-Animated.gif)
Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
.jpg "Research Chemical Sciences")
.png "Research Chemical Sciences")
Nelson,
My manner of writing and/or speaking is less so due to whom I may read, and more so due to the fact that I am a conceited, somewhat delusional character with fleeting fancies of existential importance, meant to mask an inferiority complex. But that is beside the point.
If you would have more experience (either personal, or via the observation of others) with 1-Test and 4AD transdermals such the difference you would notice. Even upon some Steroid boards, some have proclaimed the effectiveness of 1AD (although making statement that they would rather spend their money on 'gear'. The point being that even some 'harsh-critics' such as them, do see some benefit in those regards [which is not to say that they are always the most logical of critics, since I don't equate the quality of air with the heat of the wind]).
Experience is not always applicable to every given context; in your case, your context is the past (regarding the Estrogen, and such; however that was a rather clever statement with regards to your book and Estrogen---good use of wit).
The statements against 4AD and other earlier pro-hormones was due to the bioavailabilty. Given that Androdione is obsolete, 4AD has been put to good use via transdermal administartion. And in that consideration, a difference would be seen (Androdione will lead to Estrogenic issues, however one can not deduce from that, the downfall of other related compounds---as you stated yourself---'similar is not the same').
Notice that I don't attack your character or your credentials. I simply attack the argument. Wish you would do such the same for 1Fast and others ('owning a website and selling pro-hormones' being the calumny in question--you attack him, and not the call in question).
I could have mentioned that you were a high-school dropout, or a Biotest employee, but I don't see that being as relevant to the argument (as others erroneously used that to discount you; they could not attack the issue, so they attack the person); perhaps you should look beyond ownership and association, as well.
My manner of writing and/or speaking is less so due to whom I may read, and more so due to the fact that I am a conceited, somewhat delusional character with fleeting fancies of existential importance, meant to mask an inferiority complex. But that is beside the point.
If you would have more experience (either personal, or via the observation of others) with 1-Test and 4AD transdermals such the difference you would notice. Even upon some Steroid boards, some have proclaimed the effectiveness of 1AD (although making statement that they would rather spend their money on 'gear'. The point being that even some 'harsh-critics' such as them, do see some benefit in those regards [which is not to say that they are always the most logical of critics, since I don't equate the quality of air with the heat of the wind]).
Experience is not always applicable to every given context; in your case, your context is the past (regarding the Estrogen, and such; however that was a rather clever statement with regards to your book and Estrogen---good use of wit).
The statements against 4AD and other earlier pro-hormones was due to the bioavailabilty. Given that Androdione is obsolete, 4AD has been put to good use via transdermal administartion. And in that consideration, a difference would be seen (Androdione will lead to Estrogenic issues, however one can not deduce from that, the downfall of other related compounds---as you stated yourself---'similar is not the same').
Notice that I don't attack your character or your credentials. I simply attack the argument. Wish you would do such the same for 1Fast and others ('owning a website and selling pro-hormones' being the calumny in question--you attack him, and not the call in question).
I could have mentioned that you were a high-school dropout, or a Biotest employee, but I don't see that being as relevant to the argument (as others erroneously used that to discount you; they could not attack the issue, so they attack the person); perhaps you should look beyond ownership and association, as well.
Last edited:
