As I said...I am still researching. It is still going to be a month or more before I am ready to do anything. I will start a log once I do for sure.
Welcome to The Iron Den
Where strength athletes share techniques for building muscle, burning fat and the proper use of anabolc steroids to help you meet your fitness goals.
...then you have come to the right place!
we will try to help you with your problem.
As I said...I am still researching. It is still going to be a month or more before I am ready to do anything. I will start a log once I do for sure.
I like how you are going about this Macgyver...You are doing your research and starting at low reasonable doses. Ive seen many people go off half cocked and trying to put the highest amount of AAS in them. I think so far your on the right path
After feeling really run down for the past several years, I finally had my test checked. I came up with avg test, but my free was below the bottom of the scale. My GP put me on test Cyp and we are still in the beginning stages of getting levels figured out. Have to say I am feeling MUCH better now. I was feeling constantly fatigued no matter what level of sleep I got. Now it is much better.
Now that I dont have worries of re-start...etc, I have decided to look into dabbling.
On the Tren topic. I see that most people recommend ED pinning. Being new to pinning myself, and still struggling with 2/week I currently do, I did not think that was a great option.
Then I researched transdermal application. Yes.....I know.... only 40-50% absorption....But it is not as if the base is hard to get or expensive.
Looking into carriers, DMSO comes up, but it has it's drawbacks. (smell irritation..etc). There are prepared products available, but these pretty much cost as much as the base....so I looked into brewing my own.
The best carriers are Lecithin based like PLOgel. Doing some scrubbing on the net I found all the ingredients and even found ratios.
Here is what it is based on
Isopropyl palmitate (palm base) Available from soap making places
Lecithin granuals Available from NOW
Polysorbate20 A surfactant and emulsifier
Isopropyl Alcohol (solvent)
D-Limonene Citrus oil. (gives good scent also helps as a carrier)
Then....DMSO up to 10% (optional). Studies of the lecithin based carriers showed good ability in scientific studies as transdermal agents. The addition of small amount of DMSO should only improve this. At this low concentration, I am hoping that there would not be the irritation or smell associated with straight DMSO usage.
Even if you only get 40%, a cart of Finaplix runs about$40 for 2000mg Tren. 40% would yeild 800mg. At a low starting dose of 25mg/day, that would yeild 30 days / cart transdermally. (You could get twice the yeild if you wanted to convert to injectible....but the cost of oils and other things will double the cost). It is not nearly as efficient base material wise....but cost wise, once you factor in oils and supplies, the cost is about a wash.
For about $35 I got enough supplies to make A BUNCH of PLOgel. More then I could ever use.
Not having to turn yourself into a pin cushion.
Not having to worry about sterility issues with injectibles
Being able to split doses up even doing an AM/PM for even more stable levels
Not really knowing what effective doseage you are getting without trial and error.
Possible transference issues
If this is the chosen route to go.... I would assume a 40% absorption rate and shoot for a lower dose of 25/ day.
What are your guys thoughts?
Last edited by macgyver; 03-06-2012 at 01:28 PM.
Pinning ED is no big deal. Really. It's not. No experience with Tren of any type so I have no feedback there.
I personally am a low-dose fan.
I run it at 35-50 ED with 300-400 Test / wk and get great results in strength and hardness without completely sacrificing my cardio.
I have run it as high as 75 ED and 500+ test/ wk for bulking and it works well at that level, but I did not like the complete lack of cardio capacity.
I do ED shots as I am more stable emotionally vs EOD. I use insulin syringes. 29GA 1/2 inch and you wont even know you took a shot. I back load them from a standard 3 cc syr. If you mixed up 75 mg/ml tren then draw up the amount you want in the 3 cc, then pull the plunger on the insulin syr and load a 0.5 cc for 35 ED or 0.7 for 50 ED and put the plunger back in the insulin syr and keep going till I have loaded enough for several days. You will need to shoot the tren in areas with low bodyfat when using insulin syr as it is such a short needle.
Y- will just take 25 seconds to push through the 29 ga rather than 15 through a 25 ga.
