How often do supplement companies lie about the ingredients on their bottles? I just came across a supplement I've been taking tested positive for having Methasterone (Superdrol) in it.
>>37409293
What supp
If its a significant dose it would be abundently fucking obvious youre on steroids
>>37409315
1024 by ATS Labs:
http://ustdsa.org/index.php/2015/08/07/1024-achievement-though-sciences-ats-labs-contains-anabolic-agents/
>>37409315
Steroids arent that magical dumbass.
>>37409482
What are you on right now
250 test
350 tren
50 winstrol
Anadrol on heavy days
>>37409445
Damn
What was it even supposed to be
>>37409631
An "Extreme Growth Agent" lmao, after finding that out I researched a bit and found out a lot of the little companies don't put everything on the ingredients list because I suppose they don't get tested as much, or it would be a waste of time for the DEA or whoever to go through all the paperwork etc, Animal/Cellucor, etc on the other hand I'm guessing everything is 100% on their labels.
>>37409783
Supps arent tested at all generally
Theres no governing apparatus for them
Thats dope though dude enjoy your sdrol lol
Last two times i got it the shit was bunk
>>37409808
Lmao I got lucky I guess, taking a liver support and will for sure PCT afterwards obviously, but I heard sdrol is fucking toxic af, have you taken it before?
>>37409833
Yeah ive run it a bunch of times
I was joking about running that though
I mean i would because yolo but you dont know the dose and sdrol is a killer
If your lower back begins to hurt or your eyes go yellow abort lel
But yeah its probably the most powerful bb drug ive taken mg for mg
>>37409864
Yeah I mean one of my friends took the 1024, without knowing the shit that was in it that wasn't on the label, he fucking got strong lmao. & the guy at the supplement shop said he's been selling it for a few months now, oh well I'll see how it goes.
>>37409909
Gl bruh
>>37409927
I'm just wondering if after the USADA tested it, they changed it, probably not. (hopefully)
