Watson Test-C (Domestic-Supply) - Blood Work - 2/2015 - LabCorp

[dper726]

I have to say I agree with you. It would be a lot more conclusive if ran longer. Especially with only 120/wk. Accually I agree with @Oregongearhead all things considered. It looks about right to me. Or at least too soon to draw a conclusion.

It doesn't look good at all. It is too low considering the factors in play. While the number is indeed acceptable on a trt basis. The results should of been a lot higher. We are attempting to conclude here the potency of the drug more then reaching trt safe levels.

At 125mg a week I am reaching 1300 on a Non pharma label

 

[Dr JIM]

Protocol:

- 120mg Test-C per week, split into 2 doses of 60mg each.

- 500iu hcg per week, split into 2 doses of 250iu each.

- AI as needed

Duration of protocol:

- Approximately 6 weeks

Blood draw information:

- Blood was drawn approximately 36hrs after 60mg Test-C injection, approximately 72hrs after 250iu HCG injection, and 24hrs after 12.5mg of Exemestane.

Results:

- 908 TT (ng/dl 348-1197)
- 36.14 FT (ng/dl 5-21)
- 13 E2 Sensitive (pg/ml 3-70)

Comments:

I'm surprised at the results. Based on how I feel, mentally, I expected numbers in the range I usually test in. Compared to the other results I posted on my prescription Test-C, these are lower by at least 300 points.

Although there were some physical indicators that my testosterone had decreased- acne and slight loss in strength- I chalked it up to E2 fluctuations, not getting enough sleep, and diet. Now its clear what the cause is.

A variable factor is the HCG in this protocol is not the same brand I was taking in my previous posted protocols. Additionally, it is not prescription HCG from a pharmacy. The brand is called Zyhcg by Sanzyme Ltd. out of India.

As far as I can tell, the HCG is working. Testicular size and ejaculate volume have not decreased and there is no achy sensation of atrophy. I apologize if this was too much information, haha.

If the HCG is authentic and it the correct concentration, the Watson is under-dosed.

I hope this helps provide more information on the matter. If anyone has any questions, concerns, or input, please feel free to post.

Thank You.

Wait let's make sure we are comparing apples to apples first.

Bc the WATSON test purchased on the net thru some UGL may not really be Watson but some counterfeit "Watson" product.

 

[Burrr]

If it turns out to be legit Watson, that would be pretty damn cool. HArd not to be skeptical though.

 

[insertnamehere]

Wait let's make sure we are comparing apples to apples first.

Bc the WATSON test purchased on the net thru some UGL may not really be Watson but some counterfeit "Watson" product.

The Watson is from Domestic-Supply. They're not an UGL, they don't make anything. The are resellers of popular brands.

The Watson looks legit but now that the blood test results are in, I'm inclined to say its fake.

 

[insertnamehere]

Wait let's make sure we are comparing apples to apples first.

Bc the WATSON test purchased on the net thru some UGL may not really be Watson but some counterfeit "Watson" product.

I'm comparing the Watson obtained from DS to my prescription testosterone (Perrigo) obtained from a legitimate pharmacy by means of blood testing.

My results on the same protocol using the Perrigo is here:

https://thinksteroids.com/community...-c-perrigo-blood-work-8-2014-quest.134360058/

 

[Dr JIM]

Who is DS ?

 

[Burrr]

Who is DS ?

A source, Domestic-Supply

 

[Dr JIM]

It only matters if the Watson your using is a legitimate Pharm product and the only way of knowing for sure is by testing it OR buying it from a pharmacy.

Absent the above who knows what your DS is selling as Watson.

 

[jackmeoff1]

I'm comparing the Watson obtained from DS to my prescription testosterone (Perrigo) obtained from a legitimate pharmacy by means of blood testing.

My results on the same protocol using the Perrigo is here:

https://thinksteroids.com/community...-c-perrigo-blood-work-8-2014-quest.134360058/

I've had a 300 point difference in TT levels from not only the same pharmaceutical testosterone, but from the same vial.

I think it's a little presumptuous to call this Watson fake based on your results.

It's not the 10x rule, but even Dr Jim admitted that the inclusion of HCG and an AI doesn't make that rule concrete.

 

[Dr JIM]

I've had a 300 point difference in TT levels from not only the same pharmaceutical testosterone, but from the same vial.

I think it's a little presumptuous to call this Watson fake based on your results.

It's not the 10x rule, but even Dr Jim admitted that the inclusion of HCG and an AI doesn't make that rule concrete.

Is that what I said NOT!

I said it hasn't been studied sufficiently to know how the inclusion of those two compounds would alter the 10 X rule.

However considering both HCG and AI's RAISE TT LEVELS, there is no reason to expect their simultaneous use during a cycle would do anything but INCREASE the TT dose response relationship.

