Athleticfreak
New Member
Search function
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
MESO-Rx Sponsor Primal Pharma - US Domestic
- Thread starter Primal_Pharma
- Start date
-
- Tags
- primal
powdered_toast_man
Member
You guys do not understand burden of proof at all.
Whistles77
Member
I really cannot understand what this sentence means as it's such incredibly awful grammar, and your thoughts, responses and throwing insults are all over the place, but chatgpt gave me this interpretation? Did the AI articulate your viewpoint accurately?
That sentence is poorly written, which is why it feels confusing. Here’s what it’s trying to say, in plain English — and then I’ll clean it up.
What it means
They’re asking whether:
Primo reliably lowers estradiol (E2) levels by a mechanism intrinsic to Primo itself, rather than
- reducing aromatization like an AI,
- or lowering E2 indirectly by lowering testosterone dose,
- or via random, inconsistent side effects.
In other words:
- Is there a repeatable, Primo-specific physiological mechanism that causes E2 to drop?
- Or are the observed E2 reductions just context-dependent (dose, stack, individual variation)?
Why the original sentence is bad
- “through vis it’s own unique mechanism” is broken grammar
(“vis” is likely a typo for “via”) - “reliable way” is vague — reliable across who? what doses?
Clean rewrite (neutral)
The discussion is whether Primo lowers estradiol through a mechanism intrinsic to the compound itself, and whether that effect is consistent and reproducible.Cleaner, more precise rewrite (technical)
The question is whether methenolone produces a consistent reduction in serum estradiol via a compound-specific mechanism, independent of aromatase inhibition.Short forum-friendly version
They’re asking if Primo consistently lowers E2 by its own mechanism, not just incidentally or indirectly.What is actually known
Yes, it’s widely observed that:
- Many users see lower serum E2 on labs when Primo is added
- This happens without using an AI
- It often happens without reducing testosterone dose
So at a practical, anecdotal level: “Primo can reduce measured E2” is a fair statement. That part isn’t controversial.
Why the mechanism question still matters
Where the argument breaks down is when people jump from observation to explanation. There are multiple ways E2 can drop, and they are not equivalent:
- Reduced aromatization (AI-like)
→ Primo does not do this (no evidence) - Altered clearance / metabolism of estrogens
→ Plausible, but not well quantified - Androgenic competition at estrogen receptors
→ Can lower measured E2 without killing estrogen signaling - SHBG changes affecting circulating fractions
→ Labs move even if tissue effects don’t - Context effects (dose, stack, baseline E2)
→ Sometimes E2 drops, sometimes it doesn’t
If you don’t separate these, people start making bad decisions:
- running Primo instead of an AI
- assuming E2 suppression is predictable
- misattributing side effects to “low E2” vs receptor effects
Possible those highlighted compounds come from trace amounts of GSO?Weird where's the BA/BB?
Either way, you can compare the yellow stuff and the GCMS in the earlier post i made. Why isn't a sealed vial sent?
View attachment 376494
MESO-Rx Sponsor Post in thread 'Primal Pharma - US Domestic'
I apologize but was the Test E GCMS ever addressed?
Leaving this China Primo200 as a sample..
And a pure MCT sample
@SwolieGuacamole
@MisterT
Photon
Member
Don't know
It's mostly a qualitative gcms
The numbers don't mean much fyi
Could be a lot
Could be a little
powdered_toast_man
Member
Like this?
Attachments
powdered_toast_man
Member
That is really pathetic that you needed ChatGPT to assist you because your reading comprehension is so poor. Intelligent people aren't so easily tripped up.
The conclusion the ChatGPT came to is also mine: running primo instead of an AI is a bad decision.
But you're an idiot, so it doesn't surprise me that you posted this unashamedly.
So we’re “good?”
I actually started pinning the npp before the gcms came in not gonna lie
trynagains
Member
Why so hostile my guy? It’s okay to have an opinion. It’s okay to be strongly opinionated. But it’s not cool to bludgeon people with your opinion. Personally I’d rather be a kind simpleton than a brilliant jerk. communication is really where arguments like these break down. There’s nothing wrong with someone providing clarity and argument assessment using an LLM. From a guy who really despises AI, it’s admittedly something they are very good at.
Whistles77
Member
Dude. Youre incoherent. Your grammar is so awful that you cannot convey a point, nor stay on topic. My reading comprehension is fine, if people speak english.
If the argument you're trying to make all along has been "running primo instead of an AI is a bad decision, you might like to have tried making that point". I don't disagree with that, however you are just saying whatever the hell you feel like. Moreover, i still can't tell what point youre trying to make. You just told me your conclusion, but again, your hypothesis, your argument it's all missing. Whatever is inside your head, you don't seem able to convey it and just get angry about it.
At this point, you're either a troll, or disturbed. Either way...... good luck.
nullandvoid
Member
Y'all have a much higher tolerance for noise. I put the guy ignore a few pages back. The only way to win is not to play.
Whistles77
Member
Followed your lead. Was genuinely trying to get to the bottom of what he wanted to say.
powdered_toast_man
Member
This is fucked. For anyone who isn't a complete fucking dumbass: primo doesn't lower e2, so don't use it for that. The end.
just some dude
Member
what a fkn cornball, literally just trying to sound smart on purpose while still being wrong, the fk is wrong with this generation? gen z could have it all, look at how rich clav got
powdered_toast_man
Member
Why single me out as hostile?
nullandvoid
Member
This is how I imagine him now.
just some dude
Member
people say primo is overrated but it’s just supply and demand, people want something that’s not going to fuck their body up but can still still stack up nicely with their thyroid/hgh/test base.
to my understanding really only primo can be called for that, if you wanna add up the toxicity from all the studies (lipids/liver/kidney/brain/bp)
maybe overall -22% for EQ while -8% for primo and -12% for testosterone whereas you all know up to fkn 80 probably with the harsher compounds.
to my understanding really only primo can be called for that, if you wanna add up the toxicity from all the studies (lipids/liver/kidney/brain/bp)
maybe overall -22% for EQ while -8% for primo and -12% for testosterone whereas you all know up to fkn 80 probably with the harsher compounds.
powdered_toast_man
Member
What am I wrong about exactly? My assertion is that primo doesn't lower e2.
Does anyone know if I can use primo as an AI to lower e2?
I thought about posting in the steroid forum, the pct forum, and even the bloodwork forum, but figured I’d pop in here on a source thread and see if anyone had an opinion. TIA
I thought about posting in the steroid forum, the pct forum, and even the bloodwork forum, but figured I’d pop in here on a source thread and see if anyone had an opinion. TIA
Last edited:
Similar threads
