SuperiorMuscle.com - Bodybuilding Forums
Register Members Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   SuperiorMuscle.com - Bodybuilding Forums > Superior Fitness Section > Anabolic Steroids
Reload this Page Liquid Dbol

Anabolic Steroids Steroids, GH, PEDs, & Peptides Discussion


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-20-05, 10:23 AM
Liquid Dbol
  #1
 
rhinotat2's Avatar
 
Superior Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: US OF A
Age: 50
Likes: 0
Seeing Dbol is a oral steriod. How is it converted into a liquid form? Is the same processed used as converting Finiplex to Tren? Or is there a totally different chemical structure for Liquid Dbol then Oral Dbol? Thanks
__________________
"To Be Yourself Is All That You Can Do"

Last edited by rhinotat2; 06-20-05 at 10:26 AM.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
spidey
Old 06-20-05, 10:39 AM
  #2
 
Guest
Likes:
The powder is just dissolved in something like Everclear at a known dosage.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-05, 03:59 PM
  #3
 
rhinotat2's Avatar
 
Superior Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: US OF A
Age: 50
Likes: 0
Does the Liquid Dbol contain the C17 alpha alkylates?
is Offline   Reply With Quote
spidey
Old 06-20-05, 04:17 PM
  #4
 
Guest
Likes:
Dude, dbol IS a 17-alkylated steroid.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-05, 04:17 PM
  #5
 
Superior Admiral
Join Date: Jul 2003
Likes: 0
.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-05, 07:38 PM
  #6
 
rhinotat2's Avatar
 
Superior Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: US OF A
Age: 50
Likes: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by spidey
Dude, dbol IS a 17-alkylated steroid.

I understand this about Oral but I am not familiar at all with liquid dBol.

I read this statement on another site which peaked my interest.

"there is no need to worry about it being hepi-toxic because it's not c17 alpha alkylated like oral D-bol... "(referring to liquid form)

It made me think that Dbol is a c17 but maybe because the liquid doesn't have the binders it is no longer toxic.

I understand 17-alpha alkylated are very liver-toxic. I know that they are in the oral form because the binders that are in the pill. If you dont make them into a pill they wouldn't be toxic because no binders are necessary.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-05, 10:51 PM
  #7
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WILD WEST
Likes: 11451
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhinotat2
I understand this about Oral but I am not familiar at all with liquid dBol.

I read this statement on another site which peaked my interest.

"there is no need to worry about it being hepi-toxic because it's not c17 alpha alkylated like oral D-bol... "(referring to liquid form)

It made me think that Dbol is a c17 but maybe because the liquid doesn't have the binders it is no longer toxic.

I understand 17-alpha alkylated are very liver-toxic. I know that they are in the oral form because the binders that are in the pill. If you dont make them into a pill they wouldn't be toxic because no binders are necessary.
dbol no matter if its pill or liquid is 17-aa.
is Online   Reply With Quote
spidey
Old 06-21-05, 09:27 AM
  #8
 
Guest
Likes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhinotat2
I understand this about Oral but I am not familiar at all with liquid dBol.

I read this statement on another site which peaked my interest.

"there is no need to worry about it being hepi-toxic because it's not c17 alpha alkylated like oral D-bol... "(referring to liquid form)

It made me think that Dbol is a c17 but maybe because the liquid doesn't have the binders it is no longer toxic.

I understand 17-alpha alkylated are very liver-toxic. I know that they are in the oral form because the binders that are in the pill. If you dont make them into a pill they wouldn't be toxic because no binders are necessary.
That makes me think what they are selling is not dbol at all but rather something else (a prohormone maybe) with a different structure. Dianabol is the common name for methandrostenolone, a 17-alphamethylated version of boldenone.

There is no advantage in injecting it and there are some disadvantages (namely, infection). It is cleared by the liver whether you take it orally or inject it so the effect on the liver is the same.

Just swallow the damn dbol like everyone else and stop worrying about it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-05, 10:59 AM
  #9
 
rhinotat2's Avatar
 
Superior Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: US OF A
Age: 50
Likes: 0
Just swallow the damn dbol like everyone else and stop worrying about it.

I dont use Dbol I was just trying to understand the difference. I am a test & HGH guy.
If I was to hit the orals Id do Halo's first, Pimobolan 50's or AD 50's.
Dbol wouldn't my choice.
I think you're missing my point. yes everything is cleared by the liver but obviously orals are more toxic to your liver because the binders in the pills. I was trying to find out if the liquid contained those binders. Thanks for your help.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
spidey
Old 06-21-05, 11:29 AM
  #10
 
Guest
Likes:
Orals are not more toxic because of the binders in the pills. The binders are typically just starch or methyl cellulose and are totally inert, nontoxic things.

Orals are liver toxic because they are all 17-AAS (with the exceptions of proviron and oral primo). They are inherently liver toxic as a result of their chemical structure. There is no other reason. The 17-alkylation ehances the bioavailability but nothing is free. The price is that it also enhances liver toxicity.

The liquid dbol made from dissolving methandrostenolone powder in some solvent (ethanol) is just as liver toxic as the pills. Indeed, one could argue it is even a little worse since ethanol is also liver toxic.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-05, 12:05 PM
  #11
 
beefcake's Avatar
 
Superior Freak
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Step aerobics class
Age: 38
Likes: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhinotat2
Just swallow the damn dbol like everyone else and stop worrying about it.