If you made it at 200 mg/ml then you will only need .25 ml for 50 and .5 ml for 100 so the insulin syr is a perfect plan.
Ed is the way to go and load up 27 x 1/2s instead of the ouchy wire brush needle slin pins
Hey guys... I ordered the supplies and made a batch of homebrew PLO gel. It is very thin and absorbs well. Using about 7% DMSO the smell is not bad and is completely concealed with the D-limonene. (which has a nice citrus scent).
After doing tons of reading, guys seem to have had good results with TD application of Tren-ace.
I also found an interesting post written about Tren and how Europeans use it like we use test.
Here it is> It is long but seem interesting. I really dont have the experience to say whether this is true or not...just sharing what I found and hoping some of you guys with more experience can shed some light on it.
I began BBing with a trainer from Germany. In educating me, he related to me that, in his time BBing there, European BBers were relatively without American influence. Common practice called for the use of short half-life ester injectables, the variety of which was much greater than exists today, combined with mild orals like Anavar and Winstrol and, sometimes, Dbol. Short cycles (2-4 weeks) were also the norm. Most interesting, use of test was very uncommon, and considered a horror. What was commonly used was Parabolan, what we, today, call Trenbolone. Eight week cycles were virtually unheard of, and the desire to pack on 20-40 pounds in such a short time was unthinkable. European BBers took a much more unhurried pace of growth. Young, competitive BBers were very much smaller than those found in the US, today, due to this orderly pace of growth. It was only the very rare, genetically unusual BBer who was big at a young age. Europeans simply had a different outlook and different standards.
IAN: Yes, within 5 months I was using 200 lbs for like 14 reps.
Early on, my trainer lamented the situation he found in the US: heavy dependence upon test, long halflife esters used in long cycles, gross overeating, poor estrogen suppression, acceptance of high body fat percentages, and excessive lean body mass development in short time spans. He was horrified at what he envisioned would be the long term consequences of widespread use of these practices. He was associated with IFBB pros, like Zhur, el Sonbaty, Schlierkamp, and Ruhl, while in Europe. He was well aware of the health complications associated with extreme muscularity. He kept reiterating "BBing is a sport for life".
While still a natural, I began to examine how an entire philosophy of AAS use might be developed, based upon the European experience. By the time it was appropriate for me to begin AAS, years later, I already had a plan. Initially, I quietly used myself as a lab rat. The results became quite visible, and, before too long, questions followed. My trainer asked that we work together, to develop a new way for his athletes to grow. And here we are.....
Characteristics of AAS:
There are two clearly discernable characteristics of interest to BBers. Anabolic: muscle growth/hypertrophy. and Androgenic: strength, aggression, fat burning. Most AAS possess these two characteristics in varying ratios, and in various strengths. For example, Halotestin may be seen to produce a pure androgenic response, but no anabolic response. Deca, on the other hand, will produce anabolism with no significant androgenic response. Test produces roughly a 50 percent anabolic response, and 50 percent androgenic response. Then there is strength of response. Winstrol is a moderate, pure anabolic. Anavar is a moderate, pure androgen. Trenbolone is a very powerful androgen (80 percent of total response), much more powerful than the androgenic characteristics of test. Tren's anabolic characteristic (20 percent of total response), is weaker than that of test. And so on. I have built a complete table of response characteristics of all the AAS components we use.
"In a stunning scoop that has shaken bodybuilding to its core, we have convinced six of the current Top 20 professional bodybuilders in the world to reveal every detail of their drug and steroid regimens… What does this mean for you? Every bodybuilder who's ever stepped inside a gym has wondered what it is that separates the guys who lift for years and years (and get big, but not that big)... and the monsters that win the big professional contests. It isn't genetics that accounts for the incredible difference in size... and it isn't training or nutrition…"
Site injection and localized growth:
Time and time again, we have seen localized growth response to site injected, esterless and short halflife AAS. I no longer accept that a positive response is anecdotal. It's just too commonplace, in my own work. Consequently, we no longer waste gear in glutes and quads. We identify and then site inject any and all lagging body parts, in a rotating injection program. And we have seen some startling responses. In nearly every case, we prefer tren and an esterless AAS, for the most powerful response. There must be weak-, or non-responders, but I have yet to find any. I owe much, in this particular area, to the work of Paul Borreson.