What that means is it's almost certain the 10 X rule would become the 11,12,13 etc rule, but bc it has not been studied the exact change can not be quantified.

While a (10%) 300ng/DL difference is not significant when the level is 3300ng/DL it most certainly not correct to assume a similar change can be attributed to lab error when the difference is (50%) such as a 300ng/DL variation in a 600ng/DL level.

The former may be expected the latter NO way!

 

[jackmeoff1]

Is that what I said NOT!!

Here is what you said:

The "joke" is your suggestion what your running is "TRT"!

More importantly your missing the point, AGAIN, there simply is NO BENCHMARK that can be used to determine what effect an AI or HCG would have on TT levels. The net effect, there is NO WAY to reliably determine what a patients TT levels should be when these substances are run simultaneously!

But that's just one of several APPLES to ORANGES comparisons you have made in this thread, as a covert attempt to support the unsubstantiated dogma you spew!

And to be perfectly honest I'm surprised at how many Meso members have swallowed your BS hook, line and sinker, in the absence of ANY evidence based literature!

Since there is NO BENCHMARK why can that be used to support a conclusion in this case?

In my example, that was backed with blood work, you dismissed my data as a means to discredit the 10x theory because of the inclusion of an AI and HCG.

This data also uses those variables but the "10x theory" still holds up?

At least be consistent.

 

[Dr JIM]

How do you think a "benchmark" is established? Clinical studies!

Wrong clown in that thread you suggested your TRT values could be LOWER than the 10 X rule for whatever foolish reason you concocted even though you were taking these compounds and that's just being stupid.

Bc there is NO REASON to expect including these compounds in a cycle would diminish TT levels when they are well established to do the opposite.

The fact is I've been very consistent since their inclusion only INCREASES the likelihood a particular UGL TT product is underdosed should it not achieve levels consistent with the 10X rule, something you obviously still can't grasp bc your a shill, ignorant or just foolish.

 

[insertnamehere]

I've had a 300 point difference in TT levels from not only the same pharmaceutical testosterone, but from the same vial.

I think it's a little presumptuous to call this Watson fake based on your results.

It's not the 10x rule, but even Dr Jim admitted that the inclusion of HCG and an AI doesn't make that rule concrete.

Isn't it a little presumptuous to say, I said it was fake?

Please point out where I said it was fake. Am I inclined to believe it is fake, based on my blood work? Yes I am but we need more evidence to analyze.

As I recall, you were complaining about the lack of blood work to support the claims of the products DS sells on Evo. You were interested in blood work on the anything including the Watson. Well, there you have it.

BTW, you're welcome.

 

[Burrr]

I appreciate the bloodwork, and would probably be looking into making a purchase if bloods had come back a little better. Even if the bloods had come back 10x, I still wouldn't have absolute faith that it was legit pharma.
Come to think of it, if they were going through so much trouble to make a nearly perfect counterfeit, the dosing should have been the easy part.

 

[jackmeoff1]

Isn't it a little presumptuous to say, I said it was fake?

Please point out where I said it was fake. Am I inclined to believe it is fake, based on my blood work? Yes I am but we need more evidence to analyze.

As I recall, you were complaining about the lack of blood work to support the claims of the products DS sells on Evo. You were interested in blood work on the anything including the Watson. Well, there you have it.

BTW, you're welcome.

My bad. I didn't mean to imply that you said that. Rather it was becoming the consensus.

 

[insertnamehere]

My bad. I didn't mean to imply that you said that. Rather it was becoming the consensus.

Its cool.

So, are you going to make a purchase based off my blood work?

 

[jackmeoff1]

Wrong clown in that thread you suggested your TRT values could be LOWER than the 10 X rule for whatever foolish reason you concocted

Bc there is NO REASON to expect including these compounds in a cycle would diminish TT levels when they are well established .

there is NO WAY to reliably determine what a patients TT levels should be when these substances are run simultaneously!

So you admit that there is NO benchmark, yet it's good enough to use as conclusive anyways? Based on what? You don't have to answer that because the entire 10x rule has no basis itself anyways. I just wanted to point out the obvious regarding how you view data.

I guess I'm a shill for DS now, even though I almost got banned on EVO for scrutinizing them

 

[insertnamehere]

Who threatened to ban you for scrutinizing DS?

 

[bdg77]

How long would you suggest that Test-C needs to run before an accurate measure can be obtained?

Six weeks at the same dosing protocol, blood levels are saturated.

I would wait until week 10. With weekly dosing wouldn't there be a slow, steady build up? I've read with cyp at typical TRT (100mg-200mg) dose, which are normal administered about every 12 days. That a stable T level of around 900-1200 could be expected. But that's almost twice as long between dosing. So by dosing at a rate that is less than cyp's half life it should keep going up.

 

[double-leg]

Wait isn't ds run by a few members on this board? Aren't the part of a peptide company?
Aswell as other labels?