I dont use Dbol I was just trying to understand the difference. I am a test & HGH guy.
If I was to hit the orals Id do Halo's first, Pimobolan 50's or AD 50's.
Dbol wouldn't my choice.
I think you're missing my point. yes everything is cleared by the liver but obviously orals are more toxic to your liver because the binders in the pills. I was trying to find out if the liquid contained those binders. Thanks for your help.
Halo's? What for? I think the disadvantages outweigh the benefits on that one.
__________________
"Working out is like building a house, everytime you do a half-ass workout, you're not laying a brick, someone else is." - Dorian Yates

"Man cannot remake himself without suffering, for he is both the marble and the sculptor." - Alexis Carrel

"Whenever you're not in the the gym training, someone else out there is, and when you meet them, they will beat you." - Victor Martinez

is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-05, 01:00 PM
  #12
 
rhinotat2's Avatar
 
Superior Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: US OF A
Age: 50
Likes: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by beefcake
Halo's? What for? I think the disadvantages outweigh the benefits on that one.

I am not looking to grow. Halos work great for me to achieve that hard look.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-05, 01:11 PM
  #13
 
rhinotat2's Avatar
 
Superior Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: US OF A
Age: 50
Likes: 0
[QUOTE=spidey]Orals are not more toxic because of the binders in the pills. The binders are typically just starch or methyl cellulose and are totally inert, nontoxic things.

Orals are liver toxic because they are all 17-AAS (with the exceptions of proviron and oral primo). They are inherently liver toxic as a result of their chemical structure. There is no other reason. The 17-alkylation ehances the bioavailability but nothing is free. The price is that it also enhances liver toxicity.

I read a study some time ago that stated that the binders in AS are what caused the Toxicity or at least contribute to it. If I can locate it I'll present it. Thanks for the information.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
spidey
Old 06-21-05, 02:08 PM
  #14
 
Guest
Likes:
Yes, please do because that makes no sense whatsoever. Why would someone use a toxic binder when they could use simple starch and it works just as well. Plus, from an economical standpoint, starch is dirt cheap and hypoallergenic. Companies looking to their bottom lines love starch as a binder.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-05, 08:35 PM
  #15
 
GSXR600's Avatar
 
Superior Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Mich
Likes: 0
There is a difference between a mechanical binder, such as the one that holds the pill together, as spidey is talking about, verses how the atoms are bound chemically, which rhinotat2 might be referring to.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
spidey
Old 08-23-05, 12:16 PM
  #16
 
Guest
Likes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSXR600
There is a difference between a mechanical binder, such as the one that holds the pill together, as spidey is talking about, verses how the atoms are bound chemically, which rhinotat2 might be referring to.
LOL, what have you been smoking?? (jk)

If the atoms are bound to each other in a different way, they would form a different molecule. Thus it would not be methandrostenolone. If you are talking about chemically binding two or more molecules of dbol together to form dimers, trimers, etc., you have still created a different molecule and one that will not be an androgen at that (it won't fit the androgen receptors any more).

Pills of any drug are made in the same way. The drug is mixed with an inert "binder" and pressed into tablets. There is no other kind of binder than the "mechanical one I was talking about".
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-05, 01:40 PM
  #17
 
GSXR600's Avatar
 
Superior Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Mich
Likes: 0
I wasn’t discrediting your knowledge one bit, I have read thru allot of your posts on this site, so as to do my homework, and you seem to be very knowledgeable regarding this subject matter, and I am willing to listen to what is said here. I was simply stating a fact there is a difference between the 2 binding mechanism due to the confusion that was transgressing.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-05, 02:57 AM
  #18
 
Skyefire's Avatar
 
Superior Pro
Join Date: Mar 2004
Likes: 0
Ok, first off spidey is right about drinking it vs pill, if your talking about injectingthere is no reason for most people to inject as any differnce in toxicity is small if there is any at all. If it upsets your stomach or you have a history of ulcers then go ahead and inject. lots of post on this topic. (I do inject but usually only for scheduling reasons as once a day shots you don't have to worry about dividing it up. its not the easiest to prepare.) And this binder mith is old. there is nothing wrong with the fina binders ether as it is just MC.
__________________
Looking at my own reflection, When suddenly it changes
Violently it changes (oh no), There is no turning back now
You've woken up the demon in me
Superior Muscle Does not promote the use of anabolic steroids without a doctor's prescription. The information shared is for learning purposes only.

The Administrators, and Moderators of this site are not liable for any injury caused by the misuse of any chemical used for bodybuilding purposes.

1) DO NOT POST ASKING FOR A SOURCE!!!!

2)If you are a source, dont bother posting for business, it is clearly against the board's policy and you will be banned.

3)DO NOT PM OR EMAIL A MOD ABOUT A SOURCE!

Supermod at chemicalfitness.com
Mod at superiormuscle.com
is Offline   Reply With Quote
num1son
Old 08-24-05, 08:35 PM
  #19
 
Guest
Likes:
Um just pop the tabs every few hrs end of story

K
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-05, 02:22 PM
  #20
 
bigandreasg's Avatar
 
Superior Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: moving to Missouri
Age: 39
Likes: 0
What would be a reccomended method of making a drinkable dbol from a powder? Let's say 5 or 10 grams of dbol with an end product of 50mg/ml. ????? How much everclear and anything else needed?

Last edited by bigandreasg; 09-03-05 at 02:55 PM.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-05, 01:17 AM
  #21
 
bigandreasg's Avatar
 
Superior Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: moving to Missouri
Age: 39
Likes: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigandreasg
What would be a reccomended method of making a drinkable dbol from a powder? Let's say 5 or 10 grams of dbol with an end product of 50mg/ml. ????? How much everclear and anything else needed?
nevermind i found it on another site.
is Offline   Reply With Quote

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0