Anyone inject inner thigh? Getting Muscle Spasms (daily injector)

Robotics

Active Member
I am a daily injector (29 gauge 1/2 inch) I was injecting outer thigh shallow IM for a while, concerned about scar tissue moved over to inner thigh (which is more fatty). Has worked well so far, but had the expect increase in E2 and decrease in TT as most see with a move to sub-q, though it is manageable.

1. I started getting some spasms in my inner right thigh a couple days ago, weird just some automatic muscle twitching. perhaps I hit something? anyone had this?

2. I am wondering if there would be a difference in T/E2 injecting sub-q inner thigh vs sub-q stomach
 

madman

Member
I am a daily injector (29 gauge 1/2 inch) I was injecting outer thigh shallow IM for a while, concerned about scar tissue moved over to inner thigh (which is more fatty). Has worked well so far, but had the expect increase in E2 and decrease in TT as most see with a move to sub-q, though it is manageable.

1. I started getting some spasms in my inner right thigh a couple days ago, weird just some automatic muscle twitching. perhaps I hit something? anyone had this?

2. I am wondering if there would be a difference in T/E2 injecting sub-q inner thigh vs sub-q stomach

I am a daily injector (29 gauge 1/2 inch) I was injecting outer thigh shallow IM for a while a concerned about scar tissue moved over to inner thigh (which is more fatty).

Scar tissue/trauma would be minimal when using a fixed insulin syringe whether using
a 27-31G.


Has worked well so far, but had the expect increase in E2 and decrease in TT as most see with a move to sub-q, though it is manageable.

Really?

Out to lunch on this one!

You should know better to state such.



My reply: post#5
Bryan_K77 said:
Some guys get lumps when injecting oil based in the abdomen near the navel. I would on occasion, but the “love handle” and upper glute/low back area was great for me. I actually got higher numbers on sub q than IM, but some guys don’t absorb oil well sub q
This is far from common and even then unless those same individuals have kept everything consistent such as protocol (dose T/injection frequency), same ester, waiting the full 4-6 weeks for levels to stabilize, testing at the true trough, using the same lab, same assay (most accurate) when comparing lab results for TT/FT between sub-q vs IM than I would have my doubts.

Trust me when I tell you that some of these same individuals making such claims as poor absorption/lower T levels have slipped up on one of the points stated above.

For the majority, there should be no difference in the absorption let alone the effectiveness when injecting exogenous esterified testosterone subcutaneously.





 

Robotics

Active Member
I am a daily injector (29 gauge 1/2 inch) I was injecting outer thigh shallow IM for a while a concerned about scar tissue moved over to inner thigh (which is more fatty).

Scar tissue/trauma would be minimal when using a fixed insulin syringe whether using
a 27-31G.


Has worked well so far, but had the expect increase in E2 and decrease in TT as most see with a move to sub-q, though it is manageable.

Really?

Out to lunch on this one!

You should know better to state such.



My reply: post#5

This is far from common and even then unless those same individuals have kept everything consistent such as protocol (dose T/injection frequency), same ester, waiting the full 4-6 weeks for levels to stabilize, testing at the true trough, using the same lab, same assay (most accurate) when comparing lab results for TT/FT between sub-q vs IM than I would have my doubts.

Trust me when I tell you that some of these same individuals making such claims as poor absorption/lower T levels have slipped up on one of the points stated above.

For the majority, there should be no difference in the absorption let alone the effectiveness when injecting exogenous esterified testosterone subcutaneously.






I would correct my statement to say that "some" rather than most, but I think eventually it will become accepted that IM results in better absorption for most. I have kept everything consistent and switched im to sub-q twice and found the same trend. Most people do not do this, so they don't notice a difference in levels. They may be increasing frequency etc when going to sub-q.

