Here is help to create the perfect cycle!
- Thread starter DUANABOL
- Start date
ranger1082
New member
Good post looks like u put some time and effort into this.
Old Guy
New member
Good post.
Most people appreciate the time and effort that others spend trying to be helpful.
There are multiple opinions to everything.
Especially subjects like, How does Tren cause Gyno, lactation, etc.
If a post results in the sharing of information and civilized debate, then it is a good post.
Most people appreciate the time and effort that others spend trying to be helpful.
There are multiple opinions to everything.
Especially subjects like, How does Tren cause Gyno, lactation, etc.
If a post results in the sharing of information and civilized debate, then it is a good post.
StoneColdNTO
Administrator
Old Guy said:
bigdaddy22
New member
this is very good, even for the non newbs
First off i have to say that i do appreciate "duabnabol" 's effort.I did not mean to sound like an asshole.
I'm quite new to posting in such forums and i first did in order to seek advice for a close friend's problem.
But from what i see many false thing are widely believed and this first post really was quite a great reminder.Athletes are perhaps the greatest of observers of their own drug use and perhaps bodybuilders the best of all because by nature they have to be over analytical and over observant in order to succeed.
And it's NOT about differences in opinions-facts are facts and science only goes one way.There's nothing to discuss and to have opinions about.Things are just right or wrong.
Observing a drug's effects is a great thing to do in order to find out how it works but many times the effect has quite different roots.Here is the science that has to come and prove or disprove some things.
Proviron for example indeed makes one's appearance harder and reduces gyno.But how ? This drug has been around for quite some time.If it was such a great antiaromatase (which is a quite new drug class with the first one in it being Aminoglutethimide-Orimeten/Cytadren) wouldn't it be used extensively as a first-class therapy for breast cancer in women ? It is not. It does not reduce serum estradiol/estrone levels .It does not reduce IGF levels as most antiaromatase/antiestrogens do-in fact it increases it.
It works by affecting the estrogen/androgen ratio toward androgens and this ratio alone having been changed can affect water retention.
Can it be used for breast cancer ? Yes but as a secondary drug (along with an antiestro/antiaromatase) just like testosterone has been used in the past (Halo too).But this small difference in the way it works could mean not much to a bodybuilder but could be the difference between life and death for a patient.
Clomid too.Its mood altering alone should make most realize it really destroys one's hormone balance toward estrogen.It does increase testosterone but also estrogens in a ratio that in men is quite "anti-virilizing".Is it given for breast cancer too (as an antiestrogen should and could ? ) NO-never.In contrast to Proviron it would even be highly counterproductive.
These are just a couple of my points i wanted to further comment on so as to let you know i just wanted to set the record straight and not just undermine somebody's effort.
I'm quite new to posting in such forums and i first did in order to seek advice for a close friend's problem.
But from what i see many false thing are widely believed and this first post really was quite a great reminder.Athletes are perhaps the greatest of observers of their own drug use and perhaps bodybuilders the best of all because by nature they have to be over analytical and over observant in order to succeed.
And it's NOT about differences in opinions-facts are facts and science only goes one way.There's nothing to discuss and to have opinions about.Things are just right or wrong.
Observing a drug's effects is a great thing to do in order to find out how it works but many times the effect has quite different roots.Here is the science that has to come and prove or disprove some things.
Proviron for example indeed makes one's appearance harder and reduces gyno.But how ? This drug has been around for quite some time.If it was such a great antiaromatase (which is a quite new drug class with the first one in it being Aminoglutethimide-Orimeten/Cytadren) wouldn't it be used extensively as a first-class therapy for breast cancer in women ? It is not. It does not reduce serum estradiol/estrone levels .It does not reduce IGF levels as most antiaromatase/antiestrogens do-in fact it increases it.
It works by affecting the estrogen/androgen ratio toward androgens and this ratio alone having been changed can affect water retention.
Can it be used for breast cancer ? Yes but as a secondary drug (along with an antiestro/antiaromatase) just like testosterone has been used in the past (Halo too).But this small difference in the way it works could mean not much to a bodybuilder but could be the difference between life and death for a patient.
