I posted this up at a few other boards to see other's thoughts....I was thinking about stacking omnibolic (natural..similar to primo) and masteron and have come up with the following thoughts behind the idea...anyone who can add to this def. post up, i think it's a stack I might give a go.

Anabolic to androgenic ratio, the search for the perfect 50/50 ratio has led me to the thoughts below

The two compounds involved...the pure anabolic versus pure anadrogenic is the basis for my question on whether this could be a great stack or not.

Omnibolic:
Pure anabolic activity with no androgenic effects
Masteron:
Pure androgen derivitive of DHT exhibiting only modest anabolic properties, but TREMENDOUSLY powerful androgenic characteristics

My synergistic ideas behind this stack.

Masteron will cause many of the pleasant androgenic effects that testosterone will cause, such as agression, libido, and strength, but is not nearly as anabolic. Omnibolic will provide the anabolic effects half to the missing side of Masteron, a match made in heaven.

The masteron half (pure androgen) of the stack will increase the amounts of active free testosterone in circulation thus giving a greater effect of the omnibolic's pure anabolic presence over a Masteron-free system, IF aromatisation was an issue masteron would negate the side-effects that result from high levels of estrogen, HOWEVER we're de****g with the pure anabolic activity of Omnibolic that exhibits NO AROMATISATION.

It makes sense then that Masteron will increase the omnibolic's anabolic sensitivity in the system.

I'm all about lean quality gains versus quick bulkers brought on by aromatisation and bloat...I'm thinking about running this stack in the not so distant future and wanted to get some feedback and thoughts on it.
__________________

Hey GBoGH! Great idea my friend!

To put things in to perspective, check this...

Dianabol has an Anabolic/Androgenic Ratio of Anabolic/Androgenic Ratio of 90(anabolic)/50(androgenic). Omnibolic has an Anabolic/Androgenic Ratio of 96(anabolic)/0(androgenic).

Thus, Omnibolic is a PURE ANABOLIC exhibiting ZERO androgenic activity! Masteron is a PURE ANDROGEN, exhibiting GREAT androgenic activity but with little anabolic activity. Stacking the TWO absolutely seems like a great idea.

So far, Omnibolic is like a Primobolan/Turinabol mix. I am HARD, DENSE, LEAN. VASCULAR, and constantly pumped. my strength is up and my bodyweight keeps nudging up although I am looking friggin shredded. Looking forward to week 3.

Were are you getting The Anabolic /androgenic ratio, for Omnibolic?Not bashing just very curious as to were it came from.Thanks

I would add some test in there as a base.

Omnibolic is a perfect anabolic
Masteron is a perfect androgen

Therefore you have the 50/50 ratio...you have to stack the two, the ratio isn't just for omni

Perfect anaboilc is how it is marketed, I am not asking for that. I am asking how he got the Androgenic/Anabolic ratio or is he just pulling it out of the air?It seems to me since he has not addressed my question since I posted it, he is a little hesitent to say how he is quantifying that number. Or maybe he skipped over my post,But once again my question still stands.

This is ridiculously suspect. This guy shows up the same time as SSE as a sponsor and his first post is in the SSE forum. And now he's posting about how this Omnibolic is the "perfect/pure anabolic".

Anyway, why not just use some fucking testosterone?

I can see what you are saying, my problem is that they do not just hand out anabolic/androgenic ratios out to any compound they deem fit. Steroids are really the only thing assigned them. So I am wanting to hear his feedback on were the number he stated was from.If he can show me any kind of legitamacy to his claims , I would be satisfied.

Plus, the multiple uses of CAPITALIZATION.

I can't put my finger on it, but some things just seem wierd around here lately.

I have a problem with that too. And I'll tell you where that number comes from, insects.

Why such a hate on for estrogen?

Estrogen is necessary and healthy, eliminating estrogen is not the best idea. Estrogen keeps your cholesterol levels normal, and is good for peripheral glucose disposal, as well as being important for mood.

There is no such thing as a pure androgen or a pure anabolic, or 'ratios' they are simply silly 'brotellegence' terms applied to make oneself sound scientific.

I know there is no pure androgens or anabolics, but there are ratios and they are far from brotellegence. Please refer to ''Anabolic and Androgenic agents'' by Julius Vida. It contains approximately 650 agents. So maybe you should do some research before throwing the brotellegence word around. I mean do you even know how they test for it?Or is that just to make them sound smart?

x2

Do you have a link to that reference?

