Testosterone Enanthate or Testosterone Cypionate

[spidey]

I don't know where you got this info but several things don't make sense.

The longer the ester, the longer the half-life; that is a fact. Your chart has deca (decanoate ester; 10 carbons) with a 14 to 16 day lifetime but dynobolan (undecanoate ester; 11 carbon ester) with only a 8 to 10 day lifetime. That does not make sense.

Other examples are: EQ has a 7-9 day lifetime (12 carbon ester) but primo has a 10-14 day lifetime (7 carbon ester). Test enanthate has a longer lifetime in your list than does methenolone enanthate (primo) even though they have the SAME ESTER.

Clomid has a 5 day half life according to pharmacokinetic studies published in the physician's desk reference. I would have to say I trust the PDR more than random unreferenced data on a BB board (8 to 12 hrs lifetime? Please! More like 30 days!).

Pretty much, I believe this list to be mistaken in all of its assignments. I will stand by my assignment of 10.5 days for enanthate and 12 days for cypionate.

[spidey]

Also, your first statement of your post leads me to conclude you do not understand the nature of "half lives" to begin with. They are exponential in nature not linear. To say something has a lifetime of 16 days does not mean it's half life is 8 days. Rather, it takes 5 or more half lives for something to decay to undetectable levels. Your 16 day lifetime would indicate a MAXIMUM HALFLIFE of 3.2 days and maybe even less (assuming first order kinetics).

[canadagold]

I prefer enanthate but you will get a thread over a mile long if everyone posted which one they thought was better. . .The post that stated that it was dependant on quality of the brand being the important factor was spot on (that being intimidators post:) )
They are so close in structure it does not make much difference which you use.

[uuugeboy]

Spidey an active time pure and simply is the run of the drug through your body. To compute half-life you simple take half of the active life. Quit making things so hard on yourself bro. Figure it out--if enanthate's active life is 8 days, it's half is four. After four days after admin you'd be at 50%, then at 6 you'd be at 75%, then at 7 you'd be at 87.5, then at 7.5 you'd be at 94.25% then at 7.75 you'd be at 97.125%, etc, etc. It works out perfectly. If you really want to understand half-lives go read some nuclear physics.

As for enanthate being enanthate being enanthate........that's like saying a tree is a tree is a tree. Mere philosophical BS. Sometimes what is attached to the enanthate ester can also have an affect on active and half life.

As far as your reference to a PDR. Do you realize or have you ever thought of how much political BS goes into a PDR before it's printed? You've got the gov't, lobbyists, pharmacuetical companies, etc all competing to make a specific drug retrospectively look exactly how they want it to with description, great characteristics, contraindications, etc, etc.

If you don't believe me on the example of cyp have an active life of 16 days, go out and buy yourself some legit cyp and take your blood ED and watch.

[Skyefire]

Originally posted by uuugeboy
Spidey an active time pure and simply is the run of the drug through your body. To compute half-life you simple take half of the active life. Quit making things so hard on yourself bro. Figure it out--if enanthate's active life is 8 days, it's half is four. After four days after admin you'd be at 50%, then at 6 you'd be at 75%, then at 7 you'd be at 87.5, then at 7.5 you'd be at 94.25% then at 7.75 you'd be at 97.125%, etc, etc. It works out perfectly. If you really want to understand half-lives go read some nuclear physics.

As for enanthate being enanthate being enanthate........that's like saying a tree is a tree is a tree. Mere philosophical BS. Sometimes what is attached to the enanthate ester can also have an affect on active and half life.

As far as your reference to a PDR. Do you realize or have you ever thought of how much political BS goes into a PDR before it's printed? You've got the gov't, lobbyists, pharmacuetical companies, etc all competing to make a specific drug retrospectively look exactly how they want it to with description, great characteristics, contraindications, etc, etc.

If you don't believe me on the example of cyp have an active life of 16 days, go out and buy yourself some legit cyp and take your blood ED and watch.

Ok, I am not sure what your thinking here bro but try reading this
Post here: http://www.superiormuscle.com/vbulle...threadid=15865

[uuugeboy]

One thing I agree with in the article is the fact that what is attached to the ester (in the article is says liquid as a whole) can have a significant difference in active life.

It's obvious to me that whoever wrote the article didn't know the half-life of test enanthate to begin with, which really puts some serious doubts into my mind on the validity of the article. How can you write an article on half-lifes when you don't know them in the first place LOL? One other thing that really disqaulifies the article is where it came from.

Like I said before, if you don't believe me run one inj of test cyp and have your blood tested for 16 days without taking any other ped. Or do it with enanthate, and have your blood taken for 8 days. Do this after all bloodwork is normal from your previous cycles, pct, whatever. I don't care, but if you don't believe me, go do it and then come back and talk to me.

Also you may want to make sure you're using high quality gear.

[spidey]

Originally posted by uuugeboy
Spidey an active time pure and simply is the run of the drug through your body. To compute half-life you simple take half of the active life. Quit making things so hard on yourself bro. Figure it out--if enanthate's active life is 8 days, it's half is four. After four days after admin you'd be at 50%, then at 6 you'd be at 75%, then at 7 you'd be at 87.5, then at 7.5 you'd be at 94.25% then at 7.75 you'd be at 97.125%, etc, etc. It works out perfectly. If you really want to understand half-lives go read some nuclear physics.

LOL, this is maddening. Look bro, believe whatever you want. Are you a pharmacokineticist? You obviously don't understand kinetics even on a basic level. I am a Ph.D. chemist who works in cancer research. Measuring the half-lives of drugs and drug candidates is part of what I do for a living; I do know what I am talking about. I actually HAVE taken classes in nuclear physics. It is not linear. Just because the lifetime of a drug is 16 days (for example) does not mean it's half life is 8 days (that would be a linear relationship).

