RippedZilla's thread of knowledge

[Mrrippedzilla]

Q&A with Zilla Part 3

Now that I've restricted my activity here to this thread only, expect to have weekly (at least) updates on this q&a series. On with the q's...


1) Is it OK to run Clen/Albuterol/EC together?

In terms of health, mixing beta agonists together, especially the aggressive selective ones like clen, does weird things to both BP & heart rate - not something you should be messing around with.
Both ephedrine & albuterol also deplete potassium levels, which if not addressed through dietary supplementation could lead to bad things as far as electrolyte balance is concerned - again, something you don't want to mess with.

In terms of body comp, both albuterol & ephedrine target the same receptors (beta's 2 & 3) so all your doing is increasing the rate of downregulation.
Clen & ephedrine has the same issue except, due to clen's strength, it also eliminates the thermogenic benefits of ephedrine that otherwise would have been permanent with no need to cycle on/off.

Put simply, more is not better with most compounds & that certainly applies here.


2) Androgen receptors...up/down regulation....true or false?

Up regulation - true.
Down regulation - false.

Upregulation via AAS administration has been shown to occur with in vitro data (unfortunately, not replicated in vivo) and has been confirmed by anecdotal evidence. For example, it helps explain why you continue to gain even when way past any sort of genetic limit and why the pros get bigger by the year with no "limit" in sight.

It's important to be aware that just because something can be upregulated does not automatically mean it can also be downregulated. There is no evidence whatsoever of any type of downregulation occurring with AAS use on normal, healthy individuals - and there have been plenty of studies looking into the issue.
The only exception to this is studies dealing with ZERO androgen activity - not superphysiological or even normal androgen levels. With zero androgenic activity, it may be possible to downregulate ARs but, obviously, this has no practical relevance to most real life scenarios.
Downregulation also contradicts the real life, anecdotal data. As I mentioned earlier, we would NOT be getting these mass monster bodybuilders if it was possible to saturate the ARs & stop them responding.

Put simply, there is some data to back up the anecdotal experiences for upregulation but no evidence for downregulation when dealing with aas use specifically.


3) A bullshit article/my bro/the big guy at the gym/my dealer says anavar isn't suppressive, is this true?

A classic newbie question.

Here are a few papers to show that var IS, and always will be, suppressive at anabolic doses:

Oxandrolone in the treatment of HIV-associated weight loss in men: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. - PubMed - NCBI
- This was at 40mg and I quote "Oxandrolone treatment was associated with significant suppression of sex hormone-binding globulin, luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, and total and free testosterone levels."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14578370
- The dose was 20MG per day and all gains were lost 12 weeks after the cycle was stopped.
- The need for PCT & the disappearance of all gains are 2 other indicators of full suppression.

There are more studies showing suppression at just 15mg per day after only 5 DAYS of use...but hopefully you get the picture by now.

So please newbies, let's all accept the FACT that var is suppressive & move on to more interesting thread topics shall we


4) How much protein per meal on cycle and are there any health implications if I overdo it?

I actually have 2 separate articles (one on meal frequency, one on protein timing) that I was going to post but since my new material isn't going to be appearing on Ology, I decided to address this briefly in the q&a.
So let's break it down:

Protein intake per meal

There is NO fixed recommendation for protein intake per meal provided your overall protein intake for the day is sufficient - if it isn't then you will need to follow the 20-30g over 5/6 meals protocol.
From a logical perspective, your body has evolved with the main goal of helping you survive, so why the fuck would it just shit out a bunch of protein? The digestive system is extremely well regulated & will take as long as it wants to digest meals - larger meals requiring more time. It will NOT just waste protein.

I suspect the "20-40g every 3hrs" crap came from a bunch of acute studies that showed that this was the ideal amount of protein to maximize protein synthesis. Here's the problem:
- those studies used whey protein as the only source, and that just so happens to effect AA rate, protein synthesis, etc for 3hrs. A proper meal would take much longer.
- these were ACUTE studies, short term that have never been replicated long term in a controlled setting or in real life.