The Oxford English dictionary defines the term somatotype as the "The physique of an individual as expressed numerically in terms of the extent to which it exhibits the characteristics of each of three extremes (the endomorph, mesomorph, and ectomorph)." So for example, a person exhibiting extreme mesomorphy might be assigned the numerical ****tail of 2-7-1. What does this mean?
Cycles are assembled by, first, determining the end response characteristics desired, and assembling components whose AAS characteristics interlock together to produce that end response with a minimum of overlap, over the cycle time span desired. Consider this cycle: Nandrolone phenylpropionate (EOD), tren (EOD), Winstrol (ED), optional Anavar (ED). I've remarked, elsewhere, on the desirability of pairing tren with Winstrol. We require the use of a pure androgen for EVERY cycle, to insure ongoing muscle definition, density, and post cycle androgenicity, so Anavar is our choice for this cycle. Here, Tren is our primary androgen, and nandrolone our primary anabolic. All of these agents are selected for their lack of water retention. All are either short acting or esterless, so that meets our requirements for site injection. And, yes, we do site inject it all. We begin by frontloading the estered injectables, up to three days before cycle day zero, and add the orals and esterless injectables at cycle day minus one. On cycle day zero, the AAS is already active, with blood levels increasing. We end the injectables and orals, suitably in advance of the end of the cycle, so that, on cycle day 15, the AAS is non-inhibitory, and HTPA recovery begins immediately. Add on 14 days further system recovery, and then a cycle can begin anew. Seven weeks, total. Over a year, this might be accomplished seven times. When HCG, and an anti-e at suitable dosage, is added to the Clomid, the HTPA may be recovered in only 2 weeks. This shortens the next cycle availability point by one week.
Yes, it's a lot of injections. And the Winstrol hurts.
What might be expected, in the way of results? Bulking, we have seen as much as 10 pounds lbm. Average is five pounds. Over a year, that's 35 pounds. You say, "Hell, I can grow that much in 8 weeks". I say, let's see how many times a year you can accomplish that, and over how many years do you think you will continue to accomplish that? We have this steady, measured growing, going on and on. My guess is that this approach, using only a modest bulking diet, rather than the typical American pig-out bulking diet, can be accomplished for years and years. Due to short cycle length and rational diet design, there is very little fat gain. No pressing need to cut. No need to look like the typical big, smooth BBer, who only looks cut once a year. Our people are lean, defined, and feel healthy, all the time. They only spend two weeks cycling, while seven (or six), clean. And, since they get normalized quickly, they can train and grow natural, more quickly, because there is none of the weeks and weeks of getting that slow AAS out of their systems. The BBer doing the typical 8 week long acting ester cycle exists for weeks in a kind of limbo, where the blood levels are not high enough for anabolism, but are still inhibitory, and he must wait all that extra time. My people are off, longer than they are on. Their bodies free of drugs, all that time.
We tend to avoid test. Not completely; just most of the time. What we found is that, anytime you use test, it magnifies the sides of whatever you use with it. Tren, used in rational dosages, is relatively free of sides, and causes fewer overall sides during cycles. We use tren, like the typical BBer uses test. With tren, you get much more response, with much lower dosages, with greater androgenic intensity. Someone once wrote that tren was "the gear of the gods". Indeed, the Europeans brought to BBing AAS, a very great gift. We do use test, but only for very specialized purposes.
We only use one type of eight week bulk cycle. That for Boldenone, which now can only be obtained in a very long halflife ester. We are working with a supplier, and are patiently awaiting him to provide us with our first esterless Boldenone. Testing will begin immediately afterwards, to develop new dosage and protocols, following which, we expect to end our use of nandrolone phenylpropionate. Too many of our clients exhibit some degree of bloat from progesterone aromatization, emerging from the nandrolone. We consider any bloat, from any origin, entirely unacceptable, on health and esthetic grounds.