As a daily injector I have been following the experiences of daily injectors who have made the switch with limited other variable changes, and I believe it is more common than not. Most guys who don't have to deal with all the ins and out of daily injections will brush it off just like low shbg was brushed off for the longest time.
 

madman

Member
I would correct my statement to say that "some" rather than most, but I think eventually it will become accepted that IM results in better absorption for most. I have kept everything consistent and switched im to sub-q twice and found the same trend. Most people do not do this, so they don't notice a difference in levels. They may be increasing frequency etc when going to sub-q.

As a daily injector I have been following the experiences of daily injectors who have made the switch with limited other variable changes, and I believe it is more common than not. Most guys who don't have to deal with all the ins and out of daily injections will brush it off just like low shbg was brushed off for the longest time.

No disrespect but that is bulls**t!

As I stated in another thread:

My reply: post#5
Bryan_K77 said:
Some guys get lumps when injecting oil based in the abdomen near the navel. I would on occasion, but the “love handle” and upper glute/low back area was great for me. I actually got higher numbers on sub q than IM, but some guys don’t absorb oil well sub q
This is far from common and even then unless those same individuals have kept everything consistent such as protocol (dose T/injection frequency), same ester, waiting the full 4-6 weeks for levels to stabilize, testing at the true trough, using the same lab, same assay (most accurate) when comparing lab results for TT/FT between sub-q vs IM than I would have my doubts.

*Trust me when I tell you that some of these same individuals making such claims as poor absorption/lower T levels have slipped up on one of the points stated above.

For the majority, there should be no difference in the absorption let alone the effectiveness when injecting exogenous esterified testosterone subcutaneously.
 

Cataceous

Well-Known Member
... I think eventually it will become accepted that IM results in better absorption for most. ...
Don't take our word for it, read one of the XYOSTED studies. "Relative to 200 mg IM TE, the two doses of 100 mg SC TE (week 5 and week 6 combined) demonstrated similar AUC(0-inf), suggesting that the bioavailability of TE is similar whether administered SC or IM."

The general statement should be that IM results in faster absorption than SC for most, not better absorption. This is reflected in the shorter apparent half-life with IM.

The unexpected result is your reduction in trough TT with the move to SC. Typically as drug half-lives increase the serum hormone trough levels increase while peak levels decrease.
 

Robotics

Active Member
Don't take our word for it, read one of the XYOSTED studies. "Relative to 200 mg IM TE, the two doses of 100 mg SC TE (week 5 and week 6 combined) demonstrated similar AUC(0-inf), suggesting that the bioavailability of TE is similar whether administered SC or IM."

The general statement should be that IM results in faster absorption than SC for most, not better absorption. This is reflected in the shorter apparent half-life with IM.

The unexpected result is your reduction in trough TT with the move to SC. Typically as drug half-lives increase the serum hormone trough levels increase while peak levels decrease.
fair enough!
 

gerardo

Member
Read over post #8 numerous times.


Yes. In practice, for some it may have differences. I believe that there are still not many studies of subq injections and their place of application and comparisons with E2 levels. With regard to the level of TT and FT it seems to me that it is already consolidated that the subq and IM reach the same parameters.
 

antelopers

Active Member
I would correct my statement to say that "some" rather than most, but I think eventually it will become accepted that IM results in better absorption for most. I have kept everything consistent and switched im to sub-q twice and found the same trend. Most people do not do this, so they don't notice a difference in levels. They may be increasing frequency etc when going to sub-q.

As a daily injector I have been following the experiences of daily injectors who have made the switch with limited other variable changes, and I believe it is more common than not. Most guys who don't have to deal with all the ins and out of daily injections will brush it off just like low shbg was brushed off for the longest time.
I am another person who experimented multiple times with subq without changing any other factors and got significantly worse absorption. Every time I post it people tell me that I did something wrong, or that I'm an extreme outlier, but I see this written all the time and I have been on trt for 8 years and know for a fact that everything else was exactly the same in my life and protocol. I can tell you exactly where my levels will be with IM injections at the same dose and my absorption was absolutely awful with subq both times proven by bloodwork for several months on a subq protocol.
 

