littlebigman
New member
anyone??
Please read last post, I am looking for opionions bad or good
Please read last post, I am looking for opionions bad or good
littlebigman said:Please read last post, I am looking for opionions bad or good
Agreed... reaching hemostasis is the body recognizing the new size therefor causing a new setpoint.DocJ said:IMO short cycles are good for athletes but not the average BB/PL. The main problem I have with them is that they don't allow the nervous system to acclimate to the increased strength that the Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (AAS) will elict. Longer cycles allow for this.
HUGE debate on setpoint over at Avant Labs, might want to check it out, it's worth the read.Mesomorphyl said:Agreed... reaching hemostasis is the body recognizing the new size therefor causing a new setpoint.
From a HPTA standpoint, yes, short cycles don't make too much sense. However I'd be interested in a study that compares the length of recovery from different length cycles. What you seem to be suggesting is that a 4 week cycle would take just as long to recover from than a 10 weeker and I think that would be highly unlikely. In addition, from what I've seen, the majority of people who do shorter cycle do it for other reasons such as reduced time with: crappy lipid profile, high BP, high liver enzymes, etc.bmass said:the problem with short cycles is that it isnt better for HPTA because in studys a single dose of 100mg NPP shut the subject down for 5days so its logical to assume that a couple of hundreds miligrams of Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (AAS) will shut you down for weeks.,heres the article:
I was only talking about HPTA and no im not suggesting that a 4weeker shut you down as much as a 12weeker ,the point i was making is that you dont recover as fast as some people thought you might,but of course short cycles have other benefits like you said:not so crappy lipid profile,´high liver enzymes and so on...i remember reading about a guy pro athleats like NFL,NHL players,track and field,and bb;ers come to him and he helps them to cycle and he takes regular bloodwork on them and he said that in all cases high doses of a short ester like test P shut you down faster and it took the body longer time to recover after the cycle then if used CYP.DocJ said:From a HPTA standpoint, yes, short cycles don't make too much sense. However I'd be interested in a study that compares the length of recovery from different length cycles. What you seem to be suggesting is that a 4 week cycle would take just as long to recover from than a 10 weeker and I think that would be highly unlikely. In addition, from what I've seen, the majority of people who do shorter cycle do it for other reasons such as reduced time with: crappy lipid profile, high BP, high liver enzymes, etc.
100mg EOD Test Prop, 100mg EOD Tren Ace, 100mg ED NPP. I don't believe it's practical to use long esters because you want to get blood levels up high and steady ASAP then have them clear your system on the day after the cycle is over.