There is strong evidence that any extra benefit you gain from the 20-30g every 2-3hrs theory for protein synthesis, is eliminated long term as the body adapts & REDUCES protein synthesis while INCREASING protein oxidation. So it all ends up the same.

All of your protein in 1 meal, spread out in 10 meals - the difference is minimal in the long term ESPECIALLY on cycle where protein synthesis is increased anyway provided your overall protein intake is solid.

Meal frequency

In terms of meal frequency to keep the body in an anabolic state, I personally recommend eating every 5-6 hours based on the research. This differs for shakes since AA, protein balance, etc is elevated by whey for approx. 3hrs while casein takes 8hrs, but for meals with all the macros every 5/6hrs is optimal.
And yes - this means the intermittent fasting fad, if your following the 1 meal per day version, is NOT optimal for growth. A 16 hr fast with 2 meals spread over the 8hr eating window however would be fine.

Kidney function & protein

First of all lets be clear that the research shows individuals with preexisting kidney problems needed to reduce their protein intake, NOT high protein causes kidney problems - the media twisted this the wrong way round.

Is there a theoretical limit to how high you can take protein before it causes problems?
Yes but it varies from person to person and in the short term, for example contest prep, you can get away with higher intakes.
This problem occurs mostly with guys cycling rather than naturals because they know protein synthesis is elevated & want to see how much protein they can stuff down to make more gains.
Based on the research, I would personally set an upper limit of 1.5g/lb for protein. Alot of guys cycling consume way more than this & need to remember that their could be implications as far as kidney function is concerned.
Its also irrelevant if you have "too much protein" in 1 meal - its your overall intake that will cause the damage, not the frequency.


5) I was thinking of running a SARMs cycle and the lovely reps on #insert sponsored board name here# told me that they wont suppress my HPTA. Is this true?

Sarms still suppress the hpta, contrary to what those charming reps may have told you

You're not going to have the magic of activating the androgen receptor without getting the suppression that results from that activation - this applies to sarms, prohormones, orals & everything else that actually works.

The ONLY way to severely limit the suppression is to use doses that are INEFFECTIVE for anabolic benefits - also known as wasting your money & time.

 

[snowpatrol123]

Boom - there it is!

 

[snowpatrol123]

Dave palumbo claims that stanozolol(winstrol) isn't suppressive and often recommends it as a first cycle - safe to call BS on that similarly to anavar/oxandrolone, and SARMS?

Question - do you believe there is an order of strength for AAS in terms of receptor binding affinity? I.e...test or tren would bind "before" masteron, in a situation where there were limited receptor sites?

 

[Southernfish]

Fanstasic thread and info Zilla. Bang up job as always feeding inquiring minds

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

Dave palumbo claims that stanozolol(winstrol) isn't suppressive and often recommends it as a first cycle - safe to call BS on that similarly to anavar/oxandrolone, and SARMS?

Yup, same level of BS as demonstrated by the fact that here we see 10mg of Winstrol, not exactly an anabolic dose, caused 55% suppression within 2 weeks of use.

An interesting side observation - winstrol is capable of crashing SHBG by 50% even on a low dose (0.2mg/kg) as seen here, which makes me wonder why provi seems to be the go to drug for this purpose. Of course winstrol is also pretty nasty when it comes to lipids so that may have something to do with it, plus the impact on joints that some report, etc.

Question - do you believe there is an order of strength for AAS in terms of receptor binding affinity? I.e...test or tren would bind "before" masteron, in a situation where there were limited receptor sites?

Hmm...yes, though I would question the relevance of that scenario when we know that AR numbers can be increased and the fact that their are a lot of other factors at play here.

