PowerHungry
New Member
<EDITED>
Last edited:
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Polling Q: Chem Musc Enhn vs. Ananbolics 2004?
- Thread starter PowerHungry
- Start date
einstein1905
New Member
CME, the first one, not BTPB, is kind of rudimentary....it's got some good info, but it's nothing land breaking. BTPB is a little more cutting edge with some of the info, but it is also a little dated in many other respects.
I don't like Llewellyn. I think he misrepresents studies and writes with a bias (more so than most).
If you haven't read all of the articles here on the meso site, do that first. By doing that, you'll have already taken in 75% of the info you'll find in the two books combined.
I don't like Llewellyn. I think he misrepresents studies and writes with a bias (more so than most).
If you haven't read all of the articles here on the meso site, do that first. By doing that, you'll have already taken in 75% of the info you'll find in the two books combined.
Desibaba
New Member
I think L Rea writes with More bias than LLewellyn! But anabolics 2002 was pretty good.I have both that and CME
Similar threads
