I too suffer from panic attacks and this is currently my second cycle of the dmz brand. Im 2 weeks in on dmz 3.0 and the results out way the anxiety but today as i was coming home from the gym i had a bad panic attack. Reading your post set me at ease and put doubt towards heart problems, lung problems, etc. Hopefully no more of those spells but thanks for posting bro
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
-
Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
Super DMZ update 11 days ON. Couldn't handle sides.
- Thread starter Oitepal
- Start date
Qwai Chang
Registered
I got something that you guys may think that I'm loony tune. I already know I'm insane so here goes. I was drinking one night and I was looking over my oral capsules and tablets. I thought, "I wonder what would be the effect if I mix all of these in the creatine container?" So I began to separate the capsules and crushed all the tablets. I had maybe a little over a pound of creatine left in the jug.
After finishing up, I went to weigh. The weight came to 4.2lb!!! Inside the container: anadrol, anavar, dianabol, SuperDMZ, ostarine, turinabol, and winstrol. I put 120 capsules of DMZ in to the container and I have one bottle left of the good old stuff. I haven't gotten around to trying it out because I've been dosing a Test blend and thought taking the powder along with the inject-able maybe too much, yet, I've decided to go ahead and give it a try on Wednesday, the 22nd, my next training day. I'm sure this is going to be a blast!
After finishing up, I went to weigh. The weight came to 4.2lb!!! Inside the container: anadrol, anavar, dianabol, SuperDMZ, ostarine, turinabol, and winstrol. I put 120 capsules of DMZ in to the container and I have one bottle left of the good old stuff. I haven't gotten around to trying it out because I've been dosing a Test blend and thought taking the powder along with the inject-able maybe too much, yet, I've decided to go ahead and give it a try on Wednesday, the 22nd, my next training day. I'm sure this is going to be a blast!
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2009
- Messages
- 14,747
- Reaction score
- 4,238
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Carlisle, Pennsylvania, USA
^^^^
"I was drinking one night and I"
Water, I hope.
"I was drinking one night and I"
Water, I hope.
Delawerebadboy
Registered
This one time in band camp . Haha
UberJedi
Registered
MEN.....50 of you are going into that weight room on this shit.....25 of you aint comin back.
Qwai Chang
Registered
Thanks for the replies and the concern. Quite funny indeed. Well a little less than 2 more hours and I'll be in the gym to trying out "Frankenstein's Dried Bones" That's my nickname for the powder.
I'll keep you guys informed that's if the intake of the stuff and the time in the gym doesn't kill me. Peace all.
I'll keep you guys informed that's if the intake of the stuff and the time in the gym doesn't kill me. Peace all.
Mike Arnold
Registered
So, you "wondered what effects you would experience if you ground down a dozen different orals and mixed them all together with a pound of creatine"? I'll tell you what effect it will have--you will get the effects of every oral you put in there, plus the creatine, but now you have no idea how much of each oral is in a given quantity of powder, so you will just be guessing as to the total amount of mg's you are ingesting. Basically, that was about the dumbest fucking thing you could have done.
Next time your "wondering" something, I suggest you stop--realize you are probably about to do something stupid---and discard the idea.
Mike Arnold
Registered
Qwai Chang
Registered
"People like me"? Huh? Think not! I tried the powder, it's wonderful and still working. I had went to the VAMC earlier this morning with the substance in my blood, then my doc wanted a urine and blood testing sample. I've got to wait several day for the levels to go down. I'm going to wait until my body reaches normalcy then I take the test for for a more accurate reading.
Mike some guys don't get it. Luckily I would bet 75 percent of his product is bunk.
Spreading stupidity one post at a time! Your doing it right!
dave 236
Elite Member
No one is really this stupid...are they? This has to be a gimmick or either this is living proof that you can't protect stupid people from themselves. They will find a way to do something no one ever thought of.
Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
UberJedi
Registered
While this isn't the greatest idea it is reflective of what ProHormone companies are doing to try and chase injectables. There are some products out there that mix 2 and 3 Methylated orals into one pill. I feel sorry for your liver taking these and just about any other Designer. They are just old steroids that were highly toxic and discarded some time ago. They are giving injectables and like steroids a bad name.