Body fat gain on cycles:
Ever notice how productive of muscle a cycle usually is, during the first four weeks, and how it slows down and body fat accumulates during the second four weeks? You end up eating more in the attempt to return things to the former rate. More body fat. Finally, the whole process slows down for good. What's going on? The common explanation is that you are getting bigger, so that requires more nutrition. We say no. We say the body realizes what is going on, it exhausts and compensates, and body metabolism and developmental processes simply will no longer support this process. But you continue to eat. And that food has got no place else to go, but be turned into fat, with unproductive lbm production.
What's infinitely more interesting than Sheldon's view on somatotype permanency, is his assertion that somatotype and temperament are somehow intertwined. I'll use the example of a mesomorph's temperament because it leads to an amusing corollary involving Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Our short cycle designs, whether for 2, 3, or 4 weeks features tren, as a foundation, which is a potent fat burner, due to powerful androgenicity, and will not aromatize to estrogen. And a diet, which is clean, and appropriately sized for rational lbm gain, while minimizing conversion to fat. Later, the body is clean of AAS, and primed for most sensitive and effective response, before the cycle begins. The conversion from nutrition to muscle takes place under optimum conditions, at low body fat levels. The AAS ramp-up is swift and full, and the cycle ends before the system can desensitize and cause spillover of nutrition to body fat.
Estrogen pileup is another cause of body fat accumulation, during the typical 8 week, long halflife ester cycle. I suggest that readers visit the AE zine Issue 46, and download the blood concentration calculator from the excellent article on blood concentration of various halflife esters of AAS. Then, plug in your long halflife ester cycle components, and witness the startling blood level concentrations of what you are injecting, late in the cycle. Using the typical paltry anti-e dosages of the typical BBer, is it any wonder that, late in the cycle, estrogen levels build up out of control, and body fat follows?
Estrogen and anti-e:
It is an obsolete belief that estrogen is necessary in any cycle. Indeed, ANY amount of estrogen is BAD in any cycle! There is not one study which supports the notion. But the idea lived on in yet another obsolete notion; that water weight is good weight, in a cycle. That, water introduced into the muscle, causes increased lifts, and by lifting heavier, greater growth is obtained. The experts would purposely advise minimal amounts of anti-estrogen drugs, only to minimize the chance of gyno, but to insure lots of this, supposedly, desirable water weight. On the AE boards, I have witnessed these experts advising NO anti-e's, but only to have some Nolvadex at hand, to deal with gyno, should it appear. Not only do you end up with fake strength and fake muscle size, but, at the same time, the estrogen buildup causes high blood pressure, electrolyte imbalance, and a host of health issues. There is water buildup in the lower back to the extent that posts frequently document BBers in pain, cramps, and difficulty, attempting deads. The champions of this approach say "Oh just take some ibuprofen, and you will be just fine". Try asking your liver what it thinks about that approach. Following the cycle, the water disappears, along with the strength and size it fooled the user into believing was real muscle. This often causes depression, and chases the user into a course of creatine, to re-introduce that fake size and strength. The muscle character appears smooth, and the density is poor. When the BBer diets down, all this is lost, and the truth is seen. It's no wonder that certain other experts advise that BBers never come off AAS, so this scenario may never be exposed for what it is: a rollercoaster of reality versus water weight. I agree with them. It is not healthy to run back and forth between lost size and fullness caused by water weight. But it also is not a good thing to stay on AAS, all the time, either. This is a totally brain dead approach to AAS use. And the BBer who engages in it never attains the quality, defined physique he deserves. It's just a lot of smooth water weight and high body fat.
And body fat. Everyone should know that the presence of excess estrogen causes fat deposition. The greater and the longer the exposure to elevated levels of estrogen, the greater the body fat accumulation. Endos, listen up; stay away from any situation which creates elevated estrogen levels. Everyone, listen up; it is OBSOLETE cycle technology to enable anything but minimal levels of estrogen, at any time. Estrogen is evil, and it is NOT your friend. Using anti-e's cannot reduce estrogen to levels below which the male body cannot function properly. It requires very little estrogen to function, and no anti-e removes it all.
