Tips on how to blend propionate with enanthate (or cypionate)?

[newuser]

For a starting point I'd just use the high-end AI estimate for serum level variation with pure testosterone acetate of 60% above and below the mean. As expected, this is larger than the 50% figure I usually use with propionate. The target variation is 25% above and below the mean. Solving the equation leads to testosterone from the longer ester comprising 1.4 times the testosterone from acetate.

Testosterone enanthate is about 72% testosterone, whereas testosterone acetate is about 87% testosterone. Therefore you're looking at about 1.7 parts enanthate to 1 part acetate, or roughly 5:3 rather than the 4:3 used with propionate.

To reemphasize: this is just a rough starting point and you'll need to take measurements to see if adjustments are needed. Also, this ratio is by ester weight, not volume. Enanthate is usually going to have at least double the concentration of acetate. For example, if the acetate is 100 mg/mL and the enanthate is 200 mg/mL then the volume ratio of enanthate to acetate is 2.5:3.

Thank you very much for such a detailed explanation, it was very helpful!

 

[Nelson Vergel]

Not sure if anyone has brought up this blend:

Testosterone Cypionate / Testosterone Propionate Injection

Choose Empower Pharmacy for compounded Testosterone Cypionate / Testosterone Propionate Injection. The leading accredited 503A and FDA-registered 503B compounding pharmacy.

www.empowerpharmacy.com

 

[Cataceous]

Now that AI is a thing it's become a lot easier to model what's going on with a propionate blend while changing various parameters. For example, I asked the Grok AI to take some standard diurnal serum testosterone data for young men and find the daily doses of testosterone propionate and testosterone enanthate that best fit the data (least-squares). I told it to use 4.5 days as the TE half-life and 18 hours as the TP half-life. Aside from the doses, the AI was allowed to alter the injection time offset. I'm not sure what resolution it was using on the doses, but it came up with a 1:1 TE:TP ratio, which is a little more aggressive than the 4:3 ratio I used. Here is the graph:

The average dose-response data the AI used led to doses of 4 mg TE and 4 mg TP. This is not too bad of a fit. I suspect that better mimicry of the diurnal data would not yield that much difference in subjective results. I'll further speculate that to really move the needle the testosterone would need to be delivered in a pulsatile fashion as occurs naturally.

 

[Willyt]

Now that AI is a thing it's become a lot easier to model what's going on with a propionate blend while changing various parameters. For example, I asked the Grok AI to take some standard diurnal serum testosterone data for young men and find the daily doses of testosterone propionate and testosterone enanthate that best fit the data (least-squares). I told it to use 4.5 days as the TE half-life and 18 hours as the TP half-life. Aside from the doses, the AI was allowed to alter the injection time offset. I'm not sure what resolution it was using on the doses, but it came up with a 1:1 TE:TP ratio, which is a little more aggressive than the 4:3 ratio I used. Here is the graph:

The average dose-response data the AI used led to doses of 4 mg TE and 4 mg TP. This is not too bad of a fit. I suspect that better mimicry of the diurnal data would not yield that much difference in subjective results. I'll further speculate that to really move the needle the testosterone would need to be delivered in a pulsatile fashion as occurs naturally.

Another member brought up the potential impact of size of injection bolus. It got me thinking about these very small injections (e.g., 4mg TE). Would the tiny bolus have any effect on timing and extent of peak / trough?

 

[Cataceous]

Another member brought up the potential impact of size of injection bolus. It got me thinking about these very small injections (e.g., 4mg TE). Would the tiny bolus have any effect on timing and extent of peak / trough?

This is likely. The apparent half-life does have some dependency on the depot size, because the absorption rate can be limited by the depot's surface area. This diverges from the standard model that makes absorption proportional to the depot's volume. The effect of this is to increase the apparent half-life in larger depots. This and other factors affecting absorption make it important for each guy to characterize his own response. Fortunately this is not too difficult because the blend response is close to a linear sawtooth. The main challenge is in deciding when to test for the peak level. The only other thing you need is the trough level.