T Nation

Synth**** Products


#1


Who here has used these products? I have heard decent things (not just on P.M) about Synthetine the fat loss product.. but of course the main product is Syntherol.

I am considering some moderate use of the SEO. To bring up my biceps, i need to get a bit more of a peak which my Insertions will not naturally allow.

My arms cold and flexed are 17" - and i would be very pleased with 1/2" or as much as 1" on that just from peak. As those who know, know - the reason 24" arms exist - is due in large part to the peak.

I am not under the impression i can own a pair of 24" - by no means. But i am confident i could get to 20" over the next 10 years.

My poses of side chest and the front and rear doubles would benefit drastically from a more peaking muscle - notably the outside (lateral) head but i would use it as evenly as humanly possible.. no unsightly lumps for me.

I appreciate that the use of synthol is similar to the use of Marmite (love it or hate it), but this is NOT a discussion about the moral ambiguity of the product.
I would be interested in any horror stories (not like those dicks who use litres of it at a time like valentino etc - we all know about this and dont need to discuss it)

I would be very interested to hear of anyone here who has or would use it though. I do see it as a common BB product, and while there are not tons of BB here - there are a few who do/will compete so it must have crossed some minds.

Whaddya think?


#2

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#3

along the same lines as BBB as would much rather just do daily shots of tren acetate or test prop in the desired mucle to mildly stretch the muscle fascia, combined with high volume blood pump work and extreme stretching. got me to 21" from about 20" on the bicep peaks. Actually stretched to close to 22 but after a period of time settled in at about 21".


#4

here’s a link to my original post that details my system that worked for me.


#5

thanks - it was with you in mind i made the post - i vaguely remembered something… somewhere… sometime!

:wink:


#6

Most guys who use synthol are blackballed and never place high in the contest. It’s the same as pec or gastroc implants, To the audience it’s obvious.


#7

OK… i remember that thread - and it was the one i was thinking of as i wrote this post.

I already do inject daily… but for the most part the biggest volumes are only 1-1.5ml a day… plenty of gear for AAS dosing but not so much volume for fascia stretching - plus there is the dispersion speed… and it amounts to very little. I did bring up a very stubborn (and hard to reach) imbalance in my left bi with site specific injecting - but it isnt ‘cured’. Whether it is stretching or more likely scar tissue isn’t too bothersome to me personally.

(It may be of interest to note that the ONLY move that manages to hit my left bi in the exact way that it needs to match my right is the seated concentration curl. It is only with that exercise and no other that my strength/muscle endurance is significantly lower (a good 3-4 reps with a 15RM weight) than the right hand side - and this IMO could easily account for a difference in appearance of the two muscles.
Many find correcting imbalances a chore but i enjoy it!)

That said. I have not done a fascia stretching specific run with AAS - using AAS in large volumes (i could easily make a lower dose batch with; for example 25mg/ml of Test Prop… which i could then inject into a lagging muscle up to a volume of 5ml - (125mg/day is the most i need for a Test’rone dose).

I have a couple hundred ml of Prop in one of my cupboards actually, just in a media bottle. I may add some sterile oil to that and have a pop.

It sounds like a plan actually - as it is a slightly ‘softer’ introduction to SE, or internally mediated fascia stretching. Then if it doesn’t work, i will do the real thing.

The main downside i think is the dispersion time. While i understand the point of your post BBB, that the slow dispersion is what causes the worse lumps - it also causes the desired ones!
When using SEO’s i would ensure i use small doses but in very close proximity - to allow for a fuller, rounder look.

I wouldn’t touch the pecs though - at least not without being extremely confident. While they are one of my weaker areas, the flat look to the muscle dictates that you need to shoot in a very specific way and i can see a fuck up ruining your physique for a year or more. It would be so easy to create small ‘lumps’ of oil as the bolus sits there - That would be devastating.

I have attached a picture of a really good bicep IMO - but i think it is quite evident where the SEO has been used. I believe it is Chris Bennett :wink:


#8

[quote] Brook wrote:
thanks - it was with you in mind i made the post - i vaguely remembered something… somewhere… sometime!

;)[/quote]

no problem…with all that in mind my opinion is obvious but if someone were to just be insistent on using an SEO i would go with the brand you mentioned for sure


#9

Try the Q+A forum at RX. Derek Anthony has plenty of experience with SEO and still looks good. I’m sure he could answer any of your questions/give you advice. He even sells his own SEO product line.

@BBB - I thought the chest would be to big of a muscle to inject SEO into. The majority of pros would not inject into the quad for this reason…I thought the chest would fall into the same category.


#10

It was not BBB that mentioned chest SE but me.

The chest is or can be done but it takes a lot of close together injections, starting from the outside and covering the whole area. It is important to not miss spots and is easily done AFAIK.
Similar for the calf as this is also quite a flat muscle in appearance.

The quads are done but mostly the Vastus Medialis as it is small and ‘bulbous(sp?)’ - like the pecs, the v. lateralis would need a lot of oil and tens if not a hundred injections for an even displacement into the muscle.

IIRC i read this on the PM site somewhere - i think it is Phil Hernons protocol from memory.


#11

Why don’t you post a picture of your bicep/arm so we can see where you are at?


#12

Surely it would be necessary to post a picture of both arms? If i do the SEO or whatever i may do just that - if it is just a request to see where i am at, then there are a couple shots in my profile…

TBH it isn’t something that any normal person would notice, but as i am striving for as best symmetry as possible, i work on it. that said, most BB have one bicep a little more developed than the other and this just takes clever posing… but i want a better peak as i said, as i just would never get that naturally.


