Latest posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
25,336
Posts
498,038
Members
27,769
Latest Member
HandsomeGuru
What's New?

Lower mg test cycles

Swiper

Swiper

VIP Member
Jan 8, 2011
1,191
1,066
Tren is the most androgenic steroid. testosterone is the most anabolic steroid.

no other steroid build more muscle than testosterone.

anabolic activity is what grows muscle the best, not androgenic. that’s why tren doesn’t build good quality muscle like testosterone does
 
Wallyd

Wallyd

VIP Member
Dec 10, 2013
645
299
Tren is the most androgenic steroid. testosterone is the most anabolic steroid.

no other steroid build more muscle than testosterone.

anabolic activity is what grows muscle the best, not androgenic. that’s why tren doesn’t build good quality muscle like testosterone does
so if test builds the most muscle why not take more of it to capitalize on the muscle building affects? I know more isn’t always better, the sides increase but you see where I’m going with this. Maybe I’m just over thinking things here.
 
Swiper

Swiper

VIP Member
Jan 8, 2011
1,191
1,066
so if test builds the most muscle why not take more of it to capitalize on the muscle building affects? I know more isn’t always better, the sides increase but you see where I’m going with this. Maybe I’m just over thinking things here.
I think you have to find the sweet spot so to speak. your receptors can only hold so much. there’s a point where they can’t absorb anymore. what that milligram is per week I don’t think anyone knows. that’s why I always did a lot of test to make sure they were fully saturated and loaded.
 
W

Wilson6

VIP Member
Dec 17, 2019
175
271
W6, just out of curiosity, how long have u harnessed the benefits of hormones to facilitate HEALTH and/or Aesthetics in your days of lifting?....

U seem to be in good health and it would be interesting to know the duration of your utilization of hormones...It would be a "positive" hope that one can use anabolics (as well as ancillaries) for long-term, of course, in a reasonable manner, and stay relatively healthy....No biggie if u choose not to share, I will/do understand!....


.
See my latter post.
 
W

Wilson6

VIP Member
Dec 17, 2019
175
271
I’ve been following Victor Black for a while and belong to his Master’s Class. The guy makes the most sense of anyone I’ve listened to relative to PED use, you may not agree with everything he says or the way he presents it (he’s rough around the edges) but if you want some science based (supported by the lit), conservative thinking about PEDs, he’s certainly worth following. It is also interesting that what I read on this forum by many of the vets, based on years of experience, parallels much of what Victor discusses about lower is better and test.

The one thing I wished that I had paid more attention to when I was younger was blood pressure, it was higher than it should have been and likely contributed to mild concentric LV hypertrophy and enlarged septal wall along with some fibrosis (cardiac MRI w/LGE) and enlarged LA. BP now is well controlled with an ACEi and some propranolol (more for essential tremor my dad had). Had I kept my BP down using an ACEi or ARB years ago, I’d be in a better place. Not that I’m having serious issues, but the damage has been done. CT angiogram score was zero 3 years ago, no vascular issues. Should have also done more cardio (3x per week even just 20 min). There is also lit support showing ANG II is largely responsible for LV remodeling and renal stress. Keeping a lid on it regardless of BP makes compete sense unless you have a contraindication to ACEi or ARBs for longevity.

Number two on the wished I had paid more attention to was lifting heavy and frequency. Could have been big and not fucked up my shoulders and back nearly to the extent I have to deal with now.

My perspective on AAS. They are all about the same relative to muscle building potential mg for mg. The difference is, what else do they do that makes them different (more anabolic) and what negatives come with that (cardiac, renal, hepatic and brain toxicity)? The number one go to would be testosterone, increasing the dosage until you find the dose where sides become an issue (too much E2 or DHT or both). Then add in something else that works around whatever issue you have. Too much E2, add MAST, too much DHT, maybe some ND. Tread lightly with orals (dose and duration). Avoid EQ, too much ROS generation. Short term, lower dosing probably OK, long term higher, unnecessary. ND only, makes no sense. Long term use of orals, just a bad idea. Even oxandrolone, crushing HDL long term along with other lipid dysfunction will not lead to a long and prosperous life along with the low level liver stress, no one wants a hepatoma.

Guys talk about PCT, look, once you make the decision to take AAS, plan on running 200 mg/wk of TC for the rest of your life or it will be a roller coaster of hormonal fuckery. I also think running HCG along with either HRT or any cycle is a good idea. 500 IU 2x/wk is plenty, even every 5 days. LH isn’t just there to induce endogenous T, it does other things that HCG helps to maintain along with fertility. Again if it jacks up your E2, cut your T and add in some MAST IMO. Some ND to an HRT protocol also makes sense, (some = < 100 mg/wk) if you have joint pain and ND helps and doesn’t fuck up erectile function or libido.