You'll hear a lot of opinions on this topic from a variety of sources because, quite simply, the data on muscle-specific AR affinity is weak as shit. Yes, I'm aware that we have ratios to give us an idea of binds stronger, etc but I'm also aware that those ratios were taken from rats so the chances of them being completely accurate is zero. Hence, lots of opinions but no real answers.

Personally, I think it's important not to focus exclusively on AR affinity.
Yes, it plays a major role when it comes to muscle growth BUT it isn't the only factor to consider. For example, Dbol has weak binding affinity to the AR but more than makes up for it with a prolonged half life and increased tendency to stay in an unbound state (C17 alpha alkylation ftw brah). So the time the compound stays in your system, and it's ability to not be bound up by a serum protein (think SHBG) can make up for the fact that compound A binds to the AR "before" compound B...I hope you see what I'm getting at.

Of course we also need to keep in mind that dose is FAR more important than SHBG, receptor affinity and all that other stuff because of the increase in AR numbers we mentioned earlier

 

[Dreaded Pirate Roberts]

So nice work except your wrong about whey. Whey is absorbed in the stomach just like breast milk. It is why it is the go to for post work protein to replace the glycogen that has been used working out in the small 15 minute window where the body is still anabolic.

No need to limit yourself to this thread.

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

So nice work except your wrong about whey. Whey is absorbed in the stomach just like breast milk. It is why it is the go to for post work protein to replace the glycogen that has been used working out in the small 15 minute window where the body is still anabolic.

No need to limit yourself to this thread.

1) I was actually referring to the time it takes for plasma AAs, muscle protein synthesis, etc to return to baseline after whey consumption as shown here. Perhaps "digest" wasn't appropriate in this context, I've edited the article to take this into account.

2) The 3 points I've highlighted in bold are all incorrect but I have no desire to go back & forth with you again unless you provide evidence for any of those points.

3) Once this q&a series is finished, my activity on ology will be done for good.
If you want to know the specifics then I suggest we take it to PM since a) I'm not taking this thread off track and b) you won't like what I have to say.

 

[Dreaded Pirate Roberts]

Thanks for clarification.

 

[bonexyster]

Exercise selection for bodybuilding - Part 1

I want to make a few things clear before diving into this topic because I was hesitant to write this article to begin with...

- For guys on cycle how you train becomes much less relevant because the drugs in your system will allow you to grow muscle even if you do NO training whatsoever.
However, that does NOT mean that an optimal training programme isn't necessary to maximise your gains on cycle:

The effects of supraphysiologic doses of testosterone on muscle siz... - PubMed - NCBI

In this awesome study the authors did an important comparison between:
- Guys doing resistance training with no exogenous test supplementation aka "natties"
- Guys taking 600mg test with no resistance training
- Guys taking 600mg test with resistance training

Caloric consumption was set at 36cals/kg of bodyweight with protein consumption set at 1.5g/kg of bodyweight for all the groups.
Training for all groups consisted of 3 non-consecutive days of heavy (90% 1rm), moderate (80% 1rm) & light intensity (70% 1rm) work for 4 sets x 6 reps increased to 5 sets x 6 for the final 5 weeks.

The study took a total of 30 weeks - this included the training & recovery periods (pct, etc) - and the guys on 600mg test ended their cycle after 10 weeks.

After 30 weeks, here are the important muscle mass results:
- Natties gained 1.9kg (4 pounds) of muscle, which is pretty standard gains for any but the elite naturals
- The guys on test with NO exercise gained 3.2kg (7 pounds) of muscle
- The guys on test and a training stimulus gained 6.1kg (13.5 pounds) of muscle

Now, as you can see it is an absolute FACT that you can indeed sit on your ass all day and still gain more muscle on a standard test cycle then a natural can in a year of dieting & training perfection. 7 pounds is pretty much the maximum a natural can gain in a year, never mind 7 1/2 months of zero workouts.
The reason that this is an important discovery is that I see way too many enhanced guys telling natties that they are making more gains because they are working harder, not because of the drugs - this is bullshit & you need to stop spreading it
I know some of you will criticize me for telling guys that they can pretty much sit on their asses and still gain muscle on a Pharma grade test cycle. However, I believe in telling the truth & if your not a fan of my approach then stop reading my stuff - simple solution.

