Qingdao Sigma Chemical Co., Ltd (International, US, EU, Canada and Australia domestic

you need to try Clonidine. Iconic anti stress and sleep drug.
I’ve tired various doses of Clonidine (both immediate and extended release) and unfortunately it doesn’t work well for me. My REM and deep sleep are not too good with Clonidine and I wake up feeling like I didn’t sleep well at all. I've tried it by itself and in combination with other drugs as well.

So far, it’s 2mg Epitalon, 200mg Trazodone, 80mg of melatonin and 100mg/wk nandrolone in addition to test that gives me the most benefit. Nandrolone and test make a huge difference in my chronic pain levels and are a big part of why I could finally sleep 4 to 5 and sometimes even 6 hours a night. The other stuff seems to help me quickly fall sleep, stay asleep and helps me get back to sleep if I do wake up. I’ve been getting 6 to 8 hours of sleep with the addition of Epitalon and feel good when I wake up, and recovery from working out has improved.
 
You test the raws and thats it. No need to test the final potency unless you can't do basic math correctly.

Upfront cost is maybe $200. Add 100 for vials and expandables. 100gr test will yield 40 vials aka 4 kits of test. Thats approx the cost of buying finished oils from qsc one of the cheapest around. Everything after that is going to yield profit compared to buying finished oils.

And most importantly you control the variables: potency, sterility, rawsetc
Thank narta now I'm down the fucking rabbit hole. I already dream of my Test U in castor oil perfectly brewed and other stuff. Fuck gotta start asking and reading stuff.
 
Is using Wise payment that much better or easier than the bank? I have never used it but hate going into the bank, especially sitting awkwardly while this shits done
 
Thank narta now I'm down the fucking rabbit hole.

freddie mercury GIF


:D

P.S. Opt for Test Decanoate
 
From now on, every time a bubbly boy fear monger posts something about heavy metals, endotoxins, microplastics, coring, sterility testing, etc, I will post this video.

Cuz that shit gets old after about 5 minutes. It's a bizarre perversion of "harm reduction."

Like you should also be afraid of the airborne bacteria that can get on the needle after you withdraw it from the vial and before you stick it in your ass [insert gross infection pic meme.gif]

There was a time when needle and vial sharing was common in gyms. Even the occasional instance of hepatitis didn't stop it, since the long term effect of liver cancer wasn't fully appreciated then. But AIDS finally did.

There were undoubtedly guys like you laughing at the "bubble boy" dudes who declined to share.

Standards improve with time and knowledge. The concerns are well documented by credible establishment research. not paranoid fringe fantasy, and the precautions we're discussing are no more extreme than a 1st year nurses aide would learn.

Even if we've eliminated 98% of the short term health risks of administering gear, is there something wrong with striving to knock out the rest, and prevent the next round of harms to our health that will only become apparent in long term?
 
Mr. Narta has been very cool to me. He is a. Awesome dude.. I bug the crap outta him about homwbrew information and he's always nice enough to answer my questions..
I would agree that Narta rocks and has contributed much towards harm reduction here. That is why I don’t understand the reluctance to support something simple that can potentially reduce harm even more. To each their own, but I will continue with terminal sterilization of all my brews in spite of many saying it is unnecessary.

Everyone should do what they feel comfortable with, even if it goes against what others traditionally do,

Peace!
 
I would agree that Narta rocks and has contributed much towards harm reduction here. That is why I don’t understand the reluctance to support something simple that can potentially reduce harm even more. To each their own, but I will continue with terminal sterilization of all my brews in spite of many saying it is unnecessary.

Everyone should do what they feel comfortable with, even if it goes against what others traditionally do,

Peace!
Where can I read about the effectiveness of that and process.was gonna send u a pm but I guess you don't except them.
 
You test the raws and thats it. No need to test the final potency unless you can't do basic math correctly.

Upfront cost is maybe $200. Add 100 for vials and expandables. 100gr test will yield 40 vials aka 4 kits of test. Thats approx the cost of buying finished oils from qsc one of the cheapest around. Everything after that is going to yield profit compared to buying finished oils.

And most importantly you control the variables: potency, sterility, rawsetc
If my final volume comes out correct in the syringe, I consider it within an acceptable error. Another perk of syringe fillers.
 
Where can I read about the effectiveness of that and process.was gonna send u a pm but I guess you don't except them.

We'd all choose real pharma gear if it were easily available at a low price, not because UGLs and home brewing can't make effective gear, but because we all know it's safer, made to a higher standard.

I haven't looked for studies specifically addressing Terminal Sterilization, as it's been a long standard practice for manufacturing injectables.

You'll see in the links a lot of care is taken to keep every ingredient and piece of equipment in the process sterile, starting with raws.

Terminal sterilization is a recognition that even with the highest standards of manufacturing, bacterial contamination can still occur. Because we're bypassing the body's defense with an injection the consequences, short or long term, are much more serious than orals, or even inhalants, sources we're designed to fight off bacteria from.

For terminal sterilization heat sensitive products are exposed to radiation, in their packaging.

Steam autoclaves can sterilize at 121c.

Dry heat sterilization is usually done at 180c.

This is the method specified in Bayer's Testosterone Undecanoate patent.