Enzyme kinetics are generally psuedo first order in nature. The equation that explains first order kinetics is: A=Ao*exp[-kt] where A=concentration of drug; Ao=initial concentration of drug at time 0; k=rate constant and t=time. It is an EXPONENTIAL EQUATION.

"Half life" is defined as the amount of time that passes until 1/2 of the drug is passed through your system. If, for example, the half life of tren is 3 days and you inject 100mg tren, in 3 days you will still have 50mg in your system. In another 3 days, you still have 1/2 of that 50mg or 25mg in your system. In another 3 days, you have 12.5mg and so on. The concentration gets cut in half every 3 days.

Please note that at this rate of disappearance, it would take 7 half lives to decrease the level of tren to less than 1% of the initial dose (0.78% actually). That is 21 days! I don't know the limits of detection for tren in say doping tests but I would bet money at least 5 half lives would need to be passed before it wouldn't show up (below limits of detection).

As an academic exercise, I calculated how long you would have to wait until ALL of that initial 100mg dose of tren was completely out of your system. Theoretically, you would have some level of tren in your body for several months after the initial dose; 68 half lives in fact before less than one molecule was left (impossible so can be assumed is ALL gone). That is 204 days or 6 months 3 weeks and 3 days.

Originally posted by uuugeboy
As for enanthate being enanthate being enanthate........that's like saying a tree is a tree is a tree. Mere philosophical BS. Sometimes what is attached to the enanthate ester can also have an affect on active and half life.

While it is true that the steroid attached to the ester can theoretically make a small difference, the difference usually would not be significant. The ester attached to the steroid plays a very important role in biological half life.

Originally posted by uuugeboy
As far as your reference to a PDR. Do you realize or have you ever thought of how much political BS goes into a PDR before it's printed? You've got the gov't, lobbyists, pharmacuetical companies, etc all competing to make a specific drug retrospectively look exactly how they want it to with description, great characteristics, contraindications, etc, etc.

This sounds an awful lot like conspiracy theory. Do you realize the implications if what you say about the PDR is true? Doctors would be prescribing powerful medications, some of which could be lethal if inappropriately dosed or mixed with incompatable meds, based on a reference based on "political BS". LOL, people would be dying all over the place because of the PDR. I work closely with many medical doctors and they do use the PDR quite often as a quick reference when prescribing meds. NOTHING gets in the PDR that isn't soundly based on several pharmacokinetic and clinical studies. These studies are repeated by vareous scientific groups all over the world who have no ties to pharmaceutical companies. In fact, if a group IS tied to a drug company who makes the drug, they likely would not be allowed to contribute because of the conflict of interest. Politics has no place in the PDR.

Originally posted by uuugeboy
If you don't believe me on the example of cyp have an active life of 16 days, go out and buy yourself some legit cyp and take your blood ED and watch.

I don't have to go out and buy anything. Have you actually done that experiment? If you did, you made mistakes because the numbers you have are wrong. I know this because they demonstrate an IMPOSSIBLE relationship (a linear one). You seem to be the one that needs to go read some nuclear physics.

[Cmsmallzz]

Also, your first statement of your post leads me to conclude you do not understand the nature of "half lives" to begin with. They are exponential in nature not linear. To say something has a lifetime of 16 days does not mean it's half life is 8 days. Rather, it takes 5 or more half lives for something to decay to undetectable levels. Your 16 day lifetime would indicate a MAXIMUM HALFLIFE of 3.2 days and maybe even less (assuming first order kinetics).

:agree: Sorry to inform you uuugeboy, but the half-life of a substance is not the active life divided by 2. It is in fact an exponential function. I think your the one that needs to read his high school physics book.

[Tinfish]

I know my shit, and I agree with spidey.

[beefcake]

Not exactly a good idea to argue with spidey. The outcome in the end will always be the same. You're wrong.

[uuugeboy]

I had a huge write-up/response to the crap that's been presented by others in this thread, but I realized it was useless. You can all believe whatever, I just sincerely hope no harm comes to you as a result of misinformation, etc.

[spidey]

Originally posted by beefcake
Not exactly a good idea to argue with spidey. The outcome in the end will always be the same. You're wrong.

I don't know about that now, LOL. I can be wrong just like anyone else. I do kind of bulldog though when I know I am right. :D

[spidey]

Originally posted by uuugeboy
I had a huge write-up/response to the crap that's been presented by others in this thread, but I realized it was useless. You can all believe whatever, I just sincerely hope no harm comes to you as a result of misinformation, etc.

Yeah, OK. :rolleyes: Thanks for your concern.

You never did say what the source of your "data" was. You have to realize that the way to convince logical people that you are right is to present them with real data from reputable sources to back up your claims. No one (who is semi-intelligent anyway) is going to be convinced just based on some stranger on the internet's word. Especially if they have real data from peer reviewed scientific journals or other reputable sources like the PDR that conflict with what you are saying.

This whole thing kind of reminds me of a guy named Nelson Montana, LOL. This is the kind of shit he pulled routinely.

[Bouncer]

Originally posted by uuugeboy
I had a huge write-up/response to the crap that's been presented by others in this thread, but I realized it was useless. You can all believe whatever, I just sincerely hope no harm comes to you as a result of misinformation, etc.

dude, you are lame. take your bullshit somewhere else.

[hitmansb]

spidey....I feel like I should get college credit for reading your posts sometimes bro....thanks for the EXPERT information!