AIs are another one I’d avoid, crushing E2 is not a good idea. Control the ANG II and ALD for water, not E2. If E2 is running high, decrease the T and increase MAST or another non aromatizable agent.

That’s just scratching the surface, but off the top of my head. This is my perspective, many may not agree with it, but it’s how I see it. The goal is to stay in the game and maintain more lean mass at any age, and at least make it into your 80’s. Everytime I go in for labs or some clinical visit, I’m surrounded by a sea of the walking dead. Giving every dime of their retirement savings to hospitals and big pharma just to keep breathing so their families can come in and water them like plants every week sitting in the corner of an extended care facility, that’s not QOL. No thanks, we can all do better and don’t count on your GP to guide you down that path.
 
R

rawdeal

TID Board Of Directors
Nov 29, 2013
3,099
1,955
All quality and no junk in your posts, W6, but this one might be the most important ... thanks.
 
Wallyd

Wallyd

VIP Member
Dec 10, 2013
645
299
I’ve been following Victor Black for a while and belong to his Master’s Class. The guy makes the most sense of anyone I’ve listened to relative to PED use, you may not agree with everything he says or the way he presents it (he’s rough around the edges) but if you want some science based (supported by the lit), conservative thinking about PEDs, he’s certainly worth following. It is also interesting that what I read on this forum by many of the vets, based on years of experience, parallels much of what Victor discusses about lower is better and test.

The one thing I wished that I had paid more attention to when I was younger was blood pressure, it was higher than it should have been and likely contributed to mild concentric LV hypertrophy and enlarged septal wall along with some fibrosis (cardiac MRI w/LGE) and enlarged LA. BP now is well controlled with an ACEi and some propranolol (more for essential tremor my dad had). Had I kept my BP down using an ACEi or ARB years ago, I’d be in a better place. Not that I’m having serious issues, but the damage has been done. CT angiogram score was zero 3 years ago, no vascular issues. Should have also done more cardio (3x per week even just 20 min). There is also lit support showing ANG II is largely responsible for LV remodeling and renal stress. Keeping a lid on it regardless of BP makes compete sense unless you have a contraindication to ACEi or ARBs for longevity.

Number two on the wished I had paid more attention to was lifting heavy and frequency. Could have been big and not fucked up my shoulders and back nearly to the extent I have to deal with now.

My perspective on AAS. They are all about the same relative to muscle building potential mg for mg. The difference is, what else do they do that makes them different (more anabolic) and what negatives come with that (cardiac, renal, hepatic and brain toxicity)? The number one go to would be testosterone, increasing the dosage until you find the dose where sides become an issue (too much E2 or DHT or both). Then add in something else that works around whatever issue you have. Too much E2, add MAST, too much DHT, maybe some ND. Tread lightly with orals (dose and duration). Avoid EQ, too much ROS generation. Short term, lower dosing probably OK, long term higher, unnecessary. ND only, makes no sense. Long term use of orals, just a bad idea. Even oxandrolone, crushing HDL long term along with other lipid dysfunction will not lead to a long and prosperous life along with the low level liver stress, no one wants a hepatoma.

Guys talk about PCT, look, once you make the decision to take AAS, plan on running 200 mg/wk of TC for the rest of your life or it will be a roller coaster of hormonal fuckery. I also think running HCG along with either HRT or any cycle is a good idea. 500 IU 2x/wk is plenty, even every 5 days. LH isn’t just there to induce endogenous T, it does other things that HCG helps to maintain along with fertility. Again if it jacks up your E2, cut your T and add in some MAST IMO. Some ND to an HRT protocol also makes sense, (some = < 100 mg/wk) if you have joint pain and ND helps and doesn’t fuck up erectile function or libido.

AIs are another one I’d avoid, crushing E2 is not a good idea. Control the ANG II and ALD for water, not E2. If E2 is running high, decrease the T and increase MAST or another non aromatizable agent.

That’s just scratching the surface, but off the top of my head. This is my perspective, many may not agree with it, but it’s how I see it. The goal is to stay in the game and maintain more lean mass at any age, and at least make it into your 80’s. Everytime I go in for labs or some clinical visit, I’m surrounded by a sea of the walking dead. Giving every dime of their retirement savings to hospitals and big pharma just to keep breathing so their families can come in and water them like plants every week sitting in the corner of an extended care facility, that’s not QOL. No thanks, we can all do better and don’t count on your GP to guide you down that path.
so I understand it’s different for every person but could you listwhat a typical cycle would look like based on your beliefs for comparison to the norm.
 
