To those that use tren acetate, do you make your own or get it from an underground lab?
Since there is no pharm grade available anymore the Tren A you buy must therefore be from an UGL. Do you trust the UGL or do you trust yourself to make it?
I am leaning toward the make your own option. At least with this you could control the BA content, have some idea of the sterility, and it is also quite a bit cheaper.
I found this thread that looked like a very promising method:
Actually I now have an easier way. It probably requires, though, buying either a magnetic stir plate and magnetic stir bar (I have no suggestions: these are laboratory items) or a sonicator, for example one used for jewelry cleaning or gun cleaning.
It is as simple as adding the Finaplix pellets to a suitably large vial, filling with volume with Wesson oil for planned concentration of 50 mg/mL, and either stirring or sonicating till there are no remaining pellets.
Let settle, which in this case takes a day or less to be ready to filter at least a good part of it, and filter.
The beauty part is that when done this way there is very little tendency for the filter to clog, and filtration is much easier.
BA can be added, if desired, post-filtration.
I wouldnt buy fina kits personally - i would, and have made my own and would choose that option personally.
I think that there is nothing wrong with buying UGL gear if you know it works etc… but it is true, there is a lot of AAS mixtures (test/deca) sold as tren. The reason is simple, tren powder is approximately ~8x more expensive than test and deca powder.
I would make my own if i had a reliable powder supplier - but not all do. For one it is hard to get one in the first place, and for two you need to trust them as orders are not likely to be for 10g at a time, and they also may sell different blends of common, cheaper powders as more expensive exotic drugs (Tren, Primo and Var spring immediately to mind)
No PM’s.
Brook
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Actually I now have an easier way. It probably requires, though, buying either a magnetic stir plate and magnetic stir bar (I have no suggestions: these are laboratory items) or a sonicator, for example one used for jewelry cleaning or gun cleaning.
It is as simple as adding the Finaplix pellets to a suitably large vial, filling with volume with Wesson oil for planned concentration of 50 mg/mL, and either stirring or sonicating till there are no remaining pellets.
Let settle, which in this case takes a day or less to be ready to filter at least a good part of it, and filter.
The beauty part is that when done this way there is very little tendency for the filter to clog, and filtration is much easier.
BA can be added, if desired, post-filtration.
[/quote]
That is wild Bill…Can yo upotentially up the mg/ml by letting the pellets sit with a BA/BB mixture during the stiring…
[quote] Brook wrote:
I wouldnt buy fina kits personally - i would, and have made my own and would choose that option personally.
I think that there is nothing wrong with buying UGL gear if you know it works etc… but it is true, there is a lot of AAS mixtures (test/deca) sold as tren. The reason is simple, tren powder is approximately ~8x more expensive than test and deca powder.
I would make my own if i had a reliable powder supplier - but not all do. For one it is hard to get one in the first place, and for two you need to trust them as orders are not likely to be for 10g at a time, and they also may sell different blends of common, cheaper powders as more expensive exotic drugs (Tren, Primo and Var spring immediately to mind)
No PM’s.
Brook[/quote]
I agree with brook your powder source should be selling a wide variety of options. The ones I have seen urrently have tren at about 3X the cost of test-e…
It turns out that whatever clogs the filters goes into the oil much, much moreso in the presence of BA or BB than in the absence of them.
I know that many just like high concentrations, no matter what the thing is.
But really if using 50 mg/day, one mL per day is not that bad (to say the least) and what would be the benefit, if that is your intended dosage, of instead injecting only 2/3 mL if having a 75 mg/mL preparation?
True, if your intended dosage is 75 mg/mL it’s more convenient to do one mL of that once per day than one mL of 50 mg/mL every day but moving the injection up 8 hours every time (the exact time is not important, being off a few hours is fine, all that matters is maintaining the trend on average) but it’s not such a big deal.
Or if preferring 100 mg/day, again, why would 1 1/3 mL be easier than 2 mL?
Anyway, a nice benefit of the 50 mg/mL and no BA is that frequency of tren cough is greatly reduced compared to more concentrated preparations.
[quote]BigJawnMize wrote:
I agree with brook your powder source should be selling a wide variety of options. The ones I have seen urrently have tren at about 3X the cost of test-e…
[/quote]
A worrisome factor here is that the bulk cost of trenbolone – straight from a Chinese factory – is far more than three times the cost of bulk testosterone esters.
So when the retailer is pricing it that way, it does raise a question.