And looking at what's in there and the cutting agent I highly doubt he is going to get an effective dose of any compound outside of the creatine. Best idea would have been (considering that he probably had small amounts of each) to run the Anadrol and DBol back to back in the beginning of a cycle save the anavar until he got more and maybe use the Super DMZ on a subsequent cycle. It is really just a big waste of money. BUT it's his body so let's just sit back and enjoy the show.
And looking at what's in there and the cutting agent I highly doubt he is going to get an effective dose of any compound outside of the creatine. Best idea would have been (considering that he probably had small amounts of each) to run the Anadrol and DBol back to back in the beginning of a cycle save the anavar until he got more and maybe use the Super DMZ on a subsequent cycle. It is really just a big waste of money. BUT it's his body so let's just sit back and enjoy the show.
heckler7
Registered
drugs are bad
UberJedi
Registered
mmmKay
Mike Arnold
Registered
Correction. The orals we now call designers were not discarded because they were too toxic, as many designers (which includes 100's of AAS that were never made into prescription drugs) are much less toxic than many orals that went onto become prescription drugs.
The traditional orals were made into prescriptions not because they were less toxic or better muscle builders. In fact, maximum muscle growth was never the priority and neither was eliminating toxicity--the priority was producing drugs which were best suited to help treat certain medical conditions...period...and they didn't alway get it right, either. There are numerous designers (produced and unproduced) which display greater muscle building potency, with less toxicity, than many prescription orals.
Sure, there are bound to be some designers that are more toxic than prescription oral simply because of the law of averages. There are 100's of orals (designers) which were never made into prescription drugs or produced for any reason, while only a few dozen ever made it onto the prescription market. The vast amount of designers are not any more toxic than prescription orals.
Now, if the goal of these pharmceutical reserachers was to produce the best muscle builders within an average toxicity range, we would have seen a completely different bunch of orals being made into prescription drugs over the last 60 years. Some steroids were selected to be made into script drugs simply because they could be used by women and children without causing unacceptable masculinization (ex. Anavar). There are lots of different reasons why certain steroids were slected...but it sure didn't have a damn thing to do with which steroids were best for BB'rs.
UberJedi
Registered
But what's going on now is that when a compund is made illigeal they go back and either move a molecule around or go back to the little black book of old and discarded steroids ( I agree some where ditched because they were no more effective than what was/is on the market ) and they are getting more and more toxic and the cycle lengths are diminsihing. I understand that most oral and some injectable were developed not with BBrs in mind. But at least when they were perscription the quality was being monitored. We can look at how many people die every year from Perscriotion drugs and make a reasonable assupmtion that when it comes to purity our Gov doesn't fuck around.
If it were legal to get Test,Tren,etc we wouldn't even know what Superdrol,Epistane etc even are, Is it the Govts fault.....absolutely. Are they continuing to repeat the same fuck ups...Yup. Is there anything we can do about it?...Maybe...I wonder what would happen if BBrs and gym rats alike started to convince the drug companies that they could make a mint by lobbying these drugs to become legal. Just a pipe dream I guess. Think you could actully have classes teaching all about the compounds and how to use and dose properly. I think Jerry Brainum put it best when he said "If you're going to do steroids..do the real thing"(we all fully understand that PH's are "real" you know what I mean)
If it were legal to get Test,Tren,etc we wouldn't even know what Superdrol,Epistane etc even are, Is it the Govts fault.....absolutely. Are they continuing to repeat the same fuck ups...Yup. Is there anything we can do about it?...Maybe...I wonder what would happen if BBrs and gym rats alike started to convince the drug companies that they could make a mint by lobbying these drugs to become legal. Just a pipe dream I guess. Think you could actully have classes teaching all about the compounds and how to use and dose properly. I think Jerry Brainum put it best when he said "If you're going to do steroids..do the real thing"(we all fully understand that PH's are "real" you know what I mean)
Great post.
Mike, if pharmaceutical compagnies would have wanted to create AAS with the best muscle building potency / toxicity ratio, what do you think they would have come up with ?
SD, M1-T ? (They are fantastic muscle-builder, but, taken at effective dosage, they are extremely harsh on lipids...Syntex wanted to put Methasterone aka SD on the market after their Anadrol, but they thought it was too toxic, am I right ?)
Dimethazine (Roxilon), Methylstenbolone, Methyldihydroboldione (1-alpha) ?
Come on, Mike, I think you know some obscure compounds... ;-)
Last edited:
Anadrol : Red blood cell boost
Masteron : Anti-Estrogen
Etc...