W

Wilson6

VIP Member
Dec 17, 2019
175
271
so I understand it’s different for every person but could you listwhat a typical cycle would look like based on your beliefs for comparison to the norm.
I’m not a PED coach, and guys on this board know more about AAS from personal experience than I do. I urge you guys to check out Victor Black’s instagram posts, there is plenty there for free to provoke some constructive thinking.

My take is less for longer, and do as much as you can with testosterone first, then add in based on needs and individual responses (effects/sides). Minimize the use of orals. Watch your labs and get a yearly echo, liver US if you use orals esp anything other than Var in more than 20 mg/day.

Here's an example. I have a female client now 55 yrs old. Been training her for 13+ years. Decided to do a entry level masters physique show. She’s been cycling mostly winny oral for about that long. Usually 8 – 12.5 mg (split a 25 in two or three doses) running it about 12 weeks usually twice a year. Gets it from a guy she knows that competes and its real. Minimal sides, looking at her labs even on winny, you’d never think she was taking anything (LFTs or HDL). Always responded well, but once off, over time slowly deflated and got fatter. She would retain a little muscle but in one’s 50’s that’s hard to do regardless. Some virilization, little deeper voice and more hair growth facial/body but certainly not trans status and she’s fine with it.

She saw one of the HRT docs in the area and started TC 20 mg 3x/wk sc as a base. Grew like something out of a science fiction movie on T only, had no further issues with virilization beyond what she had with the years of low dose winny (it didn’t get any worse or progress). For the competition prep she ran 50 mg TC/30 ND/30 Mast E/30, then 8 weeks out added 8 mg of var. Was hard as nails, thick, vascular and lean. Won the show. Again her labs prior to adding the var, you’d have no idea she was on anything, even with the var, a 20% drop in HDL that was transient.

After the show she continues to run 40 TC/20 ND twice a week and has retained most of the lean mass, is still hard and vascular at about 10% body fat and not even working at it. No further virilization and labs are perfect. HDL in the 60’s.

She could probably stay on that base for years without issue. We know from the trans lit that 150 mg/wk of TC in FTM has no long term life threatening sides. It really depends on genetics (what level of virilization you end up with) and what you’re will to accept to stay lean, strong and muscular. She’s happy now being able to hold what she’s gained vs blowing up and deflating over and over.

I have another female client on a pellet with an AI, a breast cancer survivor age 57. Her total T is 800 ng/dl 4 weeks after a pellet. Been on T for over a year. A little deeper voice, that’s it. iDXA data shows a 10 lb increase in lean mass and 10 loss of body fat. She’s about 11%. Hard as nails, looks and feels great. Has the body of a 24 yr old figure competitor. Labs are perfect.

With guys the virilization isn’t an issue, it’s really about health. As I’ve said before, nothing good comes from taking enough shit to look like a genetically altered farm animal and you have to figure out why you’re doing what you’re doing, set realistic expectations and be smart about it if you want to stay in the game for years not months, and still look good and be healthy in your 60’s+.
 
testboner

testboner

VIP Member
Oct 10, 2010
749
715
Tren is the most androgenic steroid. testosterone is the most anabolic steroid.

no other steroid build more muscle than testosterone.

anabolic activity is what grows muscle the best, not androgenic. that’s why tren doesn’t build good quality muscle like testosterone does
Ment, winny, tren, var, drol and numerous others technically have a higher anabolic rating than the 100/100 ratio of straight test.
 
BackAtIt

BackAtIt

MuscleHead
Oct 3, 2016
2,089
615
so if test builds the most muscle why not take more of it to capitalize on the muscle building affects? I know more isn’t always better, the sides increase but you see where I’m going with this. Maybe I’m just over thinking things here.

Years ago on some of the older boards, this line of thought was prevalent....I remember the one rebuttal that was tossed around in the "meeting of the minds" circles when they would argue about this....The rebuttal was the notion that if one could take ANY substance that would build muscle without any hindrance, it wouldn't fly...

If u think about it, if there were NO LIMITS to muscle gain, I don't see how our bodies would be able to handle the load and/or extra blood supply mechanisms, etc?....I'm thinking the body will at some point NOT continue to grow (equilibrium/homeostasis)?....What's your take?....


P.S. Didn't mean to crash the thread...

.
 
C

C T J

Crossfit VIP
Jan 24, 2013
2,441
705
I've only ran higher test cycles mostly to avoid tren sides.
 
Wallyd

Wallyd

VIP Member
Dec 10, 2013
645
299
I've only ran higher test cycles mostly to avoid tren sides.
This was always the rule of thumb with all compounds. Then out of nowhere huys are running their tren higher & now everything is higher than their test.
 
Who is viewing this thread?

There are currently 0 members watching this topic

Top