absorption Testosterone Entanthate

snuff-sann

New Member
If you inject 3ml or 750mg of testosterone entanthate IM into the glutes, how long will it take before the whole 750mg is absorped and circulates within the blood?
 
If by whole amount you mean say 99% and by circulated you mean as testosterone itself not the ester, then about 5 weeks.

But if you mean say about 98%, then about 3 weeks.
 
Last edited:
Allright, cheers.

What is the absorption-speed of the body?
So for example, if you inject 500mg (2ml) of test-e, with which kind of speed is the body capable to absorp test-e from the injection-spot (muscle) into the blood-stream?

I read an article about test prop. That the body is capable to absorp 50mg in 1ml of oil in 24 hours.
If the ratio was 100mg in 1ml of oil then the body would absorp 50mg the first 24 hours and the other 50mg a day later. Also according to the article it's better to inject 3x 50mg in 3x 1ml of oil then 150mg in 1ml of oil.
 
The information to answer accurately is in J. Pharm. Pharmac., 1969, 21, 24-27, but this is not available online so far as I know and unfortunately I won't have the opportunity in at least the next week or so to be going to the science library I ordinarily use, to get the article in person.

Roughly speaking though? First peak in about 2-3 days. A reasonably good increase in level even within 24 hours, though if one is starting from zero and wants to get levels commensurate with ongoing 1000 mg/week use (for example) with a planned schedule of 500 mg 2x/week, then it's necessary to inject about 1200 mg on the first injection, not 500.

The body is going to absorb the same amount of steroid and in not greatly different times regardless of concentration. And with ongoing use -- a cycle that is continuing -- than the rate of uptake doesn't really matter anyway. In other words, if on account of differing concentration you're getting more from yesterday than otherwise but less from today, it comes out to the same. Over the course of the cycle, your body is still getting its 1000 mg/week (or whatever) either way.

Cycle results don't depend on concentration. There are no advantages to higher or lower concentration other than injection amount, and in some cases, injection pain with higher concentrations.
 
Thank you very much for your reply, was waiting all day for it.:D

The reason I'm asking is linked to the frontloading topic.
When you want to cycle with let's say 1000mg of test-e a week and also want a frontload and need a first dose of 1200mg, then for about 5ml needs to be injected. If you jab it all at once, and using just one spot, you will create a big depot. What I was wondering is, will the desired 500mg of test-e be circulating and be active into your bloodstream within 7 days? Is the body capable of absorping that amount in that time?

And then I have a final question.
Is there any info available if a frontload, so increasing the amount of testosterone from nil to an very high amount in a very short time-scedule, healthy? I mean, worth adding it into a cycle?
 
Last edited:
What happens with the frontload as I calculate it is that you get, over the course of your cycle, the exact same amount of steroid in those weeks as if you had been taking that amount beforehand as well and levels had built to steady state.

(To be precise, for our German friend, the exact same amount as if you had been injecting this weekly amount at a rate of one injection per half-life. Not the precise same as if you had, in the theoretical world of if-there-were-previous-injections been injecting more frequently than that, but any difference is unimportant.)

I don't at all recommend injecting 5 mL into one spot. Three mL max. And I would rather inject 1 mL into three spots with a 1/2 inch 29 gauge insulin needle than 3 mL into one spot, though the reason isn't blood levels.

Yes, you do get good blood levels in the first week this way.

The information basically is that a very large number of people have been doing it for a long time -- I've been writing it into cycles and recommending it in articles and posts for over 12 years, and for some time now many others have also been recommending frontloading -- and the satisfaction rate is either 100% or really close to it. I don't know of an exception.

(EDIT: On seeing this now, I think it could look like I'm implying I invented frontloading. Not so, the specific method I give is my own but people had been frontloading in informal ways, such as taking double on the first day, or for some period of time, since long before probably. Personally I learned of frontloading from a doctor friend in Greece, the same who introduced me to 2 week cycles. It was in correspondence with him that I decided to work out what amount really was needed.)

Frontloading doesn't result in overshoot, just (approximately) the same levels you'd otherwise eventually arrive at anyway, and there's no sign the relative suddenness of the increase is a problem.

One has that suddenness with orals also, of course, even moreso.
 
Last edited:
And I would rather inject 1 mL into three spots with a 1/2 inch 29 gauge insulin needle than.

This is very interesting, it's totally off-topic but injecting an oil based steroid with a small isulin-syringe, I've heard it before, but is it really possible? I mean a fiberneedle, will that be easy?
And where to inject? Delts, leg?
 
This is very interesting, it's totally off-topic but injecting an oil based steroid with a small isulin-syringe, I've heard it before, but is it really possible? I mean a fiberneedle, will that be easy?
And where to inject? Delts, leg?

not only is it possible it makes pinning a pleasure , i pin in biceps pecs traps side quad draw with a 19g 3ml and transfer to a slin pin heaps less scare tissue when ed injecting
 
If by whole amount you mean say 99% and by circulated you mean as testosterone itself not the ester, then about 5 weeks.