gerardo

Member
I am another person who experimented multiple times with subq without changing any other factors and got significantly worse absorption. Every time I post it people tell me that I did something wrong, or that I'm an extreme outlier, but I see this written all the time and I have been on trt for 8 years and know for a fact that everything else was exactly the same in my life and protocol. I can tell you exactly where my levels will be with IM injections at the same dose and my absorption was absolutely awful with subq both times proven by bloodwork for several months on a subq protocol.
What were your subq doses compared to MI doses to make a difference in absorption?
 

antelopers

Active Member
What were your subq doses compared to MI doses to make a difference in absorption?
The doses were exactly the same, but my trough levels were down from the high 600s to the high 300s, and estradiol was significantly higher (EDIT: Lower, not higher) both times as well.
 
Last edited:

madman

Member
Yes. In practice, for some it may have differences. I believe that there are still not many studies of subq injections and their place of application and comparisons with E2 levels. With regard to the level of TT and FT it seems to me that it is already consolidated that the subq and IM reach the same parameters.

 

madman

Member
The doses were exactly the same, but my trough levels were down from the high 600s to the high 300s, and estradiol was significantly higher both times as well.
I am another person who experimented multiple times with subq without changing any other factors and got significantly worse absorption. Every time I post it people tell me that I did something wrong, or that I'm an extreme outlier, but I see this written all the time and I have been on trt for 8 years and know for a fact that everything else was exactly the same in my life and protocol. I can tell you exactly where my levels will be with IM injections at the same dose and my absorption was absolutely awful with subq both times proven by bloodwork for several months on a subq protocol.

You stated your protocol (dose of T/injection frequency) was the same (IM vs sub-q) and this includes testing at the true trough on both protocols?

This was lab work done using the same lab, same assay (most accurate) for TT (LC/MS-MS) and FT (Equilibrium Dialysis or Ultrafiltration)?

Do you have labs to post from both protocols IM vs sub-q showing TT was tested LC/MS-MS (both sets of labs) and FT was tested using Equilibrium Dialysis (both sets of labs) or Ultrafiltration (both sets of labs)?

Interested to see where your TT/FT levels sat IM vs sub-q.




Did you adhere to everything stated below?

This is far from common and even then unless those same individuals have kept everything consistent such as protocol (dose T/injection frequency), same ester, waiting the full 4-6 weeks for levels to stabilize, testing at the true trough, using the same lab, same assay (most accurate) when comparing lab results for TT/FT between sub-q vs IM than I would have my doubts.


If so then I would say you are one of the far and few!

 

gerardo

Member
The doses were exactly the same, but my trough levels were down from the high 600s to the high 300s, and estradiol was significantly higher both times as well.
If everything was done correctly assume that the subq protocol did not work for you. Injecting subq in which part of your body? In addition to the labs, what important reactions did you feel in the subq protocol? I ask this because I see that most are using the subq protocol and you may be one of the few exceptions. Thanks.
 

antelopers

Active Member
You stated your protocol (dose of T/injection frequency) was the same (IM vs sub-q) and this includes testing at the true trough on both protocols?

This was lab work done using the same lab, same assay (most accurate) for TT (LC/MS-MS) and FT (Equilibrium Dialysis or Ultrafiltration)?

Do you have labs to post from both protocols IM vs sub-q showing TT was tested LC/MS-MS (both sets of labs) and FT was tested using Equilibrium Dialysis (both sets of labs) or Ultrafiltration (both sets of labs)?

Interested to see where your TT/FT levels sat IM vs sub-q.




Did you adhere to everything stated below?

This is far from common and even then unless those same individuals have kept everything consistent such as protocol (dose T/injection frequency), same ester, waiting the full 4-6 weeks for levels to stabilize, testing at the true trough, using the same lab, same assay (most accurate) when comparing lab results for TT/FT between sub-q vs IM than I would have my doubts.


If so then I would say you are one of the far and few!
Hey madman. I used LabCorp for all of the tests. For some reason I can't access any of my bloodwork in the LabCorp app from 2017 or earlier, but I'll ask Defy when I speak to them to send the labs over so we can take a look here. I always waited a bare minimum of 8 weeks to do labs when switching to subq.