[quote]BigJawnMize wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Actually I now have an easier way. It probably requires, though, buying either a magnetic stir plate and magnetic stir bar (I have no suggestions: these are laboratory items) or a sonicator, for example one used for jewelry cleaning or gun cleaning.
It is as simple as adding the Finaplix pellets to a suitably large vial, filling with volume with Wesson oil for planned concentration of 50 mg/mL, and either stirring or sonicating till there are no remaining pellets.
Let settle, which in this case takes a day or less to be ready to filter at least a good part of it, and filter.
The beauty part is that when done this way there is very little tendency for the filter to clog, and filtration is much easier.
BA can be added, if desired, post-filtration.
That is wild Bill…Can yo upotentially up the mg/ml by letting the pellets sit with a BA/BB mixture during the stiring…
[/quote]
That is wild indeed. I just checked around and magnetic stir plates seem reasonable.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
BigJawnMize wrote:
I agree with brook your powder source should be selling a wide variety of options. The ones I have seen urrently have tren at about 3X the cost of test-e…
A worrisome factor here is that the bulk cost of trenbolone – straight from a Chinese factory – is far more than three times the cost of bulk testosterone esters.
So when the retailer is pricing it that way, it does raise a question.[/quote]
It could mean the retailer is being very greedy when selling the test esters rather than selling the tren too cheaply.
[quote]SoreButtCheeks wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
BigJawnMize wrote:
I agree with brook your powder source should be selling a wide variety of options. The ones I have seen urrently have tren at about 3X the cost of test-e…
A worrisome factor here is that the bulk cost of trenbolone – straight from a Chinese factory – is far more than three times the cost of bulk testosterone esters.
So when the retailer is pricing it that way, it does raise a question.
It could mean the retailer is being very greedy when selling the test esters rather than selling the tren too cheaply.[/quote]
Exactly - i was thinking of replying to that explaining that if the TE is priced at its correct price (i suspect you both know as well as i what that is), then Tren being just 3x would make it either the cheapest source on the planet - OR more likely not Tren!
The fact is, it more likely to be that the Test E is multiples more than it should be - say $10/g making the Tren very expensive too - in this example; $30/g.
Brook
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Actually I now have an easier way. It probably requires, though, buying either a magnetic stir plate and magnetic stir bar (I have no suggestions: these are laboratory items) or a sonicator, for example one used for jewelry cleaning or gun cleaning.
It is as simple as adding the Finaplix pellets to a suitably large vial, filling with volume with Wesson oil for planned concentration of 50 mg/mL, and either stirring or sonicating till there are no remaining pellets.
Let settle, which in this case takes a day or less to be ready to filter at least a good part of it, and filter.
The beauty part is that when done this way there is very little tendency for the filter to clog, and filtration is much easier.
BA can be added, if desired, post-filtration.
[/quote]
OK Bill I have been looking at a number of different ways to do this and the oil with no BA, BB, at 50mg/ml sounds very appealing to me because it should lead to painless injections. Also, with my very low dose as a tren first timer the concentration sounds just right.
A few questions. I don’t know if I am ready to pony up for a stir plate quite yet. Not sure if I will even tolerate Tren.
Could I use the method of crushing the pellets in oil with the end of a sterile need cap while using no BA/BB? I know without a magnetic stirrer I may have to shake it a good bit myself and let it sit for a while, but I am patient.
Also, will a .45um whatman be sufficient or would you use the .22?
Also, if you had to choose either adding a minimal amound of BA to the solution or baking at 250 for 15 minutes what would you choose? I think I know the answer to this one.
Thanks.
Yes, if you are patient enough, crushing and shaking periodically and allowing days of time can do the job as well.
I would not under any circumstances bake.
If desired, putting in a water bath that is at about 72 C (161 F) for a few minutes till the oil is likely heated to match, can be done. Inserting a syringe, with the plunger removed, to be present during the process will prevent expanded air from popping the stopper off, if that is relevant to the particular case.
However I don’t bother with that.
Trenbolone oxidizes easily, so I would not use excessive heat, as I consider baking to be.
You might want to add the pasteurization (so to speak) step, as while my method gives really minimal exposure of the TA and oil to the environment (simply that of pouring the pellets in, directly from the cart, two rows at a time; and pouring the oil in), adding a crushing procedure will have the vessel used for mixing opened to the air for much more time. You still ought to be able to do it cleanly, but what with the extra exposure I suppose the pasteurization would be a nice thing to do.
If you would like to also be able to do the additions with so little exposure to the environment, a jewelry sonicator may well be much cheaper than a magnetic stir plate, and also works well. However some of them switch off automatically only after 5 minutes: it’s a pain in the ass when that’s the case as you may have to sonicate 20 times or some number like that.