Now before you start thinking that training is completely irrelevant - look at the gains made by the test + training group.
13.5 pounds, almost double the test only group & more than 3 times what a natty could do. An optimal training routine will significantly maximise the muscle gains you make on cycle, IMO this is a strong enough reason to create your own elite resistance training routines.

Summary:
- Naturals HAVE to train in order to make any muscle gains at all, enhanced guys don't.
- An optimal training routine will still allow an enhanced guy to almost DOUBLE his muscle mass gains, highlighting the importance of a good training protocol even when on cycle.

Hopefully you guys now have a good understanding of the importance of optimal training for muscle gains & I will get into the actual exercise selection principles in part 2 since part 1 is too long as it is.

Just for my curiosity, I wish they'd posted stats of the participants in the (600mg and lift group)
It be interesting to look at.

A 35yo 216Lb 15%bf (vs
A 35yo 216Lb 18%bf (vs
A 35yo 216Lb 9%bf (vs
A 26yo 216Lb 10%bf and so on.


The study did say it was (normal males) so I'm going to assume there probably wasn't many genetically gifted participants which narrows that part down a little.
I like to see the how much of a role age/bf differs.
And what the differences were, not just muscle but bloods also.

#read more of this post seen the part on bf. So disregard that part.#

 

[THE-DET-OAK]

Nice thread

No reason to hide over here in the corner though

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

Just for my curiosity, I wish they'd posted stats of the participants in the (600mg and lift group)
It be interesting to look at.
A 35yo 216Lb 15%bf (vs
A 35yo 216Lb 18%bf (vs
A 35yo 216Lb 9%bf (vs
A 26yo 216Lb 10%bf and so on.

The study did say it was (normal males) so I'm going to assume there probably wasn't many genetically gifted participants which narrows that part down a little.
I like to see the how much of a role age/bf differs.
And what the differences were, not just muscle but bloods also.

#read more of this post seen the part on bf. So disregard that part.#

The paper does contain information on average baseline characteristics, hormone concentrations and weight/FFM/strength changes for each group along with the overall range for each statistic (given as +/-).

Unfortunately, it's not common place in the literature to list individual stats unless you have 1 or 2 outliers that could really skew the average markers significantly - so it's impossible to determine whether their were any genetic elites within the 600mg+lifting group I'm afraid. It is what it is.

 

[Milton]

A great read for those new members and ologers!

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

It's been a while...


Q&A with Zilla part 4


1) I keep getting really high test & e2 readings from my bloodwork when running #insert nandrolone derivative here#, what's going on and how can I fix this?

When getting bloodwork done most members tend to go with the ECLIA method used by Lapcorp, which causes false elevations in both test & e2 levels due to Nandrolone metabolites.
Pages 5&7 from this paper produced by the FDA talks about the ECLIA method and the interference caused by nandrolone metabolites and the issue is summarized best here:

"Nandrolone was tested and was considered as interference substance; therefore, the sponsor (Roche) has the following limitations in the labeling...Do not use samples from patients under Nandrolone treatment..."

In order to avoid any false positives you would need to get BW from a lab that uses Quest Diagnostics and NOT Labcorp as their main processing service.
In fact, the terms & conditions of the Lapcorp tests specifically state that their tests wouldn't provide accurate readings for 19-Nors - see pg 16 here.

However, though the LS/MSMS method that works for Nandrolone metabolites also works for Tren (the medical community is pushing to use this method for all steroid hormone testing), for those who do go through Quest - they tend to use the standard RIA for Test & Estradiol and this still gives falsely elevated readings.
You will also need to specifically request the extraction RIA method instead to avoid this with them and other providers.