I use the standard tests Defy prescribes. Standard Total & Free T which would not be the specific more accurate tests you mentioned. However, my testosterone is completely consistent as is my SHBG (34-35) over all of my tests since 2013, and only when doing subq did the Total T drop, and by a significant degree.

Unless there is something that doesn't allow total t to be detected by the standard testosterone assay when injected subq, it seems that there is an issue with extremely delayed or limited absorption, rapid clearance, or some other mystery. No doubt subq works for many, but it doesn't seem to work for me, and I've seen quite a few similar reports on different boards (granted, I can't speak for their consistency in protocols and testing).

I can't remember the direct Free T numbers and will have to wait for my labs. Side note: do you still recommend the Tru-T as a good estimate for calculated Free T numbers?

I did use Sensitive Estradiol which uses LC/MS so I know the estradiol disparities were accurate as well, which is also consistent with the lower T levels.

If everything was done correctly assume that the subq protocol did not work for you. Injecting subq in which part of your body? In addition to the labs, what important reactions did you feel in the subq protocol? I ask this because I see that most are using the subq protocol and you may be one of the few exceptions. Thanks.

No doubt I am probably in the minority, but from what I read online I'm not the only one. I was injecting subq in the belly fat only the first time. Second attempt I rotated belly fat and the fat on the glute fat pad area.

I'd say the major differences were exhaustion during the day (falling asleep at work a few times), poor sleep and worsening of libido, joint pain, and losing a sense of well-being. All of which are low estradiol symptoms for me. I wouldn't say most are using a subq protocol, I think most men using test are still IM, but there are plenty of people using subq without issue.

For anyone reading I corrected my above post, my estradiol was significantly lower on subq, I wrote higher by mistake.
 

madman

Member
Hey madman. I used LabCorp for all of the tests. For some reason I can't access any of my bloodwork in the LabCorp app from 2017 or earlier, but I'll ask Defy when I speak to them to send the labs over so we can take a look here. I always waited a bare minimum of 8 weeks to do labs when switching to subq.

I use the standard tests Defy prescribes. Standard Total & Free T which would not be the specific more accurate tests you mentioned. However, my testosterone is completely consistent as is my SHBG (34-35) over all of my tests since 2013, and only when doing subq did the Total T drop, and by a significant degree.

Unless there is something that doesn't allow total t to be detected by the standard testosterone assay when injected subq, it seems that there is an issue with extremely delayed or limited absorption, rapid clearance, or some other mystery. No doubt subq works for many, but it doesn't seem to work for me, and I've seen quite a few similar reports on different boards (granted, I can't speak for their consistency in protocols and testing).

I can't remember the direct Free T numbers and will have to wait for my labs. Side note: do you still recommend the Tru-T as a good estimate for calculated Free T numbers?

I did use Sensitive Estradiol which uses LC/MS so I know the estradiol disparities were accurate as well, which is also consistent with the lower T levels.



No doubt I am probably in the minority, but from what I read online I'm not the only one. I was injecting subq in the belly fat only the first time. Second attempt I rotated belly fat and the fat on the glute fat pad area.

I'd say the major differences were exhaustion during the day (falling asleep at work a few times), poor sleep and worsening of libido, joint pain, and losing a sense of well-being. All of which are low estradiol symptoms for me. I wouldn't say most are using a subq protocol, I think most men using test are still IM, but there are plenty of people using subq without issue.

For anyone reading I corrected my above post, my estradiol was significantly lower on subq, I wrote higher by mistake.

I would prefer to have seen TT/FT done using the accurate assays and although your TT/SHBG stayed consistent over numerous labs you had your FT tested using the piss poor direct immunoassay which I would not rely upon.

Although you did state that your TT (standard assay) dropped significantly when switching to sub-q.

To get an accurate FT whether direct testing or calculated method TT would need to be done using the LC/MS-MS assay.