Clomid too.Its mood altering alone should make most realize it really destroys one's hormone balance toward estrogen.It does increase testosterone but also estrogens in a ratio that in men is quite "anti-virilizing".Is it given for breast cancer too (as an antiestrogen should and could ? ) NO-never.In contrast to Proviron it would even be highly counterproductive.
These are just a couple of my points i wanted to further comment on so as to let you know i just wanted to set the record straight and not just undermine somebody's effort.
jcp2
Community Veteran
Great post Gtrack, i see you are new, i hope you stick around and contribute. I am glad to see people explain their differences instead of just bashing other peoples opinions. I honestly have never heard the things you are saying about clomid, but i may have to do some research when i get a chance.
slobberknocker
pro powerlifter
I like the cycle where you eat a lot and train hard.
Don't get me wrong, it's nice to have lots of knowledge on AAS, but don't neglect studying up on training and nutrition. IMO, the Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (AAS) is just over rated. So many times people spend so much money and effort and thought on their cycles, and their training is crap, and it shows.
Good post. Not trying to be a dick. But come on. I just get fed up with the fact that there are about 10X as many posts in this forum as in the training forum. Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (AAS) is easy. It's the other components that will make you a champion. Trust me. I learned this the hard way.
OK, I'm off my soapbox now, lol.
Don't get me wrong, it's nice to have lots of knowledge on AAS, but don't neglect studying up on training and nutrition. IMO, the Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (AAS) is just over rated. So many times people spend so much money and effort and thought on their cycles, and their training is crap, and it shows.
Good post. Not trying to be a dick. But come on. I just get fed up with the fact that there are about 10X as many posts in this forum as in the training forum. Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (AAS) is easy. It's the other components that will make you a champion. Trust me. I learned this the hard way.
OK, I'm off my soapbox now, lol.
Nelson Montana
Community Veteran, Bodybuilding Author
Good posts by both Duanabol and Gtrack, but I'd like to address (simplify) a few points.
Coincidentally, I have a chapter in Bottom Line Bodybuilding called "The Perfect Cycle" but it deals with the most overlooked aspect of formulating a good cycle and that's the anabolic/androgenic ratio to create the optimum enviorment for growth with the least amount of suppression. If there were one drug that had the perfect balance, that'd be all you would need. (D-bol comes close, but it's toxicity excludes it form being an option as the only choice).
Also, ALL steroids are growth drugs. "Mass" cycles and "Cutting" cycles are mismomers. Bulking or cutting comes from calories, not steroids. You can cut on test and bulk on Winny.
Also, one can only gain so much muscle at a time. Doing a cycle to gain 30 pounds will only , CAN only, be a temporary condition. The body can only hold on to so much mass without assistance. And since the longer and heavier a cycle is, the more the HPTA is suppressed, the less likely you will hang on to the gains. So it's pointless trying to gain too much in one cycle.
One more: People need to re-think post cycle therapy (pct). It is NOT a cure all. And in some cases it does more harm than good. Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (HCG) supresses LH, and desensitizes leydig cells slowing recovery. It's more of a "cosmetic drug." Bridging, is just denial. People go from drug to drug and then do another cycle. That's not coming off. At some point, you have to pay the piper. Your body has to take over for itself. Herbal therapy is just proving itself to be tremendusly effective in this field. (If they're the right ones and use active extracts). And of course, Clomid completely sucks ass. It's one of the worst drugs anyone can use, but I'm sure the myth that it helps in recovery will not die soon enough because too many people think it helps. (Based on lots of things -- all incorrect).
slobb: The reason more people go on this forum is that steroids are a more interesting and evolving topic than training. There hasn't been a new training method in the past 75 years -- just reworking of old ones. That's why in my first book I explained how to use various methods to concoct an infinate amount of training routines on your own. You just need to learn the "vocabulary" of training. And oddly enough, many of todays BB's are appaulingly uneducated in that regard.
