Jump to content

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, js77 said:

I agree mate but the reality is NOBODY would notice such a slight variation in dose during a cycle.

I think the comment ‘you’ve obviously not used Pharma if you think there’s no difference with a UGL’ is inaccurate. 

I used Pharma exclusively for the first 7/8 years of my AAS use. The last 12 years or so have seen me use what I consider to be ‘good UGL’s’ such as European Union Labs and Dimension and there is zero difference compared to Pharma labs. 

It looks like we’re actually pretty much agreeing with each other regarding the differences between labs!!

Is any difference in quality between pharma and a good ugl so big that you'd notice tho?

Of course it's not...we all know it's not lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, stargazer said:

Well yeah, you do know me Paul, and you have done since 2007 but that's not the point.

The point is (agree or not) your analogy for statement 2. is flawed. 

My point is, putting it succinctly to your statement :  2. if you believe a good UGL is no different to genuine Pharma gear then you have never used genuine pharma gear for a cycle (No matter what your source says, or the big guy in the gym)

You have no right to make a statement that imposes your opinion on my circumstances, because you don't know my circumstances.

So please, don't be patronising and hypocritical because you have said very similar to what i just said (highlighted)  many, many, many times over the years and you know it ;).

 

Do as I say not as I do tho right. You know he's never responded well to people disagreeing with him lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, stuey99 said:

I get exactly what he's saying. He seems to think that disagreeing with him means we're not intelligent enough to understand. The possibility that we understand but still disagree apparently hasn't occurred to him. It's called arrogance

The difference is, I see my opinion as my personal opinion...he sees his opinion as fact. And anyone who doesn't come round to his opinion just "doesn't understand"

 

This and many other comments are what I define as arguing rather than debating or trying to understand. Often why I avoid threads on here.

What people seem to be overlooking (and I did state this already) is that ‘purity’ and ‘concentration’ are not one and the same are not entirely correlative.

Purity can affect bioavailability and toxicity and purity is not controlled for in UGL. 
 

To reaffirm, a drug product at the correct concentration or assay formulated from impure compounds will not Necessarily exhibit the same effects in the body as a one from a higher purity compound

Now my next statement is anecdotal, but it is my belief that purity of drugs, not just dosing, it is what has lead to many people over the years stating Pharma versus UGL is night and day.

@Pscarb is incredibly experienced and knowledgable and I’m quite surprised by some of the comments in this thread. When we don’t understand sometimes its best to ask for more information. If we still don’t understand sometimes we have to restructure or rephrase our question. This tends to be far more constructive.

His comment was fairly sweeping but it’s certainly not the first time I’ve heard this over time as there’s often a reason for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bensif said:

This and many other comments are what I define as arguing rather than debating or trying to understand. Often why I avoid threads on here.

What people seem to be overlooking (and I did state this already) is that ‘purity’ and ‘concentration’ are not one and the same are not entirely correlative.

Purity can affect bioavailability and toxicity and purity is not controlled for in UGL. 
 

To reaffirm, a drug product at the correct concentration or assay formulated from impure compounds will not Necessarily exhibit the same effects in the body as a one from a higher purity compound

Now my next statement is anecdotal, but it is my belief that purity of drugs, not just dosing, it is what has lead to many people over the years stating Pharma versus UGL is night and day.

@Pscarb is incredibly experienced and knowledgable and I’m quite surprised by some of the comments in this thread. When we don’t understand sometimes its best to ask for more information. If we still don’t understand sometimes we have to restructure or rephrase our question. This tends to be far more constructive.

His comment was fairly sweeping but it’s certainly not the first time I’ve heard this over time as there’s often a reason for that.

He is experienced...but because my opinion it different it does not mean I don't understand his "wisdom" or I've never tried legit pharma...it simply means I have a different opinion

My experience says that pharma cycles are really not better than cycles using decent ugl's...yet I'm being told my experience and opinion aren't valid...and if I was clever enough to understsnd what he said I would see that

Sorry, but no!!