What to do? Begin, with an entirely different approach. Say that ANY water weight is BAD weight. That estrogen must be banished, to the fullest rational extent. And that the muscle you grow and see is, in fact, muscle, and not water. That the muscle produced will be dense and well defined. A quality physique. How, then does one obtain that increased strength, which the water provided, to enhance growth during the cycle? As stated, we first kill off the estrogen and bloat. Second, we emphasize the introduction of powerful androgens into the cycle structure. I am speaking, once again, of tren and anavar. Together, these components make you VERY strong. And with NO bloat or estrogen required. The concentrated androgenicity encourages intense, aggressive workouts, while also encouraging fat burning. It is very commonplace to observe body recompositions during such cycles. In other words, you get big and lose body fat, simultaneously. The androgenicity also produces significantly increased muscle density and definition. At cycle end, what you end up with, is the real deal. Solid muscle, growth, and increased definition. No need to rush to the nearest container of creatine to stem your losses. And that strength is yours, to keep. And no test.....
Now, go back to that blood concentration calculator, and compare the blood concentrations of the typical 75 mg EOD of tren, to what you were subjecting yourself to, with that long halflife ester cycle. No stress caused by estrogen pileup, either. Now, you tell me which alternative is better.
What do we use to suppress estrogen? Well, we formerly used Arimidex. Arimidex is now an antique for us. We use Femara. We prefer one 2.5 mg tab ED. Our clients are kept dry as a bone. We will begin to study Aromasin, in mid-September. Aromasin utilizes a different approach to Estrogen control, which promises to be even more powerful than Femara. But research indicates that IGF-1 production is not suppressed by Femara, but may, in fact, be enhanced by it. We do not see that with Aromasin. Time and experimentation will tell.
Most importantly, we keep our people on anti-e, post cycle, during the HTPA recovery process, and later. This both speeds recovery of the HTPA, as well as minimizing fat buildup, while hormone levels fluctuate wildly.
Androgenicity and quality:
BBers commonly justify their long cycles by saying that they need the long cycle to enable "consolidation". They observe that this effect only occurs late in the cycle. Why is this? It's because the androgen level of the Sustanon test, typically used, takes that long to pile up and affect the muscularity of the BBer. But what about Trenbolone? Almost without fail, users commonly report density and hardening to appear within a few weeks. Why is this? Because the androgenic response of tren is so much more powerful than that of test. You can get this response to produce quality muscle at dosages of only 75 mg EOD, in less than a month. In a Sustanon test, it takes many weeks to accumulate an immense blood concentration, to achieve the same result. It is commonplace to observe tren users burning fat, while they cycle. Sust users never report this effect. Why? Once again, the androgenic response of tren is so much greater than that of test. Intense androgenicity induces fat burning. If Anavar is added, the androgenicity effect is intensified, still further.
Ever hear of the term "muscle maturity"? It describes muscle which is dense and defined. The commonly accepted belief is that it takes years and years to acquire this muscle characteristic. But why? Because, using test, the exposure to the muscle hardening androgenicity only occurs for about two weeks in the typical long cycle. And that cycle can only be repeated a few times a year. In the tren/anavar-based short cycle, the exposure to muscle hardening androgenicity occurs for longer periods, and the cycle can be repeated many times a year. "Muscle maturity", and quality, appears with rapidity, and not with years and years. I see muscle quality in only one year of regular short cycling, which I never see in the typical long cycle BBer, unless it occurs for years. Which would you prefer?
The issue of health:
There are those who say the typical American method of cycling, using long acting ester cycles, for 8 weeks or more, and eating 7-8000 calories per day, for all that time, is no danger to health. To that, I say this: in the millions of years of human evolution, at no time, ever, has the male of our species been exposed to the barrage of hormonal, metabolic, and developmental pressure and manipulation, as occurs during the long acting ester eight week cycle. Do you really believe our bodies were engineered and evolved to deal with this attack, as well as the stress of being forced to add 20-40 pounds of lbm and body fat in this same time span, over and over, again? Don't be a fool. If you believe so, then you are whistling past the cemetery. And there are additional fools, who would have you believe that staying on this course, continuously, can do you no harm. There is currently an unprecedented, uncontrolled lab experiment, taking place all over the world, with thousands of men as lab rats. The long term outcome cannot be predicted by anyone, today. True, every single one of us will die, someday. My people and I have no intention of hastening the ar***** of that inevitable day, just to look big in a coffin, as we are laid to our eternal rest. What the hell is YOUR hurry? And, what if you don't die? What if you are forced to leave your beloved sport, and spend the rest of your days, living with hypertension and heart damage due to tachycardia? And kidney damage caused by the hypertension. And still other health issue possibilities. Is this any way to live? It's a personal value judgment and risk assessment process. Step back for a moment, and re-evaluate your position and priorities.