#13

[quote] Brook wrote:
Surely it would be necessary to post a picture of both arms? If i do the SEO or whatever i may do just that - if it is just a request to see where i am at, then there are a couple shots in my profile…

TBH it isn’t something that any normal person would notice, but as i am striving for as best symmetry as possible, i work on it. that said, most BB have one bicep a little more developed than the other and this just takes clever posing… but i want a better peak as i said, as i just would never get that naturally.[/quote]

I did check your profile and there was only one picture where I could not see the shape of your bicep.
I trained with an amateur bodybuilder and she took first place in her first minor competition.
She filled out her triceps which to my amazement she had none. Her biceps were very good and with the steroids became fantastic. The triceps, however were almost dwarfed. I found that very peculiar. The lack of proportion in the bicep/triceps was such that I saw no way she would ever be at competition level without artificially fixing that.

I was more curious about the ratio of your bicep/triceps I guess. Wouldn’t having a phenomenal bicep/triceps symmetry compensate a little for not having a “better” peak?


#14

Have another look - there should be two - one with a (albeit blurry) side chest shot that i think should answer your question.

I like to think they are balanced… but you are of course right in that if one dwarfs the other then this would be much more important to fix. I have always trained in a balanced way - always, so my proportions while not perfect are not glaringly bad.

I know that when i drop fat fully, they will be much more apparent… but i would like more height.

I have started concentrating on the lateral head and high volume for the next few weeks, and see if i can stimulate some growth. They haven’t changed for a few months so i think they are due a spurt :wink:

I don’t want to post another picture as i am not happy with where i am at at the moment - but the brighter picture in my profile is only from ~5 days ago.

JJ


#15

Good point Alpha F.
While bicep is the most obvious muscle when people think about arms, tricep is often overlooked, especially for recreational BBs. A thick arm with well developed tricep (long head) and brachialis will give that 3-d look. and shom what mask the lack of peak. Ernie Tayler had a freaky tris, it is probably a bit too much. Kevin Levrone had great arms, with tricep dominance.

Brook
Did you notice any localised growth with IGF-1 ?


#16

No localised growth no - i have progressed since starting the IGF but i am very hesitant to attribute it to that particular peptide.

The reason is i was using Tren and Test’rone which gives me great results anyway, along with the GHRP-6 - which i am much more tempted to think is the basis for any real noticeable benefit.

I personally believe that the LR3 is NOT capable of giving any real localised growth as it is transported around the blood stream safely - due to the resistance to IGF-BP. I honestly think in trying to create a IGF that didn’t need very frequent injections (i personally do not have an issue with shooting 4x/day if the results justify doing so) we managed to create a strain of IGF that was nowhere near as effective.

If it was as simple as the IGf being JUST as effective but lasting longer… that would be perfect… but to reduce its ability to bind to the BP is counter productive. I think that IGF-BP is absolutely instrumental in the activation and transportation of the peptide to the receptors, and when it is inhibited from binding to the binding protein, it is allowed to then travel out of the injected muscle, into the bloodstream and eventually as the LR3 chain is removed, it will then have the affinity for the BP - BUT may then be nearer receptors we didn’t want activating - such as gut.
At least with the original IGF we knew where it was going to work…

Still i hope to have a general localised growth over the next year or two from this and the next 2+ cycles of it.

That was a long and off topic answer wasn’t it?!

I think that women would benefit from IGF, MGF, GHRH and GHRP immensely.

As for ernie T’s tris - yes, he had the most crazy triceps! I mentioned him here (or at the BB forum) a few months ago and everyone was like… “who is ET?” lol… glad someone else knows who he is!

(i did answer you Alpha F - waiting for it to show up… :wink: )


#17

I think the only way you get localised grwoth is IGF-1 gene overexpression via viral vector, it’s still work in progress. Follistatin works too, but inhibited myostatin gene reduces tendon strength.

With all the SEO injections, is it painful to train?


#18

[quote]mephistopheles wrote:
With all the SEO injections, is it painful to train?[/quote]

I am not sure if this is directed at me - but i am not using SEO…


#19

[quote] Brook wrote:
Have another look - there should be two - one with a (albeit blurry) side chest shot that i think should answer your question.

I like to think they are balanced… but you are of course right in that if one dwarfs the other then this would be much more important to fix. I have always trained in a balanced way - always, so my proportions while not perfect are not glaringly bad.

I know that when i drop fat fully, they will be much more apparent… but i would like more height.

I have started concentrating on the lateral head and high volume for the next few weeks, and see if i can stimulate some growth. They haven’t changed for a few months so i think they are due a spurt :wink:

I don’t want to post another picture as i am not happy with where i am at at the moment - but the brighter picture in my profile is only from ~5 days ago.

JJ[/quote]

No Problem, Brook. I understand.
You say you are working on the lateral head of the biceps, but how is your anterior deltoid?
Mephistopheles mentioned Ernie Taylor and Kevin Levrone but they both had killer front delts, killer.
I have seen several pictures of Arnold with big biceps but I am still looking for his shoulders.

I think it is a much more powerful look if the front delt is jumping at the viewer along with thick forearms. Strong, well developed triceps and the biceps are the middle man, just facilitating a smooth transition from torso to hand so the muscular flow is length not height.
I personally dislike “peaks” in biceps - it looks like a random tennis ball inserted in the arm of a man.
But then a gain I don’t judge bodybuilding and ultimately if you are going to compete you have to appeal to the contemporary ideal.

If you inject to get a peak I say pay attention equally to the anterior deltoid peak. A few men claim huge biceps because as Mephistopheles mentioned it is the first thing you see in the arm, but a lot of people forget to see how much of that hugeness is claimed in the absence of a an equally impressive anterior deltoid.


#20

Look at the muscle transition of his chest to front delt to biceps: a nice flow…