That's arrogant, condescending, and basically the way I've consistently seen him react over the years to anyone who disagrees with his mighty opinion

He asked me for blood results to prove what I was saying...and although I didn't have them, someone else did. Yet even after asking for bloods as proof, he then disregarded them when they were posted insisting he was still right lol

Do you believe 4ml of a decent ugl test e will be noticably less effective than 4ml of pharma test? That's really the only question here and the only statement I've ever made 

Regsrdless of anything else...yes or no?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, stuey99 said:

He is experienced...but because my opinion it different it does not mean I don't understand his "wisdom" or I've never tried legit pharma...it simply means I have a different opinion

My experience says that pharma cycles are really not better than cycles using decent ugl's...yet I'm being told my experience and opinion aren't valid...and if I was clever enough to understsnd what he said I would see that

Sorry, but no!!

That's arrogant, condescending, and basically the way I've consistently seen him react over the years to anyone who disagrees with his mighty opinion

He asked me for blood results to prove what I was saying...and although I didn't have them, someone else did. Yet even after asking for bloods as proof, he then disregarded them when they were posted insisting he was still right lol

Do you believe 4ml of a decent ugl test e will be noticably less effective than 4ml of pharma test? That's really the only question here and the only statement I've ever made 

Regsrdless of anything else...yes or no?

 

To answer this you would need to better define the bolded statement. Regardless of what? You need to define variables here please, as well as what is constant.

My issue is less so the topic, more the tone. To me, the point of this forum is share knowledge and experience and for everyone to learn from each other. Not everyone will agree on everything discussed, but a debate can offer a question some insight from which the asked can make their own decision.

This often instead seems to be a ‘who can shout the loudest and longest’ competition, sometimes leading to misinformation. 

Lets try and get it back on track with a more constructive discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bensif said:

To answer this you would need to better define the bolded statement. Regardless of what? You need to define variables here please, as well as what is constant.

My issue is less so the topic, more the tone. To me, the point of this forum is share knowledge and experience and for everyone to learn from each other. Not everyone will agree on everything discussed, but a debate can offer a question some insight from which the asked can make their own decision.

This often instead seems to be a ‘who can shout the loudest and longest’ competition, sometimes leading to misinformation. 

Lets try and get it back on track with a more constructive discussion.

My question is simple mate. Do you believe you'd see any noticable difference between 4ml of test e from a good ugl and 4ml of pharma test e?

The ONLY statement of opinion I've made here is I haven't seen any difference

Im offering up no variables. My question is simple bro

Then let's sensibly debate your answer...I'm more than happy to with you mate cos I know you understand that your opinion isnt necessemarily fact

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, stuey99 said:

My question is simple mate. Do you believe you'd see any noticable difference between 4ml of test e from a good ugl and 4ml of pharma test e?

The ONLY statement of opinion I've made here is I haven't seen any difference

Im offering up no variables. My question is simple bro

Then let's sensibly debate your answer...I'm more than happy to with you mate cos I know you understand that your opinion isnt necessemarily fact

Ok sure, so I will base my answer on my own experience. I will first preface this I rarely use Pharma because I simply don’t trust people, especially those selling illegal drugs! Bar one time, when I have used pharmaceutical testosterone it’s been from a legitimate place (I don’t want to say how or where).

Now did I feel any different in respect ‘the usual’ Positive things we see when on a reasonable dose of testosterone? No.

Did I notice any actual or other differences? Yes. A lot less water which to me says less of an inflammatory response. This is something I am quite in tune with though due to an inflammatory disease. For want of a better phrase, the look was ‘cleaner’.
 

Now I can’t tell you why I saw (and see) such a stark difference in this respect as I have not had either pharma, nor UGL used before or after HPLC tested. So my statement is conjecture; I believe this was in part due to the excipients used and in part down to the purity.

I believe this far more noticeable with things such as HGH and I’m sure many here would agree. You get the same usual effects but with far more unwanted effects and this is most certainly down to purity.
 