From this we can extrapolate that BA, BB, Castor Oil, and Test-U can withstand 180c for 3 hours without significant degradation:

IMG_8784.jpeg


This is a pharma contract manufacturer, explaining the details of making sterile injectables. Obviously their standards are high, but time is money, and no step would be done if it were useless.

If anything, the much lower standards, and lack of testing in home brewing (and UGL) makes Terminal Sterilization even more useful, compensating for all the sources of contamination instead of relying 100% on a cheap filter from Amazon to do all the heavy lifting of sterilization.


I know some say "I've been injecting for XX years and I'm fine, where's the evidence of bacteria??".

I think it's all around us. The unexplained brutal PIP, inflammation, occasional fevers, sudden joint pain, "Test flu".

It would be more odd to have never encountered contaminated gear given how loose the standards are, it's just that no one ever tests for microbials, including endotoxin, always present wherever there's bacterial and passes right through syringe filters.
 
Last edited:
I would agree that Narta rocks and has contributed much towards harm reduction here. That is why I don’t understand the reluctance to support something simple that can potentially reduce harm even more. To each their own, but I will continue with terminal sterilization of all my brews in spite of many saying it is unnecessary.

Everyone should do what they feel comfortable with, even if it goes against what others traditionally do,

Peace!
Terminal heat sterilization is non NEEDED but doesn't hurt either, it only adds to safety and sterility. And if I was doing larger batches in a non controlled environment I would opt to incorporate such a step too
 
Nebido or any single ampoule product of Bayer doesn't use BA, only BB, castor oil and the API

Fair enough! I was fooled by it being listed in the "ingredients" in a post a reference to the patent.

IMG_8785.jpeg

Too lazy to check for BA temp stability right now, but here's a common formula used by compounding pharmacies to make 100mg/ml test specifying Terminal Sterilization at 160c for just 2 hours, and it contains BA, BB, and Test.


Interesting to note they remind the pharmacy to make extra for the mandatory sterility and endotoxin tests...even for that tiny 50ml batch.
 
We'd all choose real pharma gear if it were easily available at a low price, not because UGLs and home brewing can't make effective gear, but because we all know it's safer, made to a higher standard.

I haven't looked for studies specifically addressing Terminal Sterilization, as it's been a long standard practice for manufacturing injectables.

You'll see in the links a lot of care is taken to keep every ingredient and piece of equipment in the process sterile, starting with raws.

Terminal sterilization is a recognition that even with the highest standards of manufacturing, bacterial contamination can still occur. Because we're bypassing the body's defense with an injection the consequences, short or long term, are much more serious than orals, or even inhalants, sources we're designed to fight off bacteria from.

For terminal sterilization heat sensitive products are exposed to radiation, in their packaging.

Steam autoclaves can sterilize at 121c.

Dry heat sterilization is usually done at 180c.

This is the method specified in Bayer's Testosterone Undecanoate patent.

From this we can extrapolate that BA, BB, Castor Oil, and Test-U can withstand 180c for 3 hours without significant degradation:

View attachment 293900


This is a pharma contract manufacturer, explaining the details of making sterile injectables. Obviously their standards are high, but time is money, and no step would be done if it were useless.

If anything, the much lower standards, and lack of testing in home brewing (and UGL) makes Terminal Sterilization even more useful, compensating for all the sources of contamination instead of relying 100% on a cheap filter from Amazon to do all the heavy lifting of sterilization.


I know some say "I've been injecting for XX years and I'm fine, where's the evidence of bacteria??".

I think it's all around us. The unexplained brutal PIP, inflammation, occasional fevers, sudden joint pain, "Test flu".

It would be more odd to have never encountered contaminated gear given how loose the standards are, it's just that no one ever tests for microbials, including endotoxin, always present wherever there's bacterial and passes right through syringe filters.
Problem is you have to make do with what you have. Nobody here is willing to inject bacteria into their body, hence we are giving sources shit for producing oil with floaters, actually push for sterility tests and we try to share and educate each other as homebrewers.

We do actually inject what we brew, we report our experience honestly, it is not just research from a study. Since the scientific world will not use ugl for scientific research, we are bound to do this ourselves.

I will trust people in this forum than anyone else when it comes to this subject, one because they have first hand experience and secondly they actually use it on themselves.

Furthermore, there is no epidemic of abscesses and infections plaguing our community that we know of. People have been injecting ugl for more than 40 years and people started with vet gear too, we have advanced better by learning about bad solvents to avoid, usage of better sterilization techniques and brewing methods.

In my opinion we’re doing just fine, let’s continue holding these vendors accountable and if you want to test ENDOTOXINS on your gear then actually send your stuff for testing, all I hear is jibber jabber and no actual movement, no offence.
 
Since the scientific world will not use ugl for scientific research, we are bound to do this ourselves.

Doesn't matter in this context but that's not really true. I've worked in some low budget labs and there were times when we couldn't afford "pharma" quality like Sigma Aldrich. It was animal studies but we definitely did some UGL homebrewing for some compounds. It gets published just the same.
 
Doesn't matter in this context but that's not really true. I've worked in some low budget labs and there were times when we couldn't afford "pharma" quality like Sigma Aldrich. It was animal studies but we definitely did some UGL homebrewing for some compounds. It gets published just the same.
I stand corrected, my point still stands though, it is not used as a resource for reference when it comes to application or maybe I didn’t see or hear refer to such studies.
 
Back
Top