Hello, I am a biotechnology student and I made a preparation of testosterone enanthate at 300mg / ml, the mixture came out perfect, but I have a problem with the person who did the test, he used primoteston and his total testosterone was double, but when I use The enanthate I made is not seeing results.
Could it be that he had to wait at least a week to be tested?
Is it possible that the receptors have become saturated or block?
Testosterone levels the day after an injection of 1ml primoteston 250mg (after a few half-lives)
Assuming this is all hypothetical to talk through best practice, youâve skipped a bunch of necessary pieces of the puzzle in your explanation.
TLDR: testosterone and its ester cannot be assimilated if itâs not present.
Test enanthate does not have an elimination half life of one day nor 8 hours as you have suggested. Itâs about 5-8 days.
It reads as though you injected the same person with this homemade preparation of test enanthate and also Primoteston as the control? Are you injecting the same person at the same site with the same volume? How long between injections?
Both preparations appear to register on the lab assay but I have no idea what the baseline test level was in the individual prior to either injection. The results seem in the ballpark (SHBG, clearance rate, etc, etc).
Regardless of all this, why do you say your mixture came out perfect? Why jump to the most complex possible explanation involving receptors when Occamâs Razor points to your recipe or synthesis not being perfect, but actually wrong and your product underdosed. Please walk through your synthesis procedure and calculated yield on product. How did you confirm product concentration and yield? Are you using the experiment you just described to estimate product yield and concentration. Is so, please refrain from doing so in the future.
@Chris_Colucci I seem to run into frequent editing of my posts when I include any pictures or links to any products, however innocuous. The photo I originally attached above was deleted due to "No references to brands, distributors, sources, etc.
This has happened to me previously with even pictures of a insulin syringe bag. All of these products I reference are always legal OTC or Rx products. In this particular case I was trying to confirm with the OP what the Primoteston was and went to the trouble of showing whatâs actually in said Primoteston.
In the Pharma forum, we have zero discussion of brands, labs, sources, distributors, etc. when it comes to anabolics/gear. Zero. None. OTC supplements are one thing, prescription drugs are something very different, for what should be obvious reasons.
Thank you for the explanation. I wasnât trying to flout said rules but probably looking at some of these other posts lowered my guard. I appreciate your detailed explanation and thank you for your time sir. Itâs a delicate subject, I understand.
Thinking about this a little more, your comment here is very poignant and could be used on a lot of what getâs posted. When it comes to education, I am too softhearted and really want to help people. But to your point, this is not an ideal approach when encountering many folks on here discussing very complex topics like endocrinology, synthetic organic chemistry, reaction kinetics, experimental design, appropriate use of controls, etc., etc. You really have to be careful on here as thereâs a fine balance between value added vs time suck.
Well, you can be nice about asking others to back their claims. It is to their benefit as well. Maybe they believed something that canât be determined to be true with their current understanding and argument. I would rather be aware of where my knowledge is sound and where it isnât, than be on âmount stupidâ on the Dunning-Kruger graph (I suppose there are other options other than those).
Thank you for answering me, excuse me I think I did not explain well.
As I am doing experiments at school and learning to make solutions, it was easy for me to get powdered testosterone enanthate and an acquaintance gave me 10 grams, my mistake was not having tested for purity with acids and bases.
In the school laboratory I made the formula with 21% BB / 1.5% Ba, add guaiacol to stabilize it at 2% and the vehicle was sesame oil were 3 grams of powder for a total of 10 ml, sterilized with UVC rays and filtration to 0.22 with Pvdf.
The point is that a friend used primoteston and we did a test to see if testosterone enanthate worked, but what is the surprise that his total testosterone levels did not rise. When I said that the formula came out perfect it was in the preparation, perhaps I lacked more tests but my question was referring to what if it is possible that the testosterone cannot be absorbed?
This was the reference value when he was natural and hormone free
Good point. I guess thatâs why I have philosophical aversion to any UGL product unless I interviewed, screened, and babysat the manufacturer. Thatâs not really feasible for a number of reasons and I understand people have different risk tolerances. Iâm not implying this thread is an example of the quality of all the UGL products out there, but the average consumer really has limited means to comprehend whatâs missing vs added (sometimes stuff that shouldnât be added), and the more exhaustive QC options out there further expose to the consumer to additional legal complications. Happy Wednesday.
Good awareness on the first part. 2nd part, how are you going to confirm presence of TE in the bulk powder using acid/base titration? Help me understand that.
In the first lab work you posted, the reading with your 300mg home brew test was >10.09ng/mL, which isnât necessarily lower than the first lab of 20.56ng/mL. In fact it could be higher.
Good observation and I assumed all three results shown were from same machine. See first test which shows result of 20.56 ng.mL. These types of CMIA machines should be linear no problem up to 15 ng/mL (1500 mg/dL). Strange thereâs a > symbol there. Also third test OP shared gives quantitative result (10.06 ng/mL). Assay should not be saturating (up to 15 ng/mL) and data shared indicates even better dynamic range but I canât explain the > @swoops39.
RE the OP: if the lab has two machines, one set up to result quantitative number regardless and another set up to only show â> Xâ if result greater than X, that could explain above. In that case, @swoops39 took my money and my false negative hypothesis is crap. Moral of the story with supra levels of testosterone, run the LCMS!
My God you must hate your test subjects. That stuff is like injecting fire ants and is unnecessary for that concentration of test e. Just a little tip for the next time you cook up some goodies in your lab.