So why do I mostly use UGL like many here? Numerous reasons;

- I don’t trust sellers

- not everything (not any more) is available as a pharmaceutical grade product

- if I’m using two or more compounds, where one or more are only available as UGL, is there any point or can I justify using a pharmaceutical grade product as well?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bensif said:

Ok sure, so I will base my answer on my own experience. I will first preface this I rarely use Pharma because I simply don’t trust people, especially those selling illegal drugs! Bar one time, when I have used pharmaceutical testosterone it’s been from a legitimate place (I don’t want to say how or where).

Now did I feel any different in respect ‘the usual’ Positive things we see when on a reasonable dose of testosterone? No.

Did I notice any actual or other differences? Yes. A lot less water which to me says less of an inflammatory response. This is something I am quite in tune with though due to an inflammatory disease. For want of a better phrase, the look was ‘cleaner’.
 

Now I can’t tell you why I saw (and see) such a stark difference in this respect as I have not had either pharma, nor UGL used before or after HPLC tested. So my statement is conjecture; I believe this was in part due to the excipients used and in part down to the purity.

I believe this far more noticeable with things such as HGH and I’m sure many here would agree. You get the same usual effects but with far more unwanted effects and this is most certainly down to purity.
 

So why do I mostly use UGL like many here? Numerous reasons;

- I don’t trust sellers

- not everything (not any more) is available as a pharmaceutical grade product

- if I’m using two or more compounds, where one or more are only available as UGL, is there any point or can I justify using a pharmaceutical grade product as well?

 

Totally respect that bro...so you agree results are the same,  but your body reacts better in other ways to pharma? Which is totally in line with you saying earlier that "the finished product is better quality" which if you remember, I agreed with

Although from what Paul says, the fact tou noticed no difference in results must actually mean the pharma you used wasn't legit lol

As always its person dependant,  although I highly doubt anyone would see a noticable difference in gains between a good ugl and pharma...largely because even 2 identical cycles will bring totally different results, which I'm sure few guys will disagree with

If you run 1g of pharma test now, and 1g of pharma test in 6 months will the results be the same? I highly doubt it. So if you cant quantify the difference between 2 identical pharma cycles, I fail to see how you could notice the difference between pharma and a similarly dosed ugl lol

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, stuey99 said:

Totally respect that bro...so you agree results are the same,  but your body reacts better in other ways to pharma? Which is totally in line with you saying earlier that "the finished product is better quality" which if you remember, I agreed with

Although from what Paul says, the fact tou noticed no difference in results must actually mean the pharma you used wasn't legit lol

As always its person dependant,  although I highly doubt anyone would see a noticable difference in gains between a good ugl and pharma...largely because even 2 identical cycles will bring totally different results, which I'm sure few guys will disagree with

If you run 1g of pharma test now, and 1g of pharma test in 6 months will the results be the same? I highly doubt it. So if you cant quantify the difference between 2 identical pharma cycles, I fail to see how you could notice the difference between pharma and a similarly dosed ugl lol

 

I should have perhaps better qualified what I meant by usual results. Stronger, fuller etc. But strength and performance are affected by so many other factors, so I cannot attribute any positive or acute changes I saw here to the testosterone alone.

But the cleaner look and feel is certainly a result I could see and preferred. But this was testosterone in isolation. I do have periods where I only use test, but not perhaps as much as where I am stacking things (usually 2 compounds and an oral) unless I’m on downtime and ‘cruising’.

I do think, compounded over time this may yield an overall better physique but as I haven’t done this personally, eg only use pharmaceutical grade products, I couldn’t say this for sure.

I do liken this to HGH where the above is far more pronounced and I did use pharmaceutical grade HGH exclusively for a number of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bensif said:

I should have perhaps better qualified what I meant by usual results. Stronger, fuller etc. But strength and performance are affected by so many other factors, so I cannot attribute any positive or acute changes I saw here to the testosterone alone.

But the cleaner look and feel is certainly a result I could see and preferred. But this was testosterone in isolation. I do have periods where I only use test, but not perhaps as much as where I am stacking things (usually 2 compounds and an oral) unless I’m on downtime and ‘cruising’.

