Synergy Forge Test E 600mg/week 3312ng/dl 5.52x

[gb2]

Link to Bloodwork
Source	@Synergy Forge
Test Ester Running	Enanthate
Weekly Testosterone Dose (mg)	600mg (300mg E3.5D)
Other Compounds in Cycle	Asin
Weekly Dose Other Compunds (mg)	12.5mg (6.25mg E3.5D)
Weeks Run	6+
Draw Time from Last Pin	52 Hours
Blood Results
Testosterone Reading in ng/dl	3312ng/dl
Testosterone Multiplier	5.5x
Test Capped at 1500?	No
Estrogen (E2) Reading pg/ml	88pg/ml
Liver/Lipids Elevated?	No
Anything Else Goes Below	High E2 because I wasn't taking enough asin. Judging by skin dryness doesn't work if you move to a much drier region, evidently. Doubled the dosage since and already feel way less bloated (will test again in 6 weeks).
Blood Thicker than Yogurt pls help, Why am I still smol?	Not enough iron!

Edit: removed image because I'm not getting anything for my contribution.

 

[gb2]

[Sidenote: did some older messages from the SST .net or .org era get deleted? This isn't my first post...]

 

[gb2]

could you take a look please @CaptainAmerica ?

 

[gb2]

hmm... I need to place a new order and was hoping to get the store credit to give my bank account a break. Don't mean to be a pest but I did post this last Friday. @CaptainAmerica / @Synergy Forge ?

 

[Sakuraba314]

hmm... I need to place a new order and was hoping to get the store credit to give my bank account a break. Don't mean to be a pest but I did post this last Friday. @CaptainAmerica / @Synergy Forge ?

I'm in the same boat. Believe I read @CaptainAmerica is prepping for a show so trying to temper my impatience haha.
Just keep reminding myself we get a pretty sweat deal here, $200 credit with a super reliable source and incentive to be responsible and check bloodwork, I'm sure we'll get taken care of by @CaptainAmerica who's essentially volunteering his time for this.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Wrong draw time and not enough activity to count

 

[gb2]

Wrong draw time and not enough activity to count

That's what you have to tell me after 12 days of waiting? You can't have it both ways. I'm contributing by posting my bloods - if that's not appreciated and incentivized, good to know, took it down and won't be bothering in the future.

What do you mean by 'wrong draw time'? I went by https://www.steroidsourcetalk.cc/index.php?threads/rules-for-posting-bloodwork.7225/
[Edit: I now see that you mention up to 48 hours in one of the replies. Frankly, I'm not supposed to be reading that entire thing - edit the main post please. Secondly, are you really going to reject this based on a 4 hour difference? It's Test E dude, wtf?]

About not enough activity: I told you - some old posts were deleted, I've been around here (and at .net, .org) since 2018 (and at the reddit SST even before that). Your account is one month older than mine.
You can clearly see that my message count is higher than the number of messages that show up when you search my post history. Now if you're saying "9 messages isn't active enough" then you're just making up rules as you go.

 

[gb2]

@Synergy Forge - I really hope that you guys would see past this bullshit and approve the credit at your discretion; I've been a satisfied customer but it would be extremely disappointing to me if you decide to shrug and go by the nitpickery of CaptainAmerica, instead of fostering a long term customer relationship.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

That's what you have to tell me after 12 days of waiting? You can't have it both ways. I'm contributing by posting my bloods - if that's not appreciated and incentivized, good to know, took it down and won't be bothering in the future.

What do you mean by 'wrong draw time'? I went by https://www.steroidsourcetalk.cc/index.php?threads/rules-for-posting-bloodwork.7225/
[Edit: I now see that you mention up to 48 hours in one of the replies. Frankly, I'm not supposed to be reading that entire thing - edit the main post please. Secondly, are you really going to reject this based on a 4 hour difference? It's Test E dude, wtf?]

About not enough activity: I told you - some old posts were deleted, I've been around here (and at .net, .org) since 2018 (and at the reddit SST even before that). Your account is one month older than mine.
You can clearly see that my message count is higher than the number of messages that show up when you search my post history. Now if you're saying "9 messages isn't active enough" then you're just making rules as you go.

Learn to read buddy. It looks bad on bodybuilders when you’re just a meathead. Excuse the fangs here but I’m in peak week and don’t have time to deal with morons. I’ve volunteered my time and energy to the making and maintaining of this board for years. Excuse the 12 days of waiting.

Someone made this same argument as you and was quickly shut down here and on Meso by other users. The rules are clear as day and yes you are expected to read them. I bet you’re one of the people who tried to use the blow dryer in the bathtub that made them add the warning on the tag huh?

I apply the rules fairly and to everyone equitably to insinuate otherwise is not appreciated. Maybe @Liska would chime in to say the same as he did on Meso.

 

[gb2]

Learn to read buddy. It looks bad on bodybuilders when you’re just a meathead. Excuse the fangs here but I’m in peak week and don’t have time to deal with morons. I’ve volunteered my time and energy to the making and maintaining of this board for years. Excuse the 12 days of waiting.