Finally, just for the sake of being complete, here is another paper further illustrating ECLIA being incompatible for AAS users:
Cross-reactivity of steroid hormone immunoassays: clinical significance and two-dimensional molecular similarity prediction

- Dbol/EQ & Provi (only for cortisol) get a brief mention
- Aromasin slightly interferes with progesterone readings (by approx. 0.5 ng/mL).
- No interference from Var, Winny & Tbol
- Norethindrone (progestogen found in BC, important for women) also causes interference


2) Is it OK for me to cycle between Clen & EC and if not, what is the best choice?

Clen & EC will the same receptors so the two weeks on/off cycle bullshit mentioned across the boards wont achieve anything since your receptors will be completely fried.

You can either stick with ephedrine full time with no cycling, use Clen 2 weeks on/off or use Clen full time with Ketotifen as an aid to prevent downregulation.
EC is better for guys above 12%bf, Clen is useful for those leaner than this - easy way to decide which one to use.
I should mention that Ephedra is NOT as effective as ephedrine, contains a bunch of other chemicals that do weird stuff to your BP & HR - a higher risk/less reward version so AVOID.

This leads to the question of why EC at higher bf%?
Put simply, Ephedrine doesn't lose its thermogenic effects even if used continuously for months and therefore it is better suited to long term dieting - in fact there is some evidence that suggests the thermogenic effect INCREASES the longer your on it. The reason Ephedrine remains thermogenic is that it actually has a pretty weak binding affinity to beta receptors & mainly works by increasing the body's natural production of adrenaline/noradrenaline (not as much downregulation through this moa).
Ephedrine only needs to be cycled if your interested in the appetite suppression side of it, not the thermogenic advantage or the energy boost - this can be maintained with the addition of 2-3g of tyrosine.

Clen on the other hand will eventually stop working even with the use of Ketotifen. This is due to
Clen having a very specific & strong binding affinity to beta receptors, which makes it inevitable that even with the 2 on/off method you will downregulate the receptors eventually.

IME keto does delay downregulaton but does NOT eliminate it completely and I've found zero evidence (science & experience) to suggest it helps stay on Clen for longer than 8-10 weeks MAX.
As a result, if your dieting for longer than this then it makes no sense to use Clen from the start to the finish. I hope this also helps puts to sleep the broscience of "as long as you use Ketotifen you can stay on Clen forever".

If you decide to adopt the 2 week on/off method with Clen instead of going with Keto, IME the limit still remains at around 8-10 weeks of total use (equal to about 4-5 rounds).
You also have to remember the law of diminishing returns with Clen.
Say you start at a nice low dose & slowly increase it over the 2 weeks. Well when you start your 2nd round, the starting dose will have to be higher - and on & on this will go the more rounds of 2 on/off you have. There will come a point where you cannot increase the dose without risking serious consequences - unlike ephedrine where a fixed dose permanently effective.

To summarize:
- EC is better suited to long term dieting.
- Clen + Keto or 2 weeks on/off for short term dieting with my personal preference being the former due to the better overall dosing efficiency for Clen.


3) What are your overall thoughts on advanced training techniques like pre-exhausting, drop sets and training to failure for muscle growth?

Within a well executed, periodized, programme I think they can all be useful.

In general, I tend to go to failure/utilize drop sets/other method to get extra volume on 1 movement per day, usually my weak point, and it's the final set, ideally placed later on in a workout.
This is to ensure that the effort involved doesn't negatively effect everything else for the day - for example if you go failure early on for chest, then inevitably triceps will be effected. I've seen many lifters go to failure too often/too early and it makes the rest of the workout absolutely suck.

I also tend to utilize stuff like dropsets, training to failure, pause sets, etc sparingly in order for it to remain effective but this goes hand-in-hand with the well executed, periodized, programme stuff I mentioned.