Every androgen targets slightly different receptors and modulates them differently. Some are strong androgen receptor agonists in certain tissues, others are more/less strong in other tissues, some are known to strongly antagonize glucocorticoids, others interact with other steroid receptors like the estrogen receptor and even the progesterone receptor, not to mention the varying degree of binding to other blood proteins like SHBG or albumin and interaction with enzymes like 5-AR or aromatase, or the complex interaction of various hormones with brain chemistry.... etc..

The point being every drug is different, every drug has its own unique effects on the body, and splitting them into 2 dumbed down categories of anabolic and androgenic is foolish and extremely inaccurate. Think about it.

It's an out-of-print book.
Here's a quote from the chapter "The Anabolic-Androgenic Ratio", out of the book Androgens and Anabolic Agents if you're interested.

That excerpt from the book basically said next to nothing, and I'd love to know what the credentials for the author are. No wonder it's out of print.

Just google Julius Vida, that part did say next to nothing, but he is one of the most well respected scientists there is . He is the head of about every drug companies research and development department, there is.I can see what you are trying to get at in your statements and I do partially agree with you. The Anabolic/Androgenic ratio does not describe all possible interactions that a certain drug has in the body therefore it is not useful.While I agree knowing just the ratio and nothing else about the drug may provide little help.But just because you think it is useless does not mean other people who actually develop these drugs listed, do.And it still has relevance, regardless of what you say.

I'm still waiting, as well.

In our studies conducted with Dianabol(Methandrostenolone), Omnibolic had a higher ANABOLIC RATING with ZERO androgenic activity, and thus, the 100-0 rating.

Anadrol 50:
Androgenic: Anabolic Ratio: 45:320

Anavar:
Anabolic/Androgenic Ratio (Range): 322-630:24

Androil:
Anabolic/Androgenic Ratio (Range): 100:100

Andropen 275:
Anabolic/Androgenic Ratio (Range):100:100

Deca-Durabolin:
Anabolic/Androgenic ratio: 125:37

Dianabol:
Anabolic/Androgenic Ratio (Range): 90-210:40-60

Equipoise:
Anabolic/ Androgenic ratio: 100:50

Halotestin:
Anabolic/Androgenic ratio:1,900/850

Masteron:
Anabolic/Androgenic Ratio:62:25

NPP:
Androgenic/Anabolic ratio: 37:125

Omnadren:
Anabolic/Androgenic Ratio: 100:100

Oral Turnibol:
Anabolic/ Androgenic ratio: >100:>0

Parabolan (Tren):
Anabolic/Androgenic ratio: 500/500

Primobolan:
Anabolic/Androgenic Ratio (Range): 88:44-57

Proviron:
Androgenic: Anabolic Ratio:30-40/100-150

Sustanon 250:
Anabolic/Androgenic ratio:100/100

Testosterone Cyp, Enanthate, Prop, Suspension
Anabolic/Androgenic ratio:100/100

Winstrol:
Androgenic/Anabolic Ratio:30:320

Hope this helps some of you

What studies?

Yes please post the studies, and please don't tell us that this is from insect studies, because as we all know that would mean nothing for what this would do in humans.Thank you.

http://www.supremesportsfitness.com/sci.html

Uh, wrong.

Just because it isn't androgenic, doesn't mean that its anabolic rating is 100. That is some seriously flawed logic.

Who the HECK said that? LOLL

Dianabol has an anaboic rating of 94, Omnibolic is 100.

What I think he was infering is although the anabolic rating of Dianabol is 94, does that give the number for Omnibolic an automatic anabolic rating of 100?Why not 200 or even 95?From the studies you provied it does appear to be more anabolic but how are you quantifying the exact number of 100?Also not bustin balls but you originally said it was 96 in your post in reply to GB0GH.

What the hell are you talking about? I made no reference to D-bol, you did.

I said your logic is flawed. Just because you CLAIM that this stuff isn't androgenic but still anabolic, doesn't mean it's anabolic rating is 100. Forget the whole ratio nonsense, as you didn't really post ratios, otherwise Test and Tren would've had the same ratio 1/1 ... 100/100 = 500/500. But Test != Tren.

This guy is posting some serious bullshit. Is there some way we can vote to get a sponsor removed? I'm TIRED of the SPAM all OVER the PLACE.

