MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
hCG instructions
- Thread starter Chipsam
- Start date
anabolickid
New Member
mix it and keep it in fridge(not in freezer) and shoot 250 iu 2x a week
Mix it with bacterial static water say 5cc then each cc will yield a concentration of 1000 IU. Thereafter use 0.25 ml to provide dosing at 250 IU.
Although some prefer to use HCG during a cycle to "maintain testicular size"
(which does not necessarily correlate with endogenous testosterone production) understand that it's effectiveness in increasing LH production is attenuated over time and with higher doses. Although opinions differ, I doubt there is any considerable difference in testosterone recovery providing you use it late cycle, or after it's completion.
However should you use it during a cycle use a random low dose yet (between 50-250 IU) and an a sporadic frequency (days 1, 5, 7, 10, 12, 19 etc) in an sttempt to mimic normal male LH production spikes and plateaus, which I suspect may decrease the probability of tolerance developing.
Should you want to determine the efficacy of your chosen protocol check an LH level prior and during its usage.
I probably unhinged a Pandora's box here but it's an interesting topic for discussion nonetheless.
Although some prefer to use HCG during a cycle to "maintain testicular size"
(which does not necessarily correlate with endogenous testosterone production) understand that it's effectiveness in increasing LH production is attenuated over time and with higher doses. Although opinions differ, I doubt there is any considerable difference in testosterone recovery providing you use it late cycle, or after it's completion.
However should you use it during a cycle use a random low dose yet (between 50-250 IU) and an a sporadic frequency (days 1, 5, 7, 10, 12, 19 etc) in an sttempt to mimic normal male LH production spikes and plateaus, which I suspect may decrease the probability of tolerance developing.
Should you want to determine the efficacy of your chosen protocol check an LH level prior and during its usage.
I probably unhinged a Pandora's box here but it's an interesting topic for discussion nonetheless.
Sworder
Member
Wouldn't it be better to determine how effective hCG use is by measuring FSH/LH at the end of post cycle in a cycle using hCG and then doing the same cycle and PCT without hCG. The aesthetic use of keeping larger testicles isn't the most important one in my opinion rather it is keeping the gonads from going dormant and having trouble waking them up after been shut down. You can't account for the HP but at least taking care of the T of the HPTA is manageable and wise.
I have found though that the size of the testicles don't vary as much as the scrotum being very tight. I believe the scrotum tightens not because of the testosterone production being limited but rather the spermatogenesis halting. You are trying to keep the testicles producing testosterone while on the cycle and maintaining the responsiveness for PC rather than trying to increase pituitary LH production. Would it make sense that you are in fact shutting down the pituitary even more by supplying hCG?(just a question, not assuming a stance on it)
Also, I would shoot the hCG IM, I don't like subQ. Opinions?
LH levels during or after a cycle are more reflective of the potency and duration of anabolics used not wether you add HCG to any given cycle. Recall elevated levels of either LH or testosterone suppresses subsequent LH release. Since HCG is an LH analog the effects are essentially the same...increased testosterone production which would lead to decreased endogenous LH production...nullifying its effectiveness.
It's probably better to use HCG subq because of it relatively short half life.
It's probably better to use HCG subq because of it relatively short half life.
Glad we could help!
You pretty much nailed it. Using HCG during your cycle keeps the testes producing testosterone throughout the cycle, so the 'T' part of the HPTA restoration would not be a factor for recovery and thus make recovery easier and with less risk.
As noted, HCG doesn't actually increase your LH. So testing LH while on HCG and exogenous test is useless.
Since you are shutting down LH anyway with exogenous Test, HCG will not "further" shut down the pituitary--you can't really go less than LH=0. I don't think HCG is "harsher" on the pituitary or if this would even be possible from a compound (though some people think DECA is harsher than Test, etc. I don't believe it).
Can you elaborate why you recommend hCG to be used SC rather than IM? While I recommend SC use it has more to do with ease and safety. Do you believe there will be a clinically significant effect between SC vs. IM? And, what do you mean by hCG's "relatively short half life?"
I do not understand the evidence in support of such a treatment. What is the evidence for the "sporadic frequency (days 1, 5, 7, 10, 12, 19 etc) in an sttempt to mimic normal male LH production spikes and plateaus?" Also, how do you see "tolerance developing," particularly if used Q3D?
Last edited:
No, it's fine. The only potential issue is that it's possible on injection, if not careful, to have a sudden change in injection speed as the injection changes from oil going through the needle to water going through the needle.
This should be avoided: you don't want the water jetting into the muscle.