As for pre-exhaust training, I personally never got much out of it but do understand the need if you have lagging bodyparts, eg pre-exhausting your chest because your triceps fail first when benching or whatever but otherwise, its not the best route for building overall mass. Compounds over isolation moves is still the preferred route.


4) I've read studies showing that Provi doesn't cause HPTA suppression and was interested in running it during PCT or a bridge. Any reason why I shouldn't?

The data on Provi's suppressive effect, or lack thereof, is very conflicting I suspect due to a couple of primary issues:
1) Measurement inconsistencies
2) Retarded dosing schedules (Provi has a 12-13hr half life, remember this as it will be important later in the discussion)

Let's take a look at these issues in action by selecting a few papers often quoted to support the position of Provi being non-suppressive:

Mesterolone treatment of patients with pathospermia.

- Commonly cited paper by those who have only read the abstract, which happens to be incorrect. That's a lesson for those who don't really know how to interpret data: NEVER make conclusions based on abstracts alone.
- 25mg given ONCE PER DAY (remember the half life) for 100 days.
- Some measurements methods were very unstable (such as calculating free T from serum T levels, etc).
- Some patients did report enhanced libido (evidence that this isn't broscience - DHT ftw).
- This lead to insignificant changes in FSH/LH/Test, which is not the same as NO CHANGES that the retarded authors claimed in the abstract, as illustrated by this diagram taken from the paper itself:
View attachment 565163
Does that look like "no influence" to you? Because it sure as shit doesn't to me

Testosterone levels and gonadotrophins in Klinefelter's patients treated with injections of mesterolone cipionate.
- 100mg given TWICE A MONTH caused no prolonged suppression. Do I seriously need to even comment on this?

Mesterolone treatment of aging male syndrome improves lower urinary tract symptoms.
- 50mg once per day (in the morning, with morning measurements - remember the half life? See the issue?) for 2 months.
- Slight increases in FSH/LH, Total T down 20%, free T up 11%, e2 down 14% & SHBG down 17%.
- Quote:
"The fall of total testosterone may be due to inhibition of steroideogenesis by mesterolone in testis...Mesterolone is an orally active a-methyl derivative of dihyrotestosterone, and it may also inhibit StAR and decrease steroid hormone levels."

Then we can look at what the people who actually make the drug have to say...

http://www.old.health.gov.il/units/pharmacy/trufot/alonim/3368.pdf
- "Slight inhibitory effect"
- 5-methyl gives POOR protection against liver breakdown, which is why Provi has both poor bioavailability and no hepatoxicity (you need c-17 alpha methyl alkylation to enhance both).

http://www.bayerresources.com.au/resources/uploads/PI/file9420.pdf
- "Central suppression at 75-100mg daily"
- Max serum levels 3.1mg/ml after 1.6hrs (increased 30% by daily intake)
- Terminal half-life 12-13hrs
- 40% bound to Albumin & 58% to SHBG
- 50% fully excreted in 24hrs
- 3% bioavailability

Summary:

- Overall, the data seems to suggest that at doses below 50mg Provi doesn't have a statistically significant inhibitory effect.
- "Statistically significant effect" and "no effect" are NOT the same thing and this is the main reason why it should be avoided during PCT. Suppression is suppression regardless of significance.
- The data is riddled with methodological issues and should not be taken as gospel by anyone.
I've seen BW from guys running low dose (25-50mg) provi during PCT and it paints a darker picture than this data seems to indicate.
- Considering the horrible pharmacokinetics (inactive metabolites, rapid clearance rate, terrible bioavailability), it makes a poor choice for a bridge. You might get some enhanced mood/libido effects but there are a lot of other drugs that can provide the same benefits with no suppression risk at all - Cialis for example.

 

[Milton]

bump for info

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

A short update since I'm busy elsewhere these days...


Q&A with Zilla part 5


1) Is T3/T4 supplementation necessary alongside GH?

There are very few situations where you need to supplement t3/t4 with GH - especially considering GH needs to be used for the long term in order to be effective.