So that is why you are being mean.

Omnibolic has a GREATER anabolic rating than Dianabol, plain and simple, END OF STORY.

Thats a great way of proviong your point.
Thanks mommy. Are you going to tell me not to play near the stairs next, dont touch the hot stove, or else......
I mean really.
Where is that anabolic rating comming from?
You have failed (and I carefully reviewedyour studies) to post any reference that even remotely indicates Omnibolic may have an anabolic rating at all.
Just because a product is anabolic doesnt grant it a rating.
Otherwise Avant Labs could come out and say synthesize has an anabolic rating of 1000 with an obvious androgenic rating of 0.

Comparing Ecdysterone to Dianabol is not feasible, if it was, then everyone would be ditching AAS/PS/DS for Ecdysterone/omnibolic, which they're not...

If Ecdysterone doesnt affect or modulate the androgen receptor, then we're talking apples and oranges here..

SSE please reply to the post I posted in your response to the ratio, post # 29, I am not trying to bash here. I just want to get the complete rundown of how you came up with the number. So I will keep my comments civil but it will look bad for you if you just let the statement which I quoted from you above, be the end of your discussion in this thread.thank you

What happened to the "Report this thread" function? This clown needs to go. I thought this was the Mind & Muscle website. Someone show this crap to Tkarrde.

Is this how you end all of your conflicts "END OF STORY [without any proof]"? No wonder you've been booted from so many sites. Time to add another tally.

Obviously there are no legitimate scientific studies which came up with androgenic/anabolic ratios.

For a large number of reasons not the least of which is it's impossible to quantify androgenicity (what number of pimples? how many times you got horny in a day? how much the strength gain gave you in bench press results, how many times you 'raged')...

Foolish to attempt to pass off these numbers as actual research, they were obviously dreamed up by a so-called enlightened juicer philosopher.

Archaic, I know you are a smart guy. But are you now making up scientific facts on your own whim?I mean if you don't even know how they calculate the ratio, you should be studying before you post.I mean think about it, how are you going to call something bogus whne you don't even know how they get it?Are you now Omnipotent?All knowing maybe?Should we throw out all science and bow to you maybe?

You guys are very rough over here;

Omnibolic is more anabolic than Dianabol. As far as the hypothetical AAs rating, it was purely speculative.

SSE, thank you for coming over to the thread, as I said in my PM to you. I am keeping it civil and since you answered the question, I had asked, I am now satisfied.So I am done with the question regarding what was asked by me. And will now leave it to the others if they want to ask anything further. Thanks again.

False. This is established terminology in endocrinology.

1) C. Kuhn, "Anabolic Steroids". Recent Progress in Hormone Research. 57(2002).

"Testosterone actions represent the combination of several activities. First, it binds to the androgen receptor to exert its androgenic activity. Second, it is 5a-reduced in some target tissues (including the male urogenital tract, skin, liver, and sebaceous glands) to dihydrotestosterone (DHT), which also acts on the androgen receptor. Finally, it can be aromatized to The latter two actions are highly undesirable in anabolic drugs, 5a reduction because it decreases the ratio of anabolic:androgenic activity and aromatization because of the feminizing side effects."

"To verify the anabolic effect of the treatments, the levator ani (LA) and ventral prostate (VP) weights were measured and the ratio of LA/VP was calculated as an estimate of the anabolic potency of the AAS compounds [14]. This ratio varied from 0.3 to 1.18 (Table 2), the greater value is indicative of a greater anabolic or myotropic activity relative to androgenic activity. Stanozolol, nandrolone, danazol, and methandrostenolone all had ratios close to 1, whereas the ratios for T and DHT were 0.4 and 0.3, receptively. There was no significant effect of treatment on body weights."

http://rphr.endojournals.org/cgi/reprint/57/1/411.pdf

2) C. Rosselli. "The effect of anabolic–androgenic steroids on aromatase activity and androgen receptor binding in the rat preoptic area". Brain Research. 792.2 (1998).

"The androgenic:anabolic ratio of an androgen is an important consideration when determining the clinical usefulness of these compounds. Accordingly, compounds with a high ratio of androgenic to anabolic effects remain the drug of choice in androgen-replacement therapy to treat hypogonadism in males, whereas compounds with reduced androgenic:anabolic ratios have significant benefits in the treatment of other medical conditions, in which their primary clinical application is for their anabolic effects (e.g., anemia, osteoporosis, and to reverse protein loss following trauma, surgery or prolonged immobilization."

