Why Eloralintide Is Difficult to Test

[TazaTaza]

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

 

[woundcarping]

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

 

[Chili777]

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

 

[woundcarping]

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

 

[Chili777]

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

 

[birdwhacker]

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

GLPs have worked great for me. I never fooled myself into thinking that a single one of these drugs would get me everything I want. Running reta at 12+mg for a long stretch isn't something I want or plan to do. Adding another compound is far more appealing to me. Betting everything on one pharmacokinetic approach is a really dumb move.

 

[ambot88]

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

Where do you believe you are?

 

[Chili777]

birdwhacker said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

GLPs have worked great for me. I never fooled myself into thinking that a single one of these drugs would get me everything I want. Running reta at 12+mg for a long stretch isn't something I want or plan to do. Adding another compound is far more appealing to me. Betting everything on one pharmacokinetic approach is a really dumb move.

For me, Reta did exactly what it was supposed to do. Nothing more is required in my case, and my appetite is fully suppressed, so perhaps I'm one of the lucky ones. After titrating upward to 12 mg and staying there for a month, I hit my target. These days I'm on 10 mg and tapering. Where my maintenance dose will land is still unclear, but it covers everything I need.

 

[birdwhacker]

Chili777 said:

birdwhacker said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

GLPs have worked great for me. I never fooled myself into thinking that a single one of these drugs would get me everything I want. Running reta at 12+mg for a long stretch isn't something I want or plan to do. Adding another compound is far more appealing to me. Betting everything on one pharmacokinetic approach is a really dumb move.

For me, Reta did exactly what it was supposed to do. Nothing more is required in my case, and my appetite is fully suppressed, so perhaps I'm one of the lucky ones. After titrating upward to 12 mg and staying there for a month, I hit my target. These days I'm on 10 mg and tapering. Where my maintenance dose will land is still unclear, but it covers everything I need.

That's fantastic! Should it do the job for me, wonderful. And if additional compounds turn out to be necessary, that's wonderful too. What matters is that answers are available at all these days. Only 4 months back, I had resigned myself to the idea that ending my life was an inevitability down the road. That being healthy simply wasn't within reach. These days there are so many routes ahead of us that we actually argue over which ones to take.

That counts as a major victory.

 

[Chili777]

birdwhacker said:

Chili777 said:

birdwhacker said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

GLPs have worked great for me. I never fooled myself into thinking that a single one of these drugs would get me everything I want. Running reta at 12+mg for a long stretch isn't something I want or plan to do. Adding another compound is far more appealing to me. Betting everything on one pharmacokinetic approach is a really dumb move.

For me, Reta did exactly what it was supposed to do. Nothing more is required in my case, and my appetite is fully suppressed, so perhaps I'm one of the lucky ones. After titrating upward to 12 mg and staying there for a month, I hit my target. These days I'm on 10 mg and tapering. Where my maintenance dose will land is still unclear, but it covers everything I need.

That's fantastic! Should it do the job for me, wonderful. And if additional compounds turn out to be necessary, that's wonderful too. What matters is that answers are available at all these days. Only 4 months back, I had resigned myself to the idea that ending my life was an inevitability down the road. That being healthy simply wasn't within reach. These days there are so many routes ahead of us that we actually argue over which ones to take.

That counts as a major victory.

After 12 months on Sema with nothing to show for it besides a lighter wallet, I was on the verge of throwing in the towel. These days, though, I'm happy with the range of choices available to me. And I'll admit I'm no purist — I picked up some Cagri as a safeguard, in case tapering down sent my hunger soaring. Think of it as a "break glass in case of emergency" option sitting in reserve. Ideally I won't need it, but time will tell. There's no going back for me.

 

[woundcarping]

birdwhacker said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

GLPs have worked great for me. I never fooled myself into thinking that a single one of these drugs would get me everything I want. Running reta at 12+mg for a long stretch isn't something I want or plan to do. Adding another compound is far more appealing to me. Betting everything on one pharmacokinetic approach is a really dumb move.

How anyone can say that with such certainty is baffling to me.

 

[birdwhacker]

woundcarping said:

birdwhacker said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

GLPs have worked great for me. I never fooled myself into thinking that a single one of these drugs would get me everything I want. Running reta at 12+mg for a long stretch isn't something I want or plan to do. Adding another compound is far more appealing to me. Betting everything on one pharmacokinetic approach is a really dumb move.

How anyone can say that with such certainty is baffling to me.

I suppose that's something I'll just have to accept.

