Qingdao Sigma Chemical Co., Ltd (International, US, EU, Canada and Australia domestic

Fat ass couch potato Karen trying to ruin QSC. Bitch was hit by a golf ball 20 years ago and is still trying to be a victim any way possible. Pro tip: stop buying so much food and redirect your money to the pharma grade stuff. Leave the underground markets alone.
Probably the only balls she's had in her face in the same amount of time.
 
A kilo of test c raws is around 300 and if you sell for 35 a 10 ml vial at 250mg/ml. Let’s say 10% loss so we have 900 g of usable raw material and each vial is 2.5 g so we get about 360 vials. Each is 35 dollars and which yields 12600 minus the initial raws cost were at 12300. All that work and selling 360 vials for a measly 12k? How does that make someone rich? That’s ignoring all the other operating costs which is non trivial and the risk of selling a controlled substance. I appreciate that people do this, but clearly there are better ways to make money if that is the intent.
You are doing 1 compound… they have over 20+ products…mind you… they go through more than 1 kilo a month of raw of a compound… muscle candy states this…
 
Titration was mainly determined (sorry to disappoint) by the rate of PO (progressive overload) + side effects and continuous/non-lab health markers, such as HRV, RHR, BG and the like and also occasional lab blood testing, including HbA1c, organ health, etc… basic/general comprehensive panel to make sure there wasn’t any severe risk to health.

However, IGF-1 testing was rarer due to cost-cutting because I thought my subjective assessment of exogenous HGH effects based on progression, sides and general health markers was sufficient.

Regarding the point where most males saturated around 0.1 iu/kg, and after that point, the change was simply more side effects (which doesn't fit my side effect changes/profile completely), with minimal additional IGF-1 elevation, and the PO I observed after this proposed saturation point, I think we should consider:

1. other growth mechanisms from exogenous HGH dose increases were responsible for additional PO
1.1. non-IGF-1 mediated growth pathways cause significant PO/anabolism
1.2. alternative signalling cascades, direct receptor activation, enhanced satellite cell activation, improved nutrition partitioning, etc..

2. local IGF-1 production (in muscle tissue) was stimulated by increased HGH doses and this may have a saturation point higher than serum IGF-1 / local increases supported growth despite plateaus in systemic IGF-1

3. some other factor which coincided with increased HGH dosing was responsible for increased PO and this is a coincidence / additional HGH was largely wasted (even beyond the expected diminishing returns)

Conclusion: more funding needed (LOL) to repeat (but not to the same extreme extent) up-titration with exogenous HGH with more IGF-1 monitoring, as well as what @Ghoul said about immunogenicity testing.

Just curious how you got to that final dose per day.

See for example...

Did you measure IGF-1 at each titration point along the way?

0.1 IU/kg/day enough to send many way up into the +4 SD land. See Fig 2 and discussion. Most males saturated at 0.1 IU/kg/day.

Appreciate your data set.

Should have added this quote in my prior post. My understanding is that there may be almost no difference between measured IGF-1 at 20 IU/day vs 90 IU/day. See study posted and the dot plots of 0.1 vs 0.2 IU/kg/day (Fig 2). Asymptotic dose response.
 
Titration was mainly determined (sorry to disappoint) by the rate of PO (progressive overload) + side effects and continuous/non-lab health markers, such as HRV, RHR, BG and the like and also occasional lab blood testing, including HbA1c, organ health, etc… basic/general comprehensive panel to make sure there wasn’t any severe risk to health.

However, IGF-1 testing was rarer due to cost-cutting because I thought my subjective assessment of exogenous HGH effects based on progression, sides and general health markers was sufficient.

Regarding the point where most males saturated around 0.1 iu/kg, and after that point, the change was simply more side effects (which doesn't fit my side effect changes/profile completely), with minimal additional IGF-1 elevation, and the PO I observed after this proposed saturation point, I think we should consider:

1. other growth mechanisms from exogenous HGH dose increases were responsible for additional PO
1.1. non-IGF-1 mediated growth pathways cause significant PO/anabolism
1.2. alternative signalling cascades, direct receptor activation, enhanced satellite cell activation, improved nutrition partitioning, etc..

2. local IGF-1 production (in muscle tissue) was stimulated by increased HGH doses and this may have a saturation point higher than serum IGF-1 / local increases supported growth despite plateaus in systemic IGF-1

3. some other factor which coincided with increased HGH dosing was responsible for increased PO and this is a coincidence / additional HGH was largely wasted (even beyond the expected diminishing returns)

Conclusion: more funding needed (LOL) to repeat (but not to the same extreme extent) up-titration with exogenous HGH with more IGF-1 monitoring, as well as what @Ghoul said about immunogenicity testing.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and feedback.
 
If @Ghoul's guidelines on HGH resens work, I would expect similar or maybe even higher serum IGF-1 on 20 iu per day than 90 at the moment when HRV/RHR downtrends were reversing. However, the speed at which IGF-1 levels decrease from the start period of 20 iu per day might be interesting. Sadly, I don't have the budget to compare filtering vs non-filtering and a bunch of other variables, especially on myself. So, I will follow the advice on HGH resens without those controls.

Fyi, I'm currently on zero exogenous HGH supplementation with an IGF-1 test planned for soon.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and feedback.
 
Anyone commenting that “this isn’t Amazon” and “I knew the risk” gets the fucking Genius of the Year Award and a gold star. Jesus you guys are fucking sharp. First off, if you ain’t out any money the shut the fuck up. Who gives a fuck what you anticipated happening you fucking braggard. You got lucky is all. November and problems were happening but you still placed an order? You rolled the dice and got lucky is all. And if you somehow anticipated something like this was bound to happen then why did the Chinaman take people’s money and stop processing orders? Pfffttt.

It’s not the money for me. I made plenty off of QSC and his peptides. There are many that are out a lot of fucking money. And this shitbag comes on here with some soliloquy on how fucking 2024 was a non-profitable year but just a few days before his announcement the QSC wallet was cleared out of funds. If it’s the intention of QSC to make things right then make things right. No need to post here. Post here when you have everyone’s loot.

Y’all are just dickriding a vendor jaded by cheap floater laced $5 oils. You’ll see. If he comes back, he will make a very small fraction of customers whole and fuck everyone else. Why would he need to refund everyone. I mean he made zero profit in 2024.
Two things I took away from your college length essay: First, you knew the risks, took them anyway, and are now complaining. Second, you’re completely ignoring the fact that this source has no control over his supply chain drying up or the increased security on incoming shipments. News flash, you’re not the only one losing money. Some of these sources are stressing about how they’re going to feed their families because of these changes.

The reality is, you can always get more gear, hustle for more money, and still find what you need. But the way you’re reacting is straight-up childish. Tracy isn’t reading your whiny rant, and no one here is kissing a source’s ass. We hold them accountable, but this is a two-way street the risks apply to everyone involved. If your pack arrives, great. If it doesn’t, move on and don’t complain. Sounds like you’re not built for this game, bud.
 
There is a post on the peptide section all about where to get it and why you want that specific brand.
Yeah ive checked the forums and most of the places I've seen mentioned are doing packs of 25 30mm bottles but its just a waste for me to buy that much when in reality il only need about 3 maybe 4 bottles max
 
Back
Top