of truth, but I’m no biochemist.

1 Like

I stand corrected. Thank you for fact checking me! I’ll look around for more graphs and see if I can find something more credible. It is fishy that 1mL had a larger AUC then 4mL!

1 Like

I believe the data plotted are serum concentrations at various time intervals after injection. So, higher blood concentrations, for greater periods of time, in glutes vice delts.

@mnben87 makes a great point, the fact that 4mL deca has a lower AUC than 1mL deca makes the whole graph suspect :thinking:

I’ve been tricked by enough graphs over the years to the point I really try to understand them (most of the time).

Interesting fact on the ACT test (similar to the SAT), is that the science portion has hardly anything to do with science, and almost all to do with interpreting data and graphs. Turns out many people draw incorrect conclusions from graphs, and are terrible at coming to the right conclusion from data.

It gets even more difficult when the graph has to do with a current hot topic. Two people on different sides of an issue (say global warming) can look at the same graph and come to opposite conclusions that support their initial bias. I hear that if someone comes to a graph with a bias contradictory to the graph’s conclusion, that more often than not, they think the graph confirms their bias. Some scary stuff there! Dunning Krueger really scares the shit out of me too.

:rofl:Man I love how a simple question on these forums turns into something much bigger.:rofl:

GOOD STUFF. While I look for the Testosterone graphs(there are A LOT to search through), here’s the abstract to the study the above graph was taken from:

They concluded:

“Thus, the bioavailability and physiological effects of a nandrolone ester in an oil vehicle are greatest when the ester is injected in a small (1 ml vs. 4 ml) volume and into the gluteal vs. deltoid muscle”.

OP, go glutes man! 300mgs in one cheek Monday, 300 mgs in one cheek Thursday.

1 Like

So the 4 mL and 1 mL both had the same total amount of nandrolone. Makes a bit more sense. N=5 for each sample isn’t great. We see so much variation from person to person in regards to dose response. Two guys on the same dose and same frequency can pull labs and have one guy double the TT of the other guy.

I would be fairly confident if N=15 for each group, but N=5 seems problematic. It seems plausible to get a few under responders in one group and over responders in the other group, and you would get results like this.