 

[Smiter]

birdwhacker said:

woundcarping said:

birdwhacker said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

GLPs have worked great for me. I never fooled myself into thinking that a single one of these drugs would get me everything I want. Running reta at 12+mg for a long stretch isn't something I want or plan to do. Adding another compound is far more appealing to me. Betting everything on one pharmacokinetic approach is a really dumb move.

How anyone can say that with such certainty is baffling to me.

I suppose that's something I'll just have to accept.

Hey whacker, it's been a while. How have you been?

 

[birdwhacker]

Smiter said:

birdwhacker said:

woundcarping said:

birdwhacker said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

GLPs have worked great for me. I never fooled myself into thinking that a single one of these drugs would get me everything I want. Running reta at 12+mg for a long stretch isn't something I want or plan to do. Adding another compound is far more appealing to me. Betting everything on one pharmacokinetic approach is a really dumb move.

How anyone can say that with such certainty is baffling to me.

I suppose that's something I'll just have to accept.

Hey whacker, it's been a while. How have you been?

Doing well, Smiter. How about you? Picked up any interesting new ones lately? Did you end up ordering that enclo?

HCG has been treating me well. Before, I was jerking off once every 2-4 days; now it's twice daily, morning wood included.

 

[Smiter]

birdwhacker said:

Smiter said:

birdwhacker said:

woundcarping said:

birdwhacker said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

GLPs have worked great for me. I never fooled myself into thinking that a single one of these drugs would get me everything I want. Running reta at 12+mg for a long stretch isn't something I want or plan to do. Adding another compound is far more appealing to me. Betting everything on one pharmacokinetic approach is a really dumb move.

How anyone can say that with such certainty is baffling to me.

I suppose that's something I'll just have to accept.

Hey whacker, it's been a while. How have you been?

Doing well, Smiter. How about you? Picked up any interesting new ones lately? Did you end up ordering that enclo?

HCG has been treating me well. Before, I was jerking off once every 2-4 days; now it's twice daily, morning wood included.

Yeah..appreciate it...placed orders with kimera and swiss chems.

birdwhacker said:

Smiter said:

birdwhacker said:

woundcarping said:

birdwhacker said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

GLPs have worked great for me. I never fooled myself into thinking that a single one of these drugs would get me everything I want. Running reta at 12+mg for a long stretch isn't something I want or plan to do. Adding another compound is far more appealing to me. Betting everything on one pharmacokinetic approach is a really dumb move.

How anyone can say that with such certainty is baffling to me.

I suppose that's something I'll just have to accept.

Hey whacker, it's been a while. How have you been?

Doing well, Smiter. How about you? Picked up any interesting new ones lately? Did you end up ordering that enclo?

HCG has been treating me well. Before, I was jerking off once every 2-4 days; now it's twice daily, morning wood included.

Such a grind, right? Still, on the bright side you do get those bonus rounds of post-nut clarity.

birdwhacker said:

Smiter said:

birdwhacker said:

woundcarping said:

birdwhacker said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

Chili777 said:

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

Yet none of that is wrong. Should the ring be missing, what you have is merely a collection of aminos whose effects nobody really knows. Would a typical vendor even bother to check? Not likely. Their response will be: just use it, it'll do the job regardless. That opens up yet another problem when it comes to testing, and the argument over the right way to handle it has not been settled. Plenty of questions remain without answers.

Were you able to see the part I quoted?

Yeah. The wording could have been better, sure, but I judged the comment by its overall point. My take is that Elora is meant for the slice of people who, unlike most, haven't had a response to GLPs. How big that group actually is, I have no idea.

GLPs have worked great for me. I never fooled myself into thinking that a single one of these drugs would get me everything I want. Running reta at 12+mg for a long stretch isn't something I want or plan to do. Adding another compound is far more appealing to me. Betting everything on one pharmacokinetic approach is a really dumb move.

How anyone can say that with such certainty is baffling to me.

I suppose that's something I'll just have to accept.

Hey whacker, it's been a while. How have you been?

Doing well, Smiter. How about you? Picked up any interesting new ones lately? Did you end up ordering that enclo?

HCG has been treating me well. Before, I was jerking off once every 2-4 days; now it's twice daily, morning wood included.

Nope...nothing new in the consumable department, but I did pick up a new exercise that's quickly turned into my all-time favorite. This shtick is going to show up in my dreams...and I don't even dream these days.

 

[birdwhacker]

Smiter said:


What a chore, huh? Well, at least you get the extra bouts of post-nut clarity so that's a plus.

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't do anything good for me. It's a filthy habit and I'd like to be able to quit it.

Smiter said:


Na...well, not any new consumable, but did start a new exercise which has now become my absolute fav of all time.

Click to expand...

So? Don't keep me waiting.

