Do anti-e's hinder gains?

[DADAWG]

I think you would have found even without the Arimidex during that cycle, your HDL would still have been very low. Steroids will lower one's HDL way more than a low dose of any AI.

winnie is killer on hdl

 

[DirkMoneyshot]

I find to many people using more Anti-E's then necessary. In fact i wouldn't use one if you can get away from it.

Estrogen plays a critical role in the muscle building process.

 

[Dlove]

Im always bloated and as far as other sides on Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (AAS) like acne depression high BP haven't got any yet, knock on wood. Ive ddecided to drop a compound out of my cycle that Im starting this coming week so Im definitely not going with an anti-e. I will still keep nolvadex close by in case of signs of gyno. Thanks again for your guys help. Alway's valuable info. on the board.

 

[blackbeard]

If you run an anti e that stops water retention like arimidex, then it can hurt your gains as the water leads to more strength gains, thats why I only run nolva on my cycles

thats my thinking as well
obviously everyone is different and one needs to intelligently experiment and see what produces the best gains for them

 

[RichGenetics]

I find to many people using more Anti-E's then necessary. In fact i wouldn't use one if you can get away from it.

Estrogen plays a critical role in the muscle building process.

Makes me almost want to stop taking Arimidex all-together & just up my dose of Nolvadex to 20mg per day. I don't want to gain that much estrogen related water on this cycle, so maybe the Nolvadex could keep "some" water off of me. I don't know what to do.....I mean, I want the benefits of estrogen, but not the water that comes with it ya know....

Maybe .25 EOD of Arimidex? LOL

 

[StoneColdNTO]

I don't understand all this talk about something like Arimidex reducing estrogen to zero, there are studies out there that show men taking 1mg Arimidex/day, only reduced their E2 by something like 40%, and that is not with any steroids involved either.

 

[RichGenetics]

I don't understand all this talk about something like Arimidex reducing estrogen to zero, there are studies out there that show men taking 1mg Arimidex/day, only reduced their E2 by something like 40%, and that is not with any steroids involved either.

If thats the case, then I could have my dose of Arimidex at .25 ED or .5 ED & have no problems with it reducing estrogen like all have been stating. The only think that I would have to worry about would be the higher lipid profile right?

You have any of those studies out there by chance? I bet a lot of people would like to read them. Thanks StoneCold.

 

[Makaveli_786]

It does effect your in gym performance, with an anti-e you won't put on as much bloat which will also effect how much you can lift, more water retention = more strenght BUT when you come off cycle you lose all that water anyway so with an anti-e during cycle your not letting water retention accumulate in the first place.

 

[DADAWG]

It does effect your in gym performance, with an anti-e you won't put on as much bloat which will also effect how much you can lift, more water retention = more strenght BUT when you come off cycle you lose all that water anyway so with an anti-e during cycle your not letting water retention accumulate in the first place.

lifting heavier even if helped along by bloat triggers real muscle growth imo .
the key is not to let estrogen get too low or too high . if your not haveing gyno issues and your bp is in check then leave well enough alone .

 

[DirkMoneyshot]

lifting heavier even if helped along by bloat triggers real muscle growth imo .
the key is not to let estrogen get too low or too high . if your not haveing gyno issues and your bp is in check then leave well enough alone .

My thoughts exactly!!!

 

[Trevdog]

Estrogen does contribute to gains. Personally, I use anti estrogens at times when I want to appear more defined (e.g. in summer) or if I raise my dose of aromatizing androgens pretty high (which I haven't done in a long time anyway). I've gone for months at 500 mgs. of test without using an ancillaries. It appears that I am very resistant to gyno, never had any hint of it, so I can do that.

 

[StoneColdNTO]

If thats the case, then I could have my dose of Arimidex at .25 ED or .5 ED & have no problems with it reducing estrogen like all have been stating. The only think that I would have to worry about would be the higher lipid profile right?

You have any of those studies out there by chance? I bet a lot of people would like to read them. Thanks StoneCold.

http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/co...STINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&journalcode=jcem

Estrogen Suppression in Males: Metabolic Effects1

Nelly Mauras, Kimberly O. O’Brien, Karen Oerter Klein and Valerie Hayes
Nemours Research Programs at the Nemours Children’s Clinic (N.M., V..H.), Jacksonville, Florida 32207; DuPont Hospital for Children (K.O.K.), Wilmington, Delaware 19803; and The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health (K.O.O.), Baltimore, Maryland 21205-2179

Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Nelly Mauras, M.D., Nemours Children’s Clinic, 807 Nira Street, Jacksonville, Florida 32207. E-mail: nmauras@nemours.org.

We have shown that testosterone (T) deficiency per se is associated with marked catabolic effects on protein, calcium metabolism, and body composition in men independent of changes in GH or insulin-like growth factor I production. It is not clear, however, whether estrogens have a major role in whole body anabolism in males. We investigated the metabolic effects of selective estrogen suppression in the male using a potent aromatase inhibitor, Arimidex (Anastrozole). First, a dose-response study of 12 males (mean age, 16.1 ± 0.3 yr) was conducted, and blood withdrawn at baseline and after 10 days of oral Arimidex given as two different doses (either 0.5 or 1 mg) in random order with a 14-day washout in between. A sensitive estradiol (E2) assay showed an approximately 50% decrease in E2 concentrations with either of the two doses; hence, a 1-mg dose was selected for other studies. Subsequently, eight males (aged 15–22 yr; four adults and four late pubertal) had isotopic infusions of [13C]leucine and 42Ca/44Ca, indirect calorimetry, dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, isokinetic dynamometry, and growth factors measurements performed before and after 10 weeks of daily doses of Arimidex. Contrary to the effects of T withdrawal, there were no significant changes in body composition (body mass index, fat mass, and fat-free mass) after estrogen suppression or in rates of protein synthesis or degradation; carbohydrate, lipid, or protein oxidation; muscle strength; calcium kinetics; or bone growth factors concentrations. However, E2 concentrations decreased 48% (P = 0.006), with no significant change in mean and peak GH concentrations, but with an 18% decrease in plasma insulin-like growth factor I concentrations. There was a 58% increase in serum T (P = 0.0001), sex hormone-binding globulin did not change, whereas LH and FSH concentrations increased (P < 0.02, both). Serum bone markers, osteocalcin and bone alkaline phosphatase concentrations, and rates of bone calcium deposition and resorption did not change. In conclusion, these data suggest that in the male 1) estrogens do not contribute significantly to the changes in body composition and protein synthesis observed with changing androgen levels; 2) estrogen is a main regulator of the gonadal-pituitary feedback for the gonadotropin axis; and 3) this level of aromatase inhibition does not negatively impact either kinetically measured rates of bone calcium turnover or indirect markers of bone calcium turnover, at least in the short term. Further studies will provide valuable information on whether timed aromatase inhibition can be useful in increasing the height potential of pubertal boys with profound growth retardation without the confounding negative effects of gonadal androgen suppression.