I do think, compounded over time this may yield an overall better physique but as I haven’t done this personally, eg only use pharmaceutical grade products, I couldn’t say this for sure.

I do liken this to HGH where the above is far more pronounced and I did use pharmaceutical grade HGH exclusively for a number of years.

You see, slightly different experiences between the two of us...and both totally valid

I fully agree that the likes of hgh and ancilliaries like nolva and adex...and also proviron are generally of much poorer quality from UGL's. My thinking on this is that it's more difficult for users to tell how good the dosing is so ugl's feel they can get away with underdosing products

Congratulations on a very diplomatic approach by the way lol 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, js77 said:

I agree mate but the reality is NOBODY would notice such a slight variation in dose during a cycle.

I think the comment ‘you’ve obviously not used Pharma if you think there’s no difference with a UGL’ is inaccurate. 

I used Pharma exclusively for the first 7/8 years of my AAS use. The last 12 years or so have seen me use what I consider to be ‘good UGL’s’ such as European Union Labs and Dimension and there is zero difference compared to Pharma labs. 

It looks like we’re actually pretty much agreeing with each other regarding the differences between labs!!

Yeah, totally agree. Everyone is using more than they need anyway, so they wouldn't unless they get bloods or someone tests the product.

The most common thing that's the issue is crashing gear or random PiP between same lab, same product, different batches. That's something that is pretty unique to UGLs and the reason I offered was the lower QC. Its part of the UGL journey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, feelinfine said:


Everyone would use pharma if it was widely available. At least I know I would. Gear made in a clean pharmaceutical environment vs made in a bathtub in someone's shed. It is a no brainer.

Without a doubt. 

Why has pharma pretty much disappeared? I wanna know right now! Before I go any further....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, stargazer said:

Well yeah, you do know me Paul, and you have done since 2007 but that's not the point.

The point is (agree or not) your analogy for statement 2. is flawed. 

My point is, putting it succinctly to your statement :  2. if you believe a good UGL is no different to genuine Pharma gear then you have never used genuine pharma gear for a cycle (No matter what your source says, or the big guy in the gym)

You have no right to make a statement that imposes your opinion on my circumstances, because you don't know my circumstances.

So please, don't be patronising and hypocritical because you have said very similar to what i just said (highlighted)  many, many, many times over the years and you know it ;).

 

Knowing you or not makes zero difference to my opinion, point number 2 is not flawed in my opinion maybe it is in yours but why does that mean i am wrong??

20 hours ago, stuey99 said:

He is experienced...but because my opinion it different it does not mean I don't understand his "wisdom" or I've never tried legit pharma...it simply means I have a different opinion

My experience says that pharma cycles are really not better than cycles using decent ugl's...yet I'm being told my experience and opinion aren't valid...and if I was clever enough to understsnd what he said I would see that

Sorry, but no!!

That's arrogant, condescending, and basically the way I've consistently seen him react over the years to anyone who disagrees with his mighty opinion

He asked me for blood results to prove what I was saying...and although I didn't have them, someone else did. Yet even after asking for bloods as proof, he then disregarded them when they were posted insisting he was still right lol

Do you believe 4ml of a decent ugl test e will be noticably less effective than 4ml of pharma test? That's really the only question here and the only statement I've ever made 

Regsrdless of anything else...yes or no?

 

How have I been arrogant and condescending my first post was not aimed at anyone individual, it is my opinion based on my experience, you have a different opinion I have never said that is wrong. it's not that i think my opinion is mighty, its because you assume I think it is mighty......if this is what you think then don't take any notice to it :) 

if you don't agree with me that is your right, forums are a place to debate, I have not called you arrogant etc yet it's ok for you to say that about me......why

I didnt disregard to the blood I looked at them, was i supposed to then make a post??