3) N. Evans. "Current Concept in Anabolic-Androgenic Steroids". American Journal of Sports Medicine. 32 (2004).

"Chemical modifications of testosterone have been useful pharmacologically to alter the relative anabolic-androgenic potency, slow the rate of inactivation, change the pattern of metabolism, or decrease the aromatization to estradiol.101 Most orally active AAS preparations are 17- alkylated derivatives of testosterone that are relatively resistant to hepatic degradation.7 Esterification of the 17-ß-hydroxyl group makes the molecule more soluble in lipid vehicles used for injection and, hence, slows the release of the injected steroid into the circulation. The common formulations of synthetic testosterone are shown in Table 1. All of the listed drugs possess both anabolic and androgenic activity; none are absolutely selective. Testosterone has an anabolic:androgenic ratio of 1, whereas the ratio for nandrolone is 10 and that for stanozolol is 30. However, all AASs are virilizing if administered for long enough, at high enough doses."

Prove it.



Oh wait, you can't, because you just said it was a speculative. And as Ras pointed out, A:A ratios/ratings are not hypothetical.

Archaic knows all this he has taken classes in Endocrinology. Or as he put it,"And yes, I have taken university level courses in Human and Comparative Endocrinology." In another thread.

I have used dbol several times and I just so happen to have another 100 tabs of it right here.
Send me a bottle of omnibolic. I will do two seperate cycles.
A six week cycle of test propionate and Omnibolic.
Do an extensive PCT with some time off then do a six week cycle of propionate and dbol.
I will see which cycle provides more rapid gains, more mass gains and greater strength gains.
I have been training for 10 years with several cycles under my belt. I will honestly compare and contrast the qualitative and quantitave results of both cycles.

That's actually a good idea, but how would you calculate the dosage of dbol to Omnibolic?

I do not know. SSE is the one claiming anabolic:androgenic ratios. Therefore, I would think he would have some kind of comparative dosage as well.
I would take whatever he advised of both.

Anavar is more ANABOLIC than Dianabol, but it does NOT build more MUSCLE MASS. Winstrol and Equipoise also more anabolic than Dianabol, but Dianabol is far SUPERIOR to both for muscle mass.

The ANDROGENIC component also determines the rate at which a particular compound will build lean muscle tissue.

Of course Dianabol will produce greater gains than Omnibolic, Omnibolic totally lacks an androgenic component; it is however, extremely anabolic, even moreso than Dianabol.

Prove it.
I have read the studies on your page, I still have not seen one reference verifying this claim.

....and since you are the one comparing your supplement to dbol, at what dosage of omnibolic would one start obtaining dbol like gains???

No dosage.

This is FUNDAMENTAL Anabolic Steroid information: The Anabolic AND Androgenic rating determine how much muscle mass a compound builds.

Compounds that are VERY ANDROGENIC but NOT very ANABOLIC are not ideal for MASS; Masteron, Halotestin, Cheque Drops, Proviron

Compounds that are VERY ANABOLIC but not very ANROGENIC are not ideal for MASS: Anavar, Primobolan, Winstrol

Compounds that are BOTH, SIGNIFICANTLY ANDROGENIC AND ANABOLIC ARE ideal for MASS: Testosterone, Trenbolone, Dianabol, Anadrol

This is steroids 101.

You should run for a political office. You say a whole lot without saying anything at all or answering a single question.

So since your compound is PURELY anabolic, it will build the LEAST muscle; Therefore, making this supp fairly useless..

Compared to Trenbolone, Testosterone, and Dianabol--YES.

Compared to Turinabol or Primo--NO.

Omnibolic is very effective for lean muscle mass and strength, after all, it is "more anabolic than Dianabol".

Omnibolic is just Ecdysterone plus Citruline malate for volumizing. Ecdy gave me no size gain at all. Just a little bit of hardening and after 4-5 weeks all my joints would hurt. I suspect it has an effect on estrogen levels possibly sending th4em pretty low judging by the sore joints and tendency toward cramping. Masteron is another hardener. It will bind to aromatase and inhibit conversion of testosterone and other aromatizables to estrogens. I would think that stacking the 2 would make for a pretty painful cycle with little weight gain and some hardening. I think a better choice would be testosterone propionate and Masteron Propionate.