But if you mean say about 98%, then about 3 weeks.

Wow, that is really interesting. I see in a later post you say the type of steroid is irrelevant for this and so is the size of the depot - that the absorption rate remains constant irrespective of the steroid being injected.

I assume the ester is irrelevant as well, so even with short esters, like with tren-ace, one could actually have the trenbolone hormone circulating in their blood stream for weeks after injection. That is very interesting but since the effects of trenbolone, with an acetate ester attached, are unnoticeable a week post injection, I assume that a large amount of the depot is absorbed within a few days.

Would you happen to know what the rate of absorption is for steroids in standard carrier oils, say like the biological "half-life" (wrong word but I think the idea can be understood) of an oil depot ? I know the carrier oil makes a huge difference, though I think grapeseed or cottonseed would probably be identical and EO is rarely, if ever used, so for all intents and purposes the carrier oil would simply be grapeseed.
 
The parent steroid isn't completely irrelevant, as it does affect the ratio of fat to water solubility, but it's not a major factor. Roughly speaking it might make a day's difference in the half-life.

The ester absolutely makes a difference: for an acetate ester, you'd divide these numbers of days by as much as 5 times.

I doubt the type of oil makes much difference but have never read a study on the pharmacokinetics for one oil versus another. However the relevant physical properties of all vegetable oils are almost identical so I'd except no substantial difference.
 
The parent steroid isn't completely irrelevant, as it does affect the ratio of fat to water solubility, but it's not a major factor. Roughly speaking it might make a day's difference in the half-life.

The ester absolutely makes a difference: for an acetate ester, you'd divide these numbers of days by as much as 5 times.

I doubt the type of oil makes much difference but have never read a study on the pharmacokinetics for one oil versus another. However the relevant physical properties of all vegetable oils are almost identical so I'd except no substantial difference.

Thanks for sharing. What's the logic in varying the different vehicles/oils for steroids? I assumed that the reason was the saturated versus unsaturated ratio made some oils better vehicles for transport due to increased solubility of one steroid versus another. Again, this was an assumption based on how you change the ratio of solvents in synthetic organic synthesis to solubilize your product.
 
Between the various vegetable oils, I think there is no reason.

Certainly in pharmaceutical use, many are acceptable and I've never seen reasons claimed for any other than purity, minimized allergenicity, and (rarely) mention of viscosity.

It seems to me more a matter of a number of suppliers pushing their wares being the cause of a number of pharmaceutical oils.

In the homebrewing field, there seems (this is personal impression only) to be some degree of fascination with oils that, if consumed as dietary oils, sound healthful, resulting in desires to use olive oil or flax oil. Grapeseed may fall in this category. I don't know of any pharmaceutical advantage compared to other pure vegetable oils.

With regard to ethyl oleate, it improves solubilizing ability and reduces viscosity, so it does offer a practical difference.

Your theory on differences in degrees of saturation affecting solubility probably is true to some extent but as pure guesswork I would think only a few mg/mL at most if that. The physical properties difference in this regard is mostly in melting point, which has no real effect here, and not much in the solubility parameters (?, or the different types of ?) so that is why I expect little difference between different vegetable oils. But, if anyone has found from practical experience that a given vegetable oil has given a little better solubility than another, then very good, then the effect would be more than I expect.
 
Last edited:
The parent steroid isn't completely irrelevant, as it does affect the ratio of fat to water solubility, but it's not a major factor. Roughly speaking it might make a day's difference in the half-life.

The ester absolutely makes a difference: for an acetate ester, you'd divide these numbers of days by as much as 5 times.

I doubt the type of oil makes much difference but have never read a study on the pharmacokinetics for one oil versus another. However the relevant physical properties of all vegetable oils are almost identical so I'd except no substantial difference.

Ah, ok! So just so I get this clear and something I have always wondered: is it the ester that determines the length of time a steroid depot remains in body tissue and is this the reason for the varying half-life with different esters? I wasn't sure if it was due to a steroid getting absorbed and circulating within the blood but not becoming biologically active until the ester was cleaved off or if it was "mostly" due to an increased duration of an oil depot subsisting.

I know it is really irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, but I am curious about this for purposes of injection rotation.

With regard to the carrier oils: there is not much variation with the standard carrier oils so I think it is a moot point. Though, I do know EO takes longer to absorb than the other standard carrier oils - what effect it has on the actual absorption of the hormone in the solution, I don't know.
 
Yes, it's principally the ester: basically the ester decreases the percent of steroid that is dissolved in water or aqueous phase at any time (always very low) compared to the amount that is dissolved in fat.

Only that part which is dissolved in aqueous phase can have the ester cleaved by enzymes, yielding the parent steroid. So the esterified steroid is protected in the body and remains for a longer time the higher the ratio of fat-to-water solubility. The longer the ester is, the higher this ratio and the longer the life.
 
I understand this is a old post, but is there anything wrong with getting bloodwork a week in after starting gear to make sure it is legitimate?
 
Back
Top