When does a TRT become a cycle/blast?

[DragonRider]

It helps with frog face.

Plus it's great for your joints.

 

[Smitty217]

So what "ranges" would be considered "Sports TRT?"

 

[bigrobbie]

So what "ranges" would be considered "Sports TRT?"

I'd like to see someone's answer to this!

 

[gunslinger]

Anything over 100mg per week of test would technically be a blast I suppose. But I stay on 250mg per week all year long and maybe blast with 500/400/50 once or twice a year with Test, Nandrolone and Anadrol or dbol.

 

[bigrobbie]

I've finally got my doses and shit down for my TRT
150MG WK Test E
100MG WK Mast E
50MG WK Deca D
Weekly is every 7-10 days.
I'm on T3 and Albuterol now as well.

 

[Wilson6]

Bhasin et al, showed that 125 mg/wk produced a trough total T of about 550 (trough being 125 mg/wk for 20 wks, then measuring T 7d after but before the next inj) so probably peak of about 1000 and avg over the period of about 750, in younger guys (would be higher in older guys). This was enough to produce an increase in lean mass over controls. > 300 mg/wk decreased HDL, so in theory up to 300 mg/wk is fairly low risk. Nandrolone and Mast are likely to have a greater effect on HDL at lower doses, maybe, depending on the individual but 100 mg/wk or less, probably insignificant. The reality is the whole HRT framing is more of a PC term to make is seem like we're not juicing, but we are even with 100 mg/wk because that spike will make a difference vs endogenous production, unless one is micro dosing daily. In the end though, does it really matter what we call it. From a prescribers perspective, for sure HRT to cover their ass, to us we're not happy taking the expedited track to weak and frail with advancing age and/or shit genetics. I wouldn't call 300 mg/wk a blast. Some of the HRT clinics are prescribing 200/100 TC/ND per week. Is that HRT? Nope, will it make a difference in body comp when combined with resistance training and a good diet, absolutely. To me, a blast is 500 mg/wk +, even then depending on what one is blasting, assuming BP and HCT are controlled, does it really represent an increased risk of early death and disease? It all boils down to making sure you get labs done, keep BP/HCT down, use a low dose of an ARB or ACEi (script only) to keep a lid on ANGII and the cardiac hypertrophy, an echo or at least a yearly ECG and liver US if you use orals. Assess your own risk/benefit ratio and do what you think is best for you. What bigrobbie is doing is probably the upper end of the comfort zone, but as long as his labs and other health measures are good and he's happy, 300/wk is not unreasonable with all inj. But I wouldn't start there. If you're doing well on < 200 mg/wk then why take more?

 

[Smitty217]

Bhasin et al, showed that 125 mg/wk produced a trough total T of about 550 (trough being 125 mg/wk for 20 wks, then measuring T 7d after but before the next inj) so probably peak of about 1000 and avg over the period of about 750, in younger guys (would be higher in older guys). This was enough to produce an increase in lean mass over controls. > 300 mg/wk decreased HDL, so in theory up to 300 mg/wk is fairly low risk. Nandrolone and Mast are likely to have a greater effect on HDL at lower doses, maybe, depending on the individual but 100 mg/wk or less, probably insignificant. The reality is the whole HRT framing is more of a PC term to make is seem like we're not juicing, but we are even with 100 mg/wk because that spike will make a difference vs endogenous production, unless one is micro dosing daily. In the end though, does it really matter what we call it. From a prescribers perspective, for sure HRT to cover their ass, to us we're not happy taking the expedited track to weak and frail with advancing age and/or shit genetics. I wouldn't call 300 mg/wk a blast. Some of the HRT clinics are prescribing 200/100 TC/ND per week. Is that HRT? Nope, will it make a difference in body comp when combined with resistance training and a good diet, absolutely. To me, a blast is 500 mg/wk +, even then depending on what one is blasting, assuming BP and HCT are controlled, does it really represent an increased risk of early death and disease? It all boils down to making sure you get labs done, keep BP/HCT down, use a low dose of an ARB or ACEi (script only) to keep a lid on ANGII and the cardiac hypertrophy, an echo or at least a yearly ECG and liver US if you use orals. Assess your own risk/benefit ratio and do what you think is best for you. What bigrobbie is doing is probably the upper end of the comfort zone, but as long as his labs and other health measures are good and he's happy, 300/wk is not unreasonable with all inj. But I wouldn't start there. If you're doing well on < 200 mg/wk then why take more?

I’m doing 200 mg TC & 100 ND weekly broken into three shots. All markers are good and I have no intention of changing my protocol at this point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Smitty217]

when you start yelling light weight baby before you squat

LMAO!!! TRUE