Its well known that during the first few weeks/months of GH use can result in a decrease in thyroid levels.
However, as with most things in the human body, the thyroid gland operates on a tight feedback mechanism so as time goes on and thyroid levels drop - the secretion of TSH is increased in the pituitary in order to bring thyroid levels back up to scratch.

Its also important to remember that the studies that do recommend supplementation tend to be in short statutre children, the elderly, those with genetic disorders, etc. These groups are known to be prone to hypothyroidism so the results will not necessarily transfer over to healthy adults.

In short, neither t3/t4 are necessary unless you have sub-optimal levels pre-GH use as detected through bloodwork.


2) I've been reading a lot of hype lately about MCT oil. Can you explain to me how, and if, this stuff works?

MCT's are handled differently in the body since fats normally would enter the lymphatic system after digestion before eventually ending up in the bloodstream but MCT's go straight to the liver via the portal circulation which makes them more rapidly available.

The data on just how much of an impact MCT's have is mixed with some showing a small thermogenic effect at moderate intakes and others showing that it takes massive amounts of MCT to do anything at all. I should add that large amounts of MCT's have a negative effect on blood lipid levels and should be avoided.

They can be used in all diet plans but are particularly useful in keto diets because studies show that MCT's are preferentially converted into ketones.
IME, replacing your current fat intake with 15-20g MCT's tends to boost metabolism by about 5% - note I said REPLACING your current fats.

So yes, it does have an effect but is VERY overhyped by many, many shills and certainly is not comparable to EC, clen, DNP or any other well known thermogenic. Don't expect any miracles.


3) Is Deca worse than test for heart due to the longer ester?

This bit of nonsense comes from bros who have no idea how to interpret research. Specifically, they assume rat data applies to us when it doesn't because...drum roll...we're not fucking rats.

Here is a study that goes completely against the argument that Deca is somehow worse for the heart:

Effects of testosterone and nandrolone on cardiac function: a randomized, placebo-controlled study
- 2 groups, 200mg test (mixed esters akin to sust) vs 200mg deca for 4 weeks.
- Test was found to increase left ventricular hypertrophy (though it was still within the normal range) while Deca was found to do absolutely nothing.

The take home point is that all steroids taken at high enough doses/for long enough durations will increase the risk of cardiac hypertrophy.
Esters make the hormone more fat soluble and create a depot/time release of the hormone itself - nothing more, nothing less. By focusing only on the ester you'd be missing the forest for the trees since other key contributors like the compound, dosage & length of time used play a much bigger role.

I'll note that being "detectable" and being active from the heart's perspective are two VERY different things (go get bloods 5 months after a Deca cycle and tell me how "active" it really is).


4) Is it possible for us to determine the development state of the HPTA and endocrine system?

This question usually comes from folks who, for whatever reason, refuse to stick to the "wait until your 23-25" guideline commonly given out around here.

The end of physical development is fairly easy to determine - no further increases in height or other physical body parts, no further changes to your voice,facial/body hair, close of growth plates, etc. The research suggests that physical development ends between 18-21 & its rare to find someone who continues to develop beyond this.

Now when it comes to mental development (your brain and therefore endocrine system) it gets more complicated. The research suggests that the endocrine system tends to be fully developed between the average age of 23-25 - this is why you will hear most people suggest not to cycle before 25

Is it possible to be finished developing before/after this average age? Yes, its only an average and there will always be outliers. However, its impossible to determine whether your done, or for anyone on any forum to determine your done, unless you visit a neurologist. But even here, brain development is still a relatively unexplored area of research with not a lot of fixed answers available to us.

Basically, we usually suggest not cycling before 25 because its a nice, safe estimate on full endocrine/HPTA development for most people. Some people may be developed before/after this point - but its impossible for us to determine so we always use the average estimate instead.

 

[BigSwolenPussy]

First time reading this thread. One of the best, if not THE BEST informational threads that I have seen. Thanks for keeping this up.