Smiter said:


I'm gonna dream about this shtick...and I dont even dream anymore.

Click to expand...

I dream about this routine whenever, yt boy

 

[Smiter]

birdwhacker said:


Nasty habit, wish I could put it down.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I know exactly what you mean...working the salami just for that PNC is seriously addictive.

birdwhacker said:


Well? Don't leave me hanging.

Click to expand...

This one's mine, I came up with it. I've called it the 'Androck curl', named after the pseudonym I write under. It takes cues from the Zottman curl and the Poliquin curl, plus things I've picked up myself. The brachialis, brachioradialis, pronator and supinator all get worked, but I still need to figure out a way to demonstrate it for you. After that session the sensation was wild. Down the road I can picture Popeye turning green with jealousy... my goal is Arsen Liliev-level peak forearms

 

[TazaTaza]

woundcarping said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

A forum built around the most widely used "appetite suppressant" there has ever been — and you manage to announce that appetite isn't your issue without ever mentioning weight. Extra credit for pulling that off here.

? I have to give Tz credit here. Keep in mind that Elora isn't a GLP. Tz is right there. That just blows my mind. Everyone keeps hunting for something more potent when there's already a GLP out there with really high effectiveness that's also simple to bootleg for this grey space. Wherever I look, people are fixated on crushing their appetite into an ED.

ambot88 said:

TazaTaza said:

L8lly cracks me up, I'm sure they were thrilled to find out that bootlegging Elora is hard asf.

From what I read, Elora contains a "methylene thioacetal bridge" since that holds up better than its di-SS bonds?

What gets me is that they're calling it a testing problem rather than an engineering one. Chem techniques for confirming ring structure/bridge already exist, the catch is that they're pricey + involve multiple steps. Someone could be using bunk Elora that isn't stable and has an extremely short half-life, which would kill the whole point of the pep.

It's wild to me that ppl get this hyped about an appetite suppressant?

Where do you believe you are?

Since I'm on a GLP forum, it confuses me why y'all are so hyped about an experimental appetite suppressant that is NOT simple to bootleg or test when Tz is right there with a lower risk profile and is simple to bootleg and test.

EDIT: My original comment said "T*rz solo will be supreme after the dust settles" but I removed it after some strange filtering since I'm a newbie. My bad y'all, but yeah, I figure Tz solo will likely be the answer over the long run

 

[Smiter]

TazaTaza said:


? I want to praise Tz. Mind you Elora is NOT a GLP. Tz is right there. It's mind boggling to me. Y'all keep chasing the something stronger when a GLP already exists w/very high effectiveness and is easily bootleg for this grey space. Everywhere I go everyone is obsessed with suppressing their appetite into an ED.

I'm on a GLP forum which is why I'm confused why are y'all excited over an experimental appetite suppressant that's NOT easily bootleg/testable when Tz is right there w/a lower risk profile and is easily bootleg + testable.

EDIT: My og comment had "T*rz solo will be supreme after the dust settles" but I deleted after weird filtering bc I'm a newbie. My bad y'all but yeah I think Tz solo will probably be the answer in the long-run

Click to expand...

I get the sense that Miamese is a language I still have to pick up, yet I'll do my best to work out what you're getting at. So why does the next big thing get us so fired up??? Honestly, that's the biohacker identity in its purest form. As a matter of fact, my guess is that this exact mindset is what drew so many of us toward GLP-1's from the start, back when much of the world was lined up against them.

Given that, tossing that trait aside would feel like a contradiction of who we are — above all when we know that game-changing med-tech is racing our way at warp speed.

 

[TazaTaza]

Smiter said:


I perceive I need to learn Miamese, but I shall strive to guess the thrust of your verbiage. Why are we excited about the next best thing??? Well, it's the quintessential biohacker's identity. In fact, I would assume that it's precisely that mindset that brought many of us to GLP-1's in the first place when a lot of the world is set against it.

That being the case, it would seem out of character to dispose of that trait, especially knowing that revolutionary med-tech is blazing towards us at warp speed.

Click to expand...

You've got Cag, you've also got Tz. And if you're into the old-school approach, caffeine and assorted stimulants are on the table too.

Nobody seems willing to name the obvious problem here. This entire post and the whole conversation thread revolve around one point: Elora is difficult to test and to verify. Sure, people chase the next best thing — that's exactly why a new iPhone gets bought every single year. It's the appeal of something new and shiny.

But what's the point of grabbing a new shiny toy when it's defective, or bunk, or both? I honestly don't understand the enthusiasm, especially when there are alternatives right now that are better and more feasible.



The next best thing is not some grey source bunk Elora lmao. Not right now.