But some steroids were created solely for their muscle building potency, like D-Bol, no ?
Anyway, I am really glad that you give advices to people concerning BBing. I learned a lot from reading your posts on numerous forums and from reading your articles on this website. A little sad that you are not anymore on BSL Q&A forum...
Thank you man.
Masteron : Anti-Estrogen
Etc...
But some steroids were created solely for their muscle building potency, like D-Bol, no ?
Anyway, I am really glad that you give advices to people concerning BBing. I learned a lot from reading your posts on numerous forums and from reading your articles on this website. A little sad that you are not anymore on BSL Q&A forum...
Thank you man.
Mike Arnold
Registered
You are off-base on a few things here. For one, the large majority of designer AAS (which I will refer to as non-script AAS from this point forward) being sold on the market today were previously synthesized in the 40's-60's. When they end up getting banned, these supp companies usually just end up choosing a different steroid from the old list of previously synthesized, unscheduled AAS. Yes, some of what we have on the market are new steroids, which have ben slightly modified from their original molecular structure, but most of these are NOT anymore toxic than script AAS. In fact, most of the newly modified legal orals are less toxic than many script drugs.
In addition, your belief that today's legal AAS are getting continuously more toxic through molecular manipulation just isn't true, because as I stated above, most of these newly modified drugs are actually less toxic than many script orals and on top of that, legal orals in general have grown less toxic as the years have gone by, regardless of whether they have been modified or simply selected from the list of previously unscheduled drugs. Case in point--M1T. M1T was the 1st legal, fully active methyl ever releaaed on the supp market...and it originally had only a 3 week recommended cycle length. M1T was also the most toxic legal oral ever released. SD (also more toxic than other legal orals) followed a year later and ever since then, the vast majority have declined in toxicity and could be run for longer periods of time.
But, one thing you may not realize is that none of these cycle lengths, in most cases, have any bearing on the drug's toxicity. If you haven't noticed, nearly every single legal oral ever produced has a recommended cycle length of 4 weeks, or 30 days. Even the unmethylated orals, which means they demonstrate ZERO liver toxicity, usually come with 4 week cycle recommendsations. Obviously, an unmethylated oral is much safer than all scrippt orals, but they still have 4 week recommended cycle lengths? Even among the methylated orals, why are they all set at 4 weeks when they vary so much in toxicity?
Here' the answer--because supplement companies set all the cycle lengths for legal orals, while pharmacuetical companies set usage guidelines for all script orals. There are entirely different corporations with different concerns and goals. Supplement companies have set their cycle lengths at 4 weeks not because they are necessarily more toxic than script orals, but because they don't want to be sued by some jackass who abuses their products. These companies already know that lots of customers are not going to follow recommendations. They know that if they tell the customer to runa product for 8 weeks at 50 mg/day, there will be people who run them 2-3X that long as 2-3X the recommended dose. So, by setting mild cycle recommendations, they know the absuers will still stray outside their guildeljnes, but generally not to the point of hurting themselves. Remember, the people who use these products are people obsessed with size & strength, so they are likely to want to take more for longer periods of time, whereas script oral are prescribed by doctors for the treatment of medical conditions. Peopel being treated for medical conditions are unlikely to exceed their doctor's recommendations. Basically, supp companies are forced to low-ball their recommendations (in most cases) because they know their customers won't listen to them, whereas this is a not a concern of physicians..
Hell, I know one guy who ran SD--one of the more toxic orals--for 2 years straight, so this alone shows you what supp companies are dealing with. On top of that, supp companies could be put out of business with a single lawsuit, whereas big Pharma is pretty much untouchable. Also relevant is the fact that supp companies are selling drugs for recreational purposes, while pharm companies are not. All of these reasons play into why supp companies keep their oral cycles at 4 weeks, despite a great variance in toxicity. Therefore, the chorter cycle lengths of lehal orals does not necessarily indicate an increaased toxicity over script drugs.
Still, this explanation should be completely unecessary, as snyone who has an understanding or the drugs involved already knows that many legal orals are equal or less toxic than many script orals. In many cases, doctors will make recommendations that are far more toxic than anything we see on a supplement bottle. For example, some doctors would place patients on 200+ mg of Anadrol/day for 6+ months, which is WAY more toxic than ANY legal cycle recommended today. So, if you truly think that shorter cycle lengths are a reliable true indication of a steroid's toxicity, or that legal orals arfe becomingly increasingly toxic, you are incorrect. Now, there are a few legal orals which should be limited to 3-4 weeks, such as M1T, but the vast majority of legal orals are no more toxic than script drugs.