Coincidentally, I have a chapter in Bottom Line Bodybuilding called "The Perfect Cycle" but it deals with the most overlooked aspect of formulating a good cycle and that's the anabolic/androgenic ratio to create the optimum enviorment for growth with the least amount of suppression. If there were one drug that had the perfect balance, that'd be all you would need. (D-bol comes close, but it's toxicity excludes it form being an option as the only choice).
Also, ALL steroids are growth drugs. "Mass" cycles and "Cutting" cycles are mismomers. Bulking or cutting comes from calories, not steroids. You can cut on test and bulk on Winny.
Also, one can only gain so much muscle at a time. Doing a cycle to gain 30 pounds will only , CAN only, be a temporary condition. The body can only hold on to so much mass without assistance. And since the longer and heavier a cycle is, the more the HPTA is suppressed, the less likely you will hang on to the gains. So it's pointless trying to gain too much in one cycle.
One more: People need to re-think post cycle therapy (pct). It is NOT a cure all. And in some cases it does more harm than good. Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (HCG) supresses LH, and desensitizes leydig cells slowing recovery. It's more of a "cosmetic drug." Bridging, is just denial. People go from drug to drug and then do another cycle. That's not coming off. At some point, you have to pay the piper. Your body has to take over for itself. Herbal therapy is just proving itself to be tremendusly effective in this field. (If they're the right ones and use active extracts). And of course, Clomid completely sucks ass. It's one of the worst drugs anyone can use, but I'm sure the myth that it helps in recovery will not die soon enough because too many people think it helps. (Based on lots of things -- all incorrect).
slobb: The reason more people go on this forum is that steroids are a more interesting and evolving topic than training. There hasn't been a new training method in the past 75 years -- just reworking of old ones. That's why in my first book I explained how to use various methods to concoct an infinate amount of training routines on your own. You just need to learn the "vocabulary" of training. And oddly enough, many of todays BB's are appaulingly uneducated in that regard.
Nelson Montana
Community Veteran, Bodybuilding Author
soonbebig said:
www.davedraper.com ("The Bodybuilding Truth" only, at a good price)
www.proteinfactory.com
www.nelsonmontana.com
www.****************
to name a few...
DUANABOL
New member
Nelson Montana said:
Nelson, I've been trying to find out the anabolic/androgenic ratios of the most commonly used steroids for a very long time now, unfortunately with no luck. I've even asked some very knowledgeable strength coaches but none have the information. Do you have this information in your book for the steroids below?
-Testosterone
-Deca-Durabolin
-Equipose
-Dianabol
-Winstrol
-Anadrol
-Halotestin
-Anavar
-Tren
-Primobolan
Last edited:
Nelson Montana
Community Veteran, Bodybuilding Author
DUANABOL said:
There are no set therepuetic ratios -- they are only speculations based on the anabolic effects and androgenic side effects.
The standard thinking is to use testosterone as a pure androgen (even though it too is anabolic). So test's ratio would be 1:1, whereas Primo is far less androgenic but highly anabolic so the ratio is estimated at around 10:1.
The key is get a ratio around 6:1 to get the maximum benefts. Deca is thought to be around 6:1 The problem is all the other side effects it has beyond it's androgen/anabolic ratio. So the ratio is just part of the equation, but a crucial one.
When you start to dismiss all the drugs with a high affinity for negitive sides there really aren't a lot of optimum choices. Frankly, if I were to do it all over again, my cycles would be either (preferably) Primo (10:1) and D-bol (4:1) or Test (1:1) and Var (12:1) .
That's it.
Everything else is second rate. But I'm sure some will disagee. Naturally, if you do enough of anything, you'll get good results. I'm talking just in terms of best bang for your buck -- effects vs suppression and risk to beneift ratio. There's really no need for anything else, beyond convenience or saving a few dollars, but with something as important as this, I wouldn't bargain shop. But that's me.
slobberknocker
pro powerlifter
Nelson Montana said:
You know more about bb than I do bro, but I can tell you that in strength athletics there have been huge advancements recently. A lot of it's based on stuff the Soviets were researching, but it's still evolving.
Is it really true that there hasn't been a new idea in bb for the last 75 years? I don't know, I'm really asking. That's kind of sad.
