DHulk
New Member
Just noticed dynasty Labs is no longer on OLM that's interesting
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Dynasty blood work...
- Thread starter CAswole
- Start date
CAswole
Member
I think regardless of my pinning schedule it's low.....
Roger rabbit
Well-known Member
Agree!
Don't we have some other guys here running Dynasty gear who can share their experiences?
Ryno1980
New Member
I agree with you on this.... splitting the dose x3 a week, basically 300 mg x3... 46 hours after a 300mg pin ... I gotta go against the grain here and say I don't think the numbers are horrible... but then I'd be curious to see what u got if u were pinning 450 x2...
I won't say these are good numbers by any means, but it's hard to compare it as the dosing has a lot to do with the levels at time of bloods...
Ryno1980
New Member
Disappointing... not horrible but way under dosed.. man its so hard to say.. with ur dosing protocol... still tho I'd expect higher numbers regardless of pin schedule...
CAswole
Member
That's my thing here. Let's even say my pinning schedule knocked me down 1000 points ok... that'd be 3400 off 900mg... still not great
CAswole
Member
I've bumped it to 1350 a week before i got the results which i had planned to do anyways. Wonder if i got blood on the 1350 split twice instead of 3xs..
Ryno1980
New Member
You could try it.... I'd be curious to see how you do on another lab... see if u just naturally score lower.... idk... I can't remember what I scored on my last bloods. 900 test and I was only in the upper 3800ish.. but I've done bloods on 3 different labs and have always scored low.
CAswole
Member
Yup I'll have too see... still sucks though.
Ryno1980
New Member
On the bright side, ur test is higher than it was pretty cycle... and ur still well past anabolic so ur still making gains.. I guess at the end of the day it's all about how u feel.... sucks it's not better numbers but at least it's not bunk
CAswole
Member
No not bunk at all. Maybe a bit under dosed though
Roger rabbit
Well-known Member
Still don't think it would be as high as you feel it would. Because of the half life.
Example let's say you inject once in Monday. And once on Friday schedule. There is 5 days between. Then you wait two days to get bloods drawn for bloods that will be a total of 7 days since your first shot. The half life will be on its way back down and almost fully used up from first shot, so 90% of bloods will be from the Friday shot. I would suspect it would still only be in the 3500 range area at 450x2 per week . At 1350x2 I feel you would be at maybe 4000.
I personally feel one shot is always the way to go on long esters.
Ryno1980
New Member
This is right on point... not defending this lab by any means, but there had been so many variables shown in so many different studies... let's say you pinned 900 a week for 6 weeks, but had bloods drawn 6 days after pin... realistic numbers would probably be in the mid 3000s? Am I wrong ? It seems that if u consider the peaks and valleys, 3000 would be decent for a valley...
CAswole
Member
Seeing as how i have been pinning 3xs a week and this appears to be the point of contention i will split my increased dose into 2 pinz... mon and thurs and redo bloods in 6 weeks at close of cycle. This fair?
Roger rabbit
Well-known Member
Will be cool to see. Now for us all to make a guess as to what it might end up as.
Loser has to post hot chick photos
My guess was 3500 range
Ryno1980
New Member
Fair.. but like I said, not really necessary unless it's just for your piece of mind... I think it's underdosed but I also think that a 2200 to 3000 valley is a good place to be from a health standpoint... dissapointing if u consider what ur putting in, but the numbers themselves are a good place to be for a cycle in my opinion....
Ryno1980
New Member
That's what I said too... 3500 to 4000 peak... still not bad, just not good..
I am all for doing bloods and having statistical data to measure the quality of our gear, but I also think that we need to accept that this is still to some extent, a guessing game with making interpretive assessments of the quality of our gear based on bloods.
Now obviously if your bloods would have revealed test levels in the 500 level say, then yes, we could be quite certain the gear was terrible. But i also think that we need historical data for comparative purposes for each of us AS INDIVIDUAL USERS to know where we typically test at. Comparing bloods from one user to another is difficult to do.
I am certainly not defending this or any other lab for poor blood results, but those of us who were here in 2013 and 2014 will remember how many labs that were ran off from Meso for bloods "only" coming back in the 5x to 7x range when the 10x rule was all the rage. Not such a good look for us now looking back.
Now obviously if your bloods would have revealed test levels in the 500 level say, then yes, we could be quite certain the gear was terrible. But i also think that we need historical data for comparative purposes for each of us AS INDIVIDUAL USERS to know where we typically test at. Comparing bloods from one user to another is difficult to do.
I am certainly not defending this or any other lab for poor blood results, but those of us who were here in 2013 and 2014 will remember how many labs that were ran off from Meso for bloods "only" coming back in the 5x to 7x range when the 10x rule was all the rage. Not such a good look for us now looking back.
Similar threads
Sponsors
Latest posts
-
-
Sigma Audley Inc. - Your source for peptides, ancillaries, AAS, and more!- Latest: SigmaAudley China Peptide
-