I am more concerned with where your FT truly sat and unfortunately to know such you would need to use the most accurate assays such as the gold standard Equilibrium Dialysis or Ultrafiltration (next best).

What jumps out is that your estradiol (LC/MS-MS) was significantly lower when on the sub-q protocol and you stated that:

I'd say the major differences were exhaustion during the day (falling asleep at work a few times), poor sleep and worsening of libido, joint pain, and losing a sense of well-being. All of which are low estradiol symptoms for me.
 

antelopers

Active Member
I would prefer to have seen TT/FT done using the accurate assays and although your TT/SHBG stayed consistent over numerous labs you had your FT tested using the piss poor direct immunoassay which I would not rely upon.

Although you did state that your TT (standard assay) dropped significantly when switching to sub-q.

To get an accurate FT whether direct testing or calculated method TT would need to be done using the LC/MS-MS assay.

I am more concerned with where your FT truly sat and unfortunately to know such you would need to use the most accurate assays such as the gold standard Equilibrium Dialysis or Ultrafiltration (next best).

What jumps out is that your estradiol (LC/MS-MS) was significantly lower when on the sub-q protocol and you stated that:

I'd say the major differences were exhaustion during the day (falling asleep at work a few times), poor sleep and worsening of libido, joint pain, and losing a sense of well-being. All of which are low estradiol symptoms for me.
Thanks for the insight. I wish I could go back and get the more accurate labs done, but I think my subq experiments are over. I'll post my labs from those times regardless next time I speak with Defy.

Based on your previous advice I've seen on here I started ignoring those direct free t assays. I was using the tru t calculator you recommended in the last, and in the future I'm getting all of the accurate assays as my insurance now covers all labwork at LabCorp without limitation.

I definitely think the E2 was more of a player in how I felt as well. I would feel those same symptoms running high total t and using an aromatase inhibitor. I would assume the E2 was lower because total T was lower but it's hard to say for sure.
 

gerardo

Member
Hey madman. I used LabCorp for all of the tests. For some reason I can't access any of my bloodwork in the LabCorp app from 2017 or earlier, but I'll ask Defy when I speak to them to send the labs over so we can take a look here. I always waited a bare minimum of 8 weeks to do labs when switching to subq.

I use the standard tests Defy prescribes. Standard Total & Free T which would not be the specific more accurate tests you mentioned. However, my testosterone is completely consistent as is my SHBG (34-35) over all of my tests since 2013, and only when doing subq did the Total T drop, and by a significant degree.

Unless there is something that doesn't allow total t to be detected by the standard testosterone assay when injected subq, it seems that there is an issue with extremely delayed or limited absorption, rapid clearance, or some other mystery. No doubt subq works for many, but it doesn't seem to work for me, and I've seen quite a few similar reports on different boards (granted, I can't speak for their consistency in protocols and testing).

I can't remember the direct Free T numbers and will have to wait for my labs. Side note: do you still recommend the Tru-T as a good estimate for calculated Free T numbers?

I did use Sensitive Estradiol which uses LC/MS so I know the estradiol disparities were accurate as well, which is also consistent with the lower T levels.



No doubt I am probably in the minority, but from what I read online I'm not the only one. I was injecting subq in the belly fat only the first time. Second attempt I rotated belly fat and the fat on the glute fat pad area.

I'd say the major differences were exhaustion during the day (falling asleep at work a few times), poor sleep and worsening of libido, joint pain, and losing a sense of well-being. All of which are low estradiol symptoms for me. I wouldn't say most are using a subq protocol, I think most men using test are still IM, but there are plenty of people using subq without issue.

For anyone reading I corrected my above post, my estradiol was significantly lower on subq, I wrote higher by mistake.
Do you use testosterone cypionate? Your case is interesting. I could have tried to apply subq on the outside of the trunk or on the deltoid. But your E2 has decreased. Go figure.
 

Online statistics

Members online
9
Guests online
8
Total visitors
17

Latest posts

Top