As for your claim that stuff like Sperdrol and Epistane wouldn't be available if script drygs were legal, you may be correct, but that would be a true shame, as many legal orals are some of the best orals ever released for growth 7 strength purposes. Script orals were not designed--or I should say selected for production--according to muyscle building potency or even toxicity, but because they were best suited to treating a certain medical condition. If growth & strength were the top prioities of pharm companies, we would have a scompletely different list of script drugs available today than what we currently do.
As for Jerry Branuim's comment, if he is referring only to script orals when he says the "real" thing, then his comment is based in ignorance and I discard it in full. Many legal orals are far safer than many script drugs, and vice versa. We can't put scheduled and unschedule--or legal and illegal steroids into 2 different boats. They are all steroids, so to infer, on any level, that scripr orals are always safer/betgter, is foolish. Each compound must be independently evaluated for toxicity, with its own risk profile clearly defined, before one can attempt to make a determiniation of suitabilty relative to script drugs. Tossing entire groups of drugs into a "less than desirable" category simply because they have not been sold as a prescriprtion is ridiculous and demonstrates ignorance, at best.
Mike Arnold
Registered
......
Mike Arnold
Registered
Yes, D-bol waa created solely for athletic enhancemnt, but I believe it was the only one--in the U.S. Germany, as well as Russia, employed government workers to make steroids for performance enhancement, as well. However, it is worth nothing that just because a certain steroid may have ben created for this pupose, does not mean it was the best muscle builder, or the best strength drugs, or the best at anything else. Much of what was created was the result of speculation--and with a limited understanding of how these drugs affected the body, they often chose less than ideal compounds for their goals.
For example, John Zeilger created d-bol as an alternative to testosterone because he believed testosterone was "too dangerous". Today, we know that d-bol can potentially cause many more health problems than testosterone. Just because a drug was specificaly made for performance enhancement, does not mean it was the best performance enhancer. As another example, German physicians supplied both men & woman olympic compeyitors with t-bol as the primary--and often only--AAS for performance enhancement. I could understand why they chose this AAS for women, as it is much less likely to lead to masculinization than many other drugs, but for the men? There were many oither steroids which would have provuided far greater gains in strength, speed, and endurance.
heckler7
Registered
Mike your such a tease, just tell us
UberJedi
Registered
I agree with most of what you said. But just to address Jerry Brainum he acknowledged that the PHs (Designers) are real. He was bascially saying just get out the needle if you are going to do steroids. Also I find it interesting that Masteron in the injectable version of SD (If memory serves) and it is used mostly as a cutting agent.
So what's your opinion on getting this shizzit legalized? I mean even the DEA told congress that it's a bad idea to make AAS illegal but when faced with ONE and only ONE parent who was in deep set denial. (Losing a child would be crushing I get that as a father my self). Congress folded. Not to mention the personal responsibility this Father is skirting becasue I'm sure he never preasured his child in any unreasonable way.
What's it going to take to get this boat turned around?
So what's your opinion on getting this shizzit legalized? I mean even the DEA told congress that it's a bad idea to make AAS illegal but when faced with ONE and only ONE parent who was in deep set denial. (Losing a child would be crushing I get that as a father my self). Congress folded. Not to mention the personal responsibility this Father is skirting becasue I'm sure he never preasured his child in any unreasonable way.
What's it going to take to get this boat turned around?
Mike Arnold
Registered
I agree with most of what you said.
What do you disagree with, as I have reviewed my post and do not see any inaccurate information?
But just to address Jerry Brainum he acknowledged that the PHs (Designers) are real. He was bascially saying just get out the needle if you are going to do steroids.
Every steroid has it own individual effects. I would never suggest that a serious BB'r, especially a competitive one, leave methyls (i.e. orals) behind, as they provide specific effects which an be very valuable for not only size and strength, but muscle hardness, density, and dryness. Both orals and injectables have their placce in the sport, so once again, if Jerry is suggesting that orals be eliminated (which I doubt), then I disagree, ad does every single professional BB'r and professional strength athlete on the planet. Injectables alone will never provide optimal results in any category, although their use should be properly managed, in order to avoid dramatic flucuations in cardiovascular health markers or excessive liver stress--two effects which can largely be eliminated with preventative care.