 

[Aestheticking]

Great post.. Learned alot

 

[palmers]

If i read it properly, this study (the high gl diet vs low 60-20-20 vs 40-30-30) When you drop your gl for an extended period your body/thyroid adjusts to the amount of energy your body naturally burns. Isnt this evidence of the proven method of carb cycling rather than carb reduction?
Ps. I sent u a p.m
Regarding one of your comments on page 2 or 3; wgen u said breaking muscle groups into a day is pointless. Ex- chest day, back day, legs day
This is what ive done since day 1 with a 15-12-8-4 rep routine with pretty much everything. As long as i was eatting a surplus i never reached a "plato". But if singling them out to 1x a week isnt as efficient as 2+ how would you break a routine up? (Maybe someone else can chime in too)
Pss. Im glad u post what u want instead of changing shit around to fit what was commonly put on here, years ago when i was on. Juice doesnt get the recognition it deserves and the whole "make sure u eat 6x a day with protien being 20-40g evermeal" was 'common' knowlegde and if u asked a question sooo many people wouldnt give an answer unless u listed your diet and it followed the rules. It pissed me off that people wouldnt answer ur question unless you followed this stupid idea, never mind the other shit theyd say instead of answering.... "You must be a minimum of 200lbs b4 cycling"...pshh.... I have no strict diet, never have, never once did i follow the "good carb", split protien, chicken and rice stereotype.....Other than: counting my calories on a general level..never did i say o meal 1 is 643 cals and meal 2 is 540 cals... Id only add the primary foods on the list, never added vegtables cause theres not much point theyll never be over 100-150 each serving, nor did i add condiments. So even if i said i was at a 700 cal surplus it prob was more...and using quick carbs at times when i needed quick energy, and being protien conscience i never "dieted" and always got the results i wanted, which tbh were better than a lot of people following the diet advice 'on point'...but if, a few years ago, you posted what i just said; nobody would answer any questions. Theyd just say "work on ur diet bro, having an on point diet is everything and nothing will work for you unless its perfect" and its like noooo diet is key but it doesnt need to be more fine tuned then i have it for solid results, or else i wouldne get solid results on and off cycle...anyways getting off topic for the thread. Just saying glad you speak my language, science, instead of what the 'pros' want you to say because its what they made a choice to do.... And also asking about the questionl. I understand in one of your studies listed, its metioned they did full body 3x a week, that obviously doesnt achieve optimal growth ( im assuming, idk ive always stuck to the break down of muscles/day and thought that was the best way so i never looked too deepinto other ways, so now your thread has me not knowing what to believe anymore lol!) so how would you break a week into working each as a primary 2+times a week without over kill or without limiting the first primary? Ex originally just a chest day with 1 or 2 tricept workouts now becomes a chest/tri/back day?.. Would it be once a week you are doing a heavy(4-5workouts) chest and (2) tri and (2)back workouts, then back day would be 4-5 then 2 bi and 2 chest? Or would u do a full upper body day1 lower day2 rest, repeat. Or what would u do for days, #workouts, and sets for each?

Anothing thing i was thinking you should create a topic on is LR3 and other peptides... Or a topic on pct advice beyond the usual clomid and nolva routine. Things you can use during or things to add to the clomid and nolva to better the chance of bouncing back things to add more of to your diet ect. I heard and used more red meat and the amino a-asperic acid or whatever its called (been 2+ years since my last cycle)
Thanks

 

[Scienceteacher112]

Wow, I literally just spent an entire hour and a half reading this. Absolutely incredible information. Seriously I majored in Biology and in the middle of a masters, and have never come across such complete knowledge of this. I did have a biochemistry Professor once that was absolutely massive and drove a Harley lol. He knew all there was to know about protein synthesis and was published on such topics. He had no idea about AAS for some reason lol.....said he just knew exactly how to train and eat right. Lol the man had 20” biceps with a 6-pack