The end game:
One other matter, which few consider. Everyone has a genetically pre-programmed maximum of lbm, which their body will support, regardless of whether you reach it via AAS. The faster you approach it, the sooner your gains will decline, no matter how much juice you cycle, and how often you cycle it. You will end up spending money, juicing larger quantities of gear, and stressing your body, for diminishing returns. Finally, you are tapped out. All the slin, growth hormone, IGF-1, and whatever else you toss at it, will never get you past that limit. In a minority of individuals, they will attain immense lbm gains, over time. The rest of us, face the remainder of our BBing careers, re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. All we accomplish is staying right where we are, until we leave the sport in frustration.
BBing is a sport for life. Why exhaust yourself and your body, in a hurry to arrive at the end of the journey, earlier than you need to? I'm 48 years old, and I look forward to growing and growing, for as long as I remain in the sport. We have a 65 year old client, who last competed 11 years ago. We did a few short cycles with him, dieted and prepped him, and he walked away with a second prize trophy, healthy and happy. Have any of you ever considered that you might still be able to lift and compete at that age? You better forget it, if all you can think of is slamming on endless pounds, today and tomorrow. Your time in BBing will either end in poor health, or the frustration of having reached your limit, and going no further.
I have presented, above, only the most basic introduction to my philosophy and approach to short cycling, and offered only a simple example out of a program which I spent years developing. I have devised an entire series of special-purpose cycles, each of which embody most, if not all, of the above principles.
The purpose of the short cycle is to employ moderate dosages of short halflife ester and esterless injectable and oral AAS, combined with moderate and healthy diet, to promote moderate stress anabolic growth, over time. This same process results in very high quality muscle production, which only increases with each cycle, and minimal health impact. It assumes a long term outlook. It is intended for the mature and rational BBer, who expects to remain in the sport for the rest of his life. If you truly love BBing, you never want to leave, and you want to keep your interest and grow, then consider how the short cycle might be what you need for your future in our beloved sport.
I want to take the time to publicly thank my very special friends and clients, who put their faith in me, and assisted me by using my protocols. Through their invaluable feedback and experience, they enabled me to refine and perfect my overall program. Without them, this all would be nothing but theory. Some are former and present members of this fine board.
And thank you, for taking the time to read all these words. I hope they help you in your journey, as BBers.
site ijections do not localize growth,end of discussion there and yes test brings on more sides than a straight tren run,but lots of folks will argue with that though they have never tried both ways,where I have
I had a quick question for guys with more experience. I think I am ready to run my first experiment with transdermal tren. Figuring a 40% absorption rate 60mg daily should give me a 25mg/day dose.
Now here is my issue. My sister in law is due to have a baby sometime within the next month. This will require a 5 day out of town trip. Probably without training and an on point diet.
I would really like to begin this...but dont want to waste it if it would not be effective if I had to cut it short or missed some workouts.
From the article above, the guy mentions that some guys run short cycles of as little as two weeks...or four.
So the question is.....Should I begin knowing I might be interrupted? If interrupted, should I just take it through tbose 5 days and skip training?...Or just cut my cycle short...and begin again when settled back in?
Im on HRT so pct is not a factor.
Excuse my ignorance for not reading all the replys but thats a dumbass Idea! Tren can be a real bitch or not! U didn't provide the ester ur planning on trying for 1. I'll not get into that Tren as a first cycle is a BAD IDEA no matter what! trtr doses of test WILL NOT off set the sides of Tren!