Also I find it interesting that Masteron in the injectable version of SD (If memory serves) and it is used mostly as a cutting agent.
Masteron is not an injectable version of SD. Masteron is masteron and SD is SD--two completely different drugs. When Masteron is methylated, it becomes SD, but in doing so the molecular structure is altered, making it its own drug. For example, D-bol is methylated boldenone (EQ), yet you don't hear people calling D-bol injectable boldenone because it is a completely different drug, just like methylated masteron is a completely different drug from Masteron. To provide a few other examples, Bolasterone is di-methylated testosterone, methyltrienolone is methylated trenbolone, 1-M1T is methylated 1-testosterone. Epistane is the methylated version of a japanese breast cancer drug, etc.
Whenever you methylate a steroid, it becomes a different compound altogether with different effects on the body--often drastically different effects. D-bol is a vastly different steroid than boldenone in how it effects the body--no one would say these 2 drugs are anywhere close to similar. In the same way, SD is drastically different than Masteron.
So what's your opinion on getting this shizzit legalized? I mean even the DEA told congress that it's a bad idea to make AAS illegal but when faced with ONE and only ONE parent who was in deep set denial. (Losing a child would be crushing I get that as a father my self). Congress folded. Not to mention the personal responsibility this Father is skirting becasue I'm sure he never preasured his child in any unreasonable way.
I don't think steroid use should be criminalized, but I do think they should be controlled. These are potentially injurous drugs which can cause harm to multiple bodily systems, including death. Conditions for use should include being 21 years of age and they should only be available with a prescription. This would eliminate a great deal of the problems encountered with unregulated use. As for unscheduled (legal ) AAS, they are technically considered dietary supplements, so unless they become scheduled, they should just be left alone.
.............
Mike Arnold
Registered
There are tons of AAS which provide superior size and strength gains than T-bol. In fact, most steroids (both scheduled and unscheduled) provide better results in these areas than that drug.
Mike,
Is there an advantage in term of muscle building potency / toxicity ratio to take Dimethazine instead of SD or Methyldihydroboldione instead of M1T ?
You mentionned that 45 mg of Dimethazine was pretty similar to 30 mg SD.
On another post, you wrote a list of what dosage of some methyls you could take for 8 weeks without excessive toxicity for an healthy individual.
You said 20 mg for the SD, 45 mg for the Dimethazine, and 10 mg for the M1-T (NOT IN THE SAME TIME OF COURSE).
So do you say that DIMETHAZINE is better than SD, because it gives the same effect than the SD with a reduced toxicity ?
Is 20 mg M1-T and 20 mg SD still your ultimate oral stack for muscle building ? (Despite the insane toxicity of this stack)
45 mg of Dimethazine and 60 mg of Dihydroboldione (1-Alpha) would be preferable ?
What about methyltrienolone, or even dimethyltrienolone ?
What about Drol & D-Bol stack aka Cherry Bomb ?
What are for you the ideal reasonnably toxic oral stack to run for 8 weeks if one is seeking exceptionnal muscle building ?
Thank you Mike.
Is there an advantage in term of muscle building potency / toxicity ratio to take Dimethazine instead of SD or Methyldihydroboldione instead of M1T ?
You mentionned that 45 mg of Dimethazine was pretty similar to 30 mg SD.
On another post, you wrote a list of what dosage of some methyls you could take for 8 weeks without excessive toxicity for an healthy individual.
You said 20 mg for the SD, 45 mg for the Dimethazine, and 10 mg for the M1-T (NOT IN THE SAME TIME OF COURSE).
So do you say that DIMETHAZINE is better than SD, because it gives the same effect than the SD with a reduced toxicity ?
Is 20 mg M1-T and 20 mg SD still your ultimate oral stack for muscle building ? (Despite the insane toxicity of this stack)
45 mg of Dimethazine and 60 mg of Dihydroboldione (1-Alpha) would be preferable ?
What about methyltrienolone, or even dimethyltrienolone ?
What about Drol & D-Bol stack aka Cherry Bomb ?
What are for you the ideal reasonnably toxic oral stack to run for 8 weeks if one is seeking exceptionnal muscle building ?
Thank you Mike.
Mike Arnold
Registered
........