This should be avoided: you don't want the water jetting into the muscle.
Tolerance to HCG does develop and my SUGGESTION is an attempt to lessen it's occurance by using a more erratic administration and dosage schedule. This is extrapolated from evidence that CONSTANT elevations of LH decreases its production via negative feedback.
You know if we had direct evidence for the majority of these issues we probabaly wouldn't be needed on Meso after all. Some one could simply Google the data without any need for interpretation.
After all what "evidence" is there for Adex, Novlo etc having any effect BB or lifters outcome. Almost all of that data is EXTRAPOLATED from FEMALE patients with breast CA and an inherent low testosterone. Furthermore a considerable portion of SARM data for gynecomastia was performed on "prepubertal males" and I can promise you there tT levels were not above 1000ng/dl. Besides gynecomastia is often a self limiting condition in those patients regardless of treatment.
You know if we had direct evidence for the majority of these issues we probabaly wouldn't be needed on Meso after all. Some one could simply Google the data without any need for interpretation.
After all what "evidence" is there for Adex, Novlo etc having any effect BB or lifters outcome. Almost all of that data is EXTRAPOLATED from FEMALE patients with breast CA and an inherent low testosterone. Furthermore a considerable portion of SARM data for gynecomastia was performed on "prepubertal males" and I can promise you there tT levels were not above 1000ng/dl. Besides gynecomastia is often a self limiting condition in those patients regardless of treatment.
Sworder
Member
The elevated levels of androgens will inhibit the production of LH regardless and the main purpose is to keep constant levels of imitation LH(hCG) so the testes keep producing testosterone. Tolerance, sensitivity, down regulation, I love those terms
I would agree that high levels of hCG will lead to a tolerance development but if you are using hCG doses which are supposed to mimic the amount of LH produced it shouldn't be an issue. If it was an issue wouldn't you say that the testes build a tolerance to regular LH stimulation as well??
A half life of roughly 24 hours is RELATIVELY SHORT when compared to esterified testosterone or Deca for instancd. Subcutaneous administration could decrease its eventual metabolism especially at the lower IU doses and quantity in cc I described. I also believe there's little difference in the ease of administration between pining my quad vs sticking my belly with 0.25-0.5 ml of anything.
Sworder
Member
hCG is water soluble vs. test and deca which are soluble in oil. Oils injected into subQ fat would lead to a great difference in half life but would it really impact it that much when it is a water soluble preparation??
Goodness I thought I would unhinge a Pandoras box with my SUGGESTIONS. There really is probably no REAL difference in its overall pharmokinetics should you administer HCG either IM or subcutaneously.
[As a professional, IMO, it is nice to cite the evidence in support of claims, particularly when challenged or if they are controversial or questionable. It adds to credibility. For example, can you answer - https://thinksteroids.com/community/posts/810510 ]
Saal W, Glowania HJ, Hengst W, Happ J. Pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics after subcutaneous and intramuscular injection of human chorionic gonadotropin. Fertil Steril 1991;56(2):225-9. Pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics after su... [Fertil Steril. 1991] - PubMed - NCBI
OBJECTIVE: The pharmacokinetics and efficiency of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) after subcutaneous (SC) injection was to clarify in comparison with the intramuscular (IM) mode of administration.
DESIGN: In a prospective study, the pharmacokinetics of hCG and the response of serum testosterone (T), luteinizing hormone (LH), and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) after an IM and SC injection of 5,000 IU hCG were evaluated up to 144 hours in two randomized groups.
SETTING: The study was carried out in a clinical dermatology department providing tertiary care.
PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four healthy male volunteers with a mean age of 22.7 +/- 4.3 years were divided into two groups.
INTERVENTIONS: Human chorionic gonadotropin (5,000 IU) was injected IM or SC.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Serum concentration of /b-hCG, T, LH, and FSH were evaluated after IM and SC administration of hCG. Differences between the two groups were determined by t-test.
RESULTS: Compared with IM administration of hCG, peak serum drug concentration was significantly delayed (P = 0.01) and serum half-life was prolonged (P = 0.01) after SC injection; however, T, LH, and FSH responses were identical.
CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous application of 5,000 IU hCG is as effective as IM administration in terms of steroidogenesis.
Last edited:
Can you explain or direct me to any literature on hCG tolerance. The use of the term tolerance implies an increasing dose to attain the same effect. I am not aware of any literature describing this phenomenon.
If what you mean is desensitization, can you direct me to evidence that this occurs clinically, most especially with the hCG doses you state.
Your posts raises other questions that require support.