As for what filter size to use, in principle 0.22 micron has the advantage that some bacilli have minor axis diameter smaller than 0.45 micron, so the 0.22 micron filter might stop more of these. However in practice I’ve used 0.45 micron almost every time for many years and never had an issue. It’s harder to push through an 0.22 micron filter.
BA by the way is not considered to be bactericidal anyhow, only bacteriostatic, in other words, preventing growth. But there aren’t the nutrients required for growth present in the solution anyway. Bacteria can’t grow on only fat and steroids. It’s more a problem, in my opinion, of not having live bacteria in there in the first place.
I don’t myself prefer having any BA because even at the same moderate concentration of TA (50 mg/mL, the presence of BA adds to tren cough issues, at least in my experience. Not that it becomes an intolerably awful problem, but it’s nice to have it be a very rare problem, as it is (for me anyway) with zero BA.
First of all thanks for the speedy response. When I first searched for sonicators, all I saw where the commercial grade that were insanely expensive. Now I found the kind I think you are referring to.
One final question and I think I am set. If using a sonicator, I should just fill the sonicator with water and float the vial in there? I have never used a sonicator for anything so excuse me if I seem a little dense.
Thanks.
Bill, if this isn’t too much of a silly, beginner question, I hope you can give me an answer: how is cooking oil, Wesson, OK for injections? It seems to me it would be pretty clean, as it’s designed to be ingested, but oral and intra-muscular are quite different, I think. I guess I’m wondering how the purity to allow it to be injected safely is achieved. Perhaps it’s the use of the Whatman?
Yes, it is the filtering with a 0.45-0.22um filter that makes it suitable for injecting.
If you didnt filter it would almost certainly abscess from all the particles in standard food oils.
People use all sorts of oils - Sunflower, Olive, Sesame, Cottonseed - but IMO it is just as cheap to get Grapeseed Oil which is clean, light, thin and has no potential allergins (Sesame/Almond/Cottonseed can).
GSO and CSO are the UGL industry standard as far as i can tell, and i use GSO everytime.
Brook
It’s a highly refined oil. Actually others have used other brands of cooking oil successfully, but I originally chose Wesson way back when (about 11 years ago) by comparing all brands available for optical clarity.
Imperfect clarity shows the presence of non-oil components interfering with light transmission.
Wesson was the only brand that was just amazingly clear. (Lightly colored, but utterly no haze, at least to the eye’s ability to detect.) It still is just as high in clarity today.
I’ve known people that don’t bother to filter and have had no problems. (Still, I don’t recommend that, out of concern for bacteria from other sources and because the filter traps some non-TA material from the pellets.) I doubt Wesson has bacteria in it.
Wesson isn’t a cold-pressed oil. I expect the heat treatment it has received is way beyond pasteurization.
[quote] Brook wrote:
Yes, it is the filtering with a 0.45-0.22um filter that makes it suitable for injecting.
If you didnt filter it would almost certainly abscess from all the particles in standard food oils.
People use all sorts of oils - Sunflower, Olive, Sesame, Cottonseed - but IMO it is just as cheap to get Grapeseed Oil which is clean, light, thin and has no potential allergins (Sesame/Almond/Cottonseed can).
GSO and CSO are the UGL industry standard as far as i can tell, and i use GSO everytime.
Brook[/quote]
Thank you, Sir!
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
It’s a highly refined oil. Actually others have used other brands of cooking oil successfully, but I originally chose Wesson way back when (about 11 years ago) by comparing all brands available for optical clarity.
Imperfect clarity shows the presence of non-oil components interfering with light transmission.
Wesson was the only brand that was just amazingly clear. (Lightly colored, but utterly no haze, at least to the eye’s ability to detect.) It still is just as high in clarity today.
I’ve known people that don’t bother to filter and have had no problems. (Still, I don’t recommend that, out of concern for bacteria from other sources and because the filter traps some non-TA material from the pellets.) I doubt Wesson has bacteria in it.
Wesson isn’t a cold-pressed oil. I expect the heat treatment it has received is way beyond pasteurization.[/quote]
Thanks a lot, Bill!
If using a sonicator, I should just fill the sonicator with water and float the vial in there?
Use enough water to come to a reasonable level, similar (it need not be exact) to the level of oil within the container, sitting on the bottom of the sonicator, but not floating.
Not that it couldn’t be done floating, I suppose, but more vibration will transfer with the direct surface-to-surface contact.