OT or MHN?
- 11-13-2010, 07:05 AM
OT or MHN?
I've been looking at running OT for a while but recently MHN has caught my eye.
Can anyone give me some ideas as to how liver toxic it is and how harsh it is on HPTA in comparison to Turan?
Here is some spiel bouncing round the internet on it but most people seem to be regurgitating what Geneza have already said!
Methylhydroxynandrolone, or MHN for short, is a potent derivative of the anabolic steroid nandrolone. It differs from this base steroid structurally in two ways. First, it has been c-17alpha alkylated (methylated), a modification that allows this steroid to be orally active. Next, an additional hydroxyl group has been added at its 4 position, similar to hydroxytestosterone. Together these two alterations have created a potent orally active and non-aromatizable anabolic steroid, with a profile somewhat similar to that of Winstrol or Anavar - a primarily anabolic agent with no discernable estrogenic activity. This anabolic was investigated back in the 1960's, and to spite its effective nature was never released as a prescription drug. Its properties make it of obvious interest as a designer steroid, and I would not be surprised if numerous athletes have used it for this purpose over the years. However, since we have not seen a MHN scandal in the media, this remains a matter for speculation.
Although this steroid is a nandrolone derivative, it acts quite differently from its chemical parent. For starters, while nandrolone is a relatively mild steroid, MHN is an exceedingly potent synthetic agent.
According to assay results published in Hormonal Steroids (Academic Press, 1964), methylhydroxynandrolone is 13 times more potent than methyltestosterone. This is clearly something of interest for this makes MHN stronger than any prescription steroid known currently. MHN is also quite potent as an androgen, behaving more like trenbolone than nandrolone in this regard. The relative androgenicity of this steroid is likely intensified by its 4-hydroxyl group, a modification that prevents its 5-alpha reduction to weaker "dihydro" metabolites in the skin, scalp and prostate. MHN cannot interact with the reductase enzyme, therefore, it retains its original level of potency in these same tissues. This steroid is still technically more of an "anabolic" than an "androgen", but it is definitely not the mild nandrolone you are familiar with.
Due to its displaying such a high level of milligram for milligram potency, the typical effective daily dosage for men is going to be comparatively much lower than one would expect with other agents. For example, while Dianabol might warrant using 25-35mg daily to notice a pronounced benefit, methylhydroxynandrolone users will likely be working in the range of only 2-5mg per day. At this level MHN should provide very solid gains in muscle mass and strength, with no water retention or increased fat deposition. If anything the user is likely to lose body fat at the same time, one of the reasons why athletes will often spend the extra money on an anabolic like Winstrol, instead of simply taking cheap testosterone or Dbol. This drug is also versatile for stacking, and mixes well with most other anabolics (for cutting) or androgenic (for bulking phases). Women should probably stay away from this steroid altogether, and instead opt for an agent known to be less androgenic (and friendlier to women). Something like Primobolan, Winstrol or Anavar would be a much better choice than MHN, with less chance for permanent masculine side effects
Hopefully someone with better chemical knowledge than me can shed some light on it?
- 11-13-2010, 12:24 PM
wow didn't think mohn would make a comeback.its been quite a while but I wanna say it would be more harsh on you than OT.If your looking for strength gains,fat loss and little fat gain this should do the trick I don't believe this is a good bulking agent though if I remember right.I also don't remember what the effective dosing amount was as its been awhile.
- 11-13-2010, 05:49 PM
I've heard an effective dose of 10-20mg ED that sound right? Yea I guessed its harsher due to it being a nadrolone derivative. I was looking fro strength gains and fat loss, putting on some lean mass is what I want but nothing too considerable just some keepable gains.
Sounds like you've seen it around before what would your choice/recommendation be?
Thanks for the input!
11-13-2010, 06:29 PM
- 5'10" 220 lbs.
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
MOHN is pretty damn mild, but needs to be dosed pretty high for anabolic benefits.
M.Ed. Ex Phys
11-13-2010, 09:18 PM
11-14-2010, 06:33 AM
Ha luckily for me thinning hair is not a family trait. Hmm still hear mixed things...If i have to dose upto 40mg of MHN a day tbol is probably a better solution financially.
Looking at posts from years ago it seems that MHN was hit and miss with some people needing big doses and other sticking around 15-20mg.
11-14-2010, 09:04 AM
11-15-2010, 06:24 AM
I'd definitely go with Tbol. It is the mildest oral steroid on the HPTA and has very few side effects. MO4HN is just a gamble, and it will certainly be harsh on the HPTA. And this is a huge deal if you aren't planning on running a test base, which is what it sounds like. Or will you be pinning test as well?
11-15-2010, 06:26 AM
11-15-2010, 11:34 AM
No i wasn't planning on any test! could primarily just do with the strength and fat loss for the time being. Yea i feel im gonna err on the side of caution and stick with tbol. too many unknowns for me with the mhn.
thanks for the opinions guy. +1
Will hoepfully be keeping a log so will let you know how it goes once I'm ready to go!
11-15-2010, 11:58 PM