Someone made this same argument as you and was quickly shut down here and on Meso by other users. The rules are clear as day and yes you are expected to read them. I bet you’re one of the people who tried to use the blow dryer in the bathtub that made them add the warning on the tag huh?

I apply the rules fairly and to everyone equitably to insinuate otherwise is not appreciated. Maybe @Liska would chime in to say the same as he did on Meso.

Not going through 5 pages of (mostly irrelevant) comments just to find that one rule you forgot to add to the main post doesn't make me a "meathead". In fact, reading the rules post itself rather than the entire fucking thread is a very reasonable thing to do.

The point in posting bloodwork is to add a data point and credibility to the source, yeah? How does drawing 52 hours instead of 48 hours after last pin impact that in any relevant way? Can't you say 'approved w/ non-standard draw time'? What's the point in flat-out rejecting these?

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Not going through 5 pages of (mostly irrelevant) comments just to find that one rule you forgot to add to the main post doesn't make me a "meathead". In fact, reading the rules post itself rather than the entire fucking thread is a very reasonable thing to do.

The point in posting bloodwork is to add a data point and credibility to the source, yeah? How does drawing 52 hours instead of 48 hours after last pin impact that in any relevant way? Can't you say 'approved w/ non-standard draw time'? What's the point in flat-out rejecting these?

Ah so you read the rules for “posting” bloodwork but not the actual bloodwork guidelines included in the wiki that very post guides you to? I admit the link is broken but there’s clearly an easily accessible wiki on the new site.

Regardless, from what you typed above it seems you want some sort of special treatment? I don’t understand your request for “approved with nonstandard draw time,” as I don’t do that for anyone else. Why would I do it here?

If you go through the blood work posts, (I know reading again.. ugh) you’d see that many bloods come back substandard or overdosed if draw time isn’t kept to standard because the esters all half life differently. It just takes a bit of research on the board which is EXACTLY what these many, many data points are here for. They ARE NOT here for users to get credit from sources. That’s just a happy bonus.

Just like the last guy I think someone’s just pissy they aren’t getting their “source credit.” And again as in the wiki, the rules for posting, and the previous post I mentioned from another misguided moron, the source can give you credit whether I approve or not. It has nothing at all to do with me.

 

[gb2]

Ah so you read the rules for “posting” bloodwork but not the actual bloodwork guidelines included in the wiki that very post guides you to? I admit the link is broken but there’s clearly an easily accessible wiki on the new site.

Regardless, from what you typed above it seems you want some sort of special treatment? I don’t understand your request for “approved with nonstandard draw time,” as I don’t do that for anyone else. Why would I do it here?

If you go through the blood work posts, (I know reading again.. ugh) you’d see that many bloods come back substandard or overdosed if draw time isn’t kept to standard because the esters all half life differently. It just takes a bit of research on the board which is EXACTLY what these many, many data points are here for. They ARE NOT here for users to get credit from sources. That’s just a happy bonus.

Just like the last guy I think someone’s just pissy they aren’t getting their “source credit.” And again as in the wiki, the rules for posting, and the previous post I mentioned from another misguided moron, the source can give you credit whether I approve or not. It has nothing at all to do with me.

Well, the link not working led me to believe it's obsolete and the rules are contained within the post. I don't think it's unreasonable. It would definitely be cool if you own it and just say "yeah we didn't post it clearly enough, we can make an exception here".

But the deeper problem is that the rule & your justification for it is kinda bullshit, and you know it. 36h << 48h < 52h. The data-point from drawing after 52h would be much more similar to a draw after 48h, than drawing after 36h would. So approving 36h, and 48h, but rejecting 52h makes little sense. Not that you're asking me, but if you were I'd say either remove that requirement altogether (it's already part of the data that the user reports, so it can be taken into account anyway) - or - make it a much much narrower range, like 48h +-1h.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Well, the link not working led me to believe it's obsolete and the rules are contained within the post. I don't think it's unreasonable. It would definitely be cool if you own it and just say "yeah we didn't post it clearly enough, we can make an exception here".

But the deeper problem is that the rule & your justification for it is kinda bullshit, and you know it. 36h << 48h < 52h. The data-point from drawing after 52h would be much more similar to a draw after 48h, than drawing after 36h would. So approving 36h, and 48h, but rejecting 52h makes little sense. Not that you're asking me, but if you were I'd say either remove that requirement altogether (it's already part of the data that the user reports, so it can be taken into account anyway) - or - make it a much much narrower range, like 48h +-1h.

Yeah.. No. Still not approved. The wiki is found outside of that post very clearly in the toolbar and contains far more information than the bloodwork guidelines that I’m sure you also didn’t read. I worked very hard on that wiki and its formatting. It hurts my feelings to be honest that your just blatantly disregard my hard work like that.

Most others are able to follow the draw times. It’s your fault you didn’t, not mine. “Bullshit and I know it?” How awfully presumptuous of you.

Here’s the deal though, the draw timing won’t be changing anytime soon nor has it changed since I’ve been mod, if not longer. There’s a reason for it and that reason stands.

There isn’t going to be an exception from me. You’re not special. Talk to SF about the credit. This is my last reply on the matter.