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
?
7
On 29/06/2020 at 2:33 PM, stuey99 said:

No. Because you know fine well that you can't prove dosing by bloods

My point is exactly what I've said, accurately dosed ugl's will be just as good as pharma, and even if they are slightly undersosed you wouldn't know the difference 

I didn't once try to state that I've got bloods to prove my point...as to prove my point, I dont need bloods. My point is that IMO results from decent ugl's are just as good as results from pharma

If you disagree, mate, that's fine

and that is why I didn't ask you for blood.......

the underlined part of this speaks volumes.......in your opinion what i said is wrong, although you cant appreciate that IMO i am correct.......

So your opinion is true but mine is not.........and I have the mightly opinion.....lol ok buddy

 

So without emotion or getting butthurt because i have a different opinion than you and others on this let me be clear about the point.

IMO the results from a cycle would be better if the user used genuine Pharma Gear opposed to UGL gear.

There you go its an opinion, my opinion and i stand by it, if this line of text offends you, with all due respect grow up (said in a non-arragant, condescending way :) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, MrBrightside said:

Without a doubt. 

Why has pharma pretty much disappeared? I wanna know right now! Before I go any further....

I wouldn't guesstimate

1. People generally want to spend as little as possible way of nature so cheapest option always wins.

2. Counterfeit cash in has made people loose trust in potential genuine products

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pscarb yes I appreciate that's your opinion...however it's your arrogant statement that said anyone who disagrees with you has obviously never used legit pharma which clearly shows you believe your opinion is fact

THIS is what I took issue with...and you know it

So don't start claiming I've took issue with your opinion, I've took issue with your arrogance

My opinion is exactly that...my opinion...as highlighted with my discussuon with @Bensif

My disagreement with you is because true to form you basically said if I disagree with you then I don't know what I'm talking about...and it's actually taken all this s**t for you to actually admit your opinion is just that...your opinion

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a great pity you didn't state your opinion as in bold in your last comment from the start.. rather than saying anyone who disagrees with you has obviously never used legit pharma

The two approaches are the difference between a statement of opinion and a statement of fact mate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread is close to me locking it

If you can't debate without name calling then please do not comment 

Last chance, this behaviour will not be tolerated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Cronus said:

Thread is close to me locking it

If you can't debate without name calling then please do not comment 

Last chance, this behaviour will not be tolerated

Go fuk yourself you boring cheesey foreskin x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cronus said:

Least I've used "real" Pharma

You carry on using fake UGL

Prove it...unless you can post your blood work you're lying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, js77 said:

Prove it...unless you can post your blood work you're lying.

The feelings in my cock are more proof than any blood work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pscarb 

You responded to my 2nd post with this statement "I should know better because of why? you are someone I should know"

So i answered with: "Well yeah, you do know me Paul, and you have done since 2007 but that's not the point"

So why are you now saying in response and i quote: "Knowing you or not makes zero difference to my opinion" 

I know it makes zero difference FFS, that is why when you asked me, i said that is not the point, so i'm agreeing with that so whats the problem?

As for the next bit and i quote: "point number 2 is not flawed in my opinion maybe it is in yours but why does that mean i am wrong??"

Because you are WRONG, you are wrong to tell me i have never done a pharma cycle, but that's exactly what you did do, there is no argument, it's here on this thread in black and white so be as pedantic as you like but don't tell me what i have or haven't done.

I'm not the only one in this thread who feels insulted by you telling them what they have or haven't done,  instead of arguing why don't you just agree that you should have worded it differently? 

Tell you what, you never had kidney failure or sepsis because that's not how it works, now see how that makes you feel when someone calls you out as a liar!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Cronus said:

The feelings in my cock are more proof than any blood work

Hhhhmmm I like the sound of that!

 

 

 

.....sorry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, js77 said:

Hhhhmmm I like the sound of that!

 

 

 

.....sorry

Well if that's what you think,  you've obviously never tried his cock :thumb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, stargazer said:

@Pscarb .......  instead of arguing why don't you just agree that you should have worded it differently? 

 

 

Unfortunately an over inflated ego can get in the